Summary
A design pattern in which a game’s goals are structured hierarchically — subgoals must be completed to progress toward higher-level goals. Present in virtually every game beyond a single round (Björk & Holopainen 2004, see source-patterns-in-game-design).
The Hierarchy of Goals is the goal-layer view of what Sellers describes as game-loops: the inner/outer loop structure maps directly onto the subgoal/main-goal hierarchy. The pattern provides the scaffolding that makes moment-to-moment actions feel connected to long-term purpose.
Implementation
Topology options:
- Linear sequence — subgoals must be completed in order; simplest; common in shoot-‘em-ups and story-driven games
- Tree — multiple parallel subgoal paths converge on a high-level goal; gives player choice of approach
- Network — complex interdependencies between goals; common in open-world and strategy games; highest cognitive load
Revelation strategy:
- Full disclosure — all goals visible from the start; enables long-term planning; risks overwhelming new players
- Progressive revelation — subgoals revealed one at a time as the player completes earlier goals; common in adventure and RPG games; Zelda: A Link to the Past is the canonical example (rescuing Zelda → defeating Agahnim → defeating Ganon)
- Implicit hierarchy — no goal is formally stated but logical sub-steps emerge from the game state (Chess: capture pieces → control the board → checkmate)
Required vs. optional:
- Requiring full completion at each level ensures content engagement but can restrict freedom of choice
- Optional Goals allow players to skip sub-challenges; supports replayability and speedrunning
- Selectable Sets of Goals give players agency over which path through the hierarchy to pursue
Pacing effect: The Hierarchy of Goals produces natural closure-points at each level boundary — these are moments of reflection, reward delivery, and save opportunities. They function as the peaks and valleys of the interest curve.
Trade-offs
| Structure | Benefit | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Linear sequence | Clear direction; easy to pace | No player agency; fails replayability |
| Tree | Player choice; branching narrative | Increased design scope; balance difficulty |
| Network | Strategic depth; emergent play | Cognitive overload; hard to test |
| Progressive revelation | Maintains mystery; controls pacing | Players may feel manipulated |
| Static hierarchy | Enables strategic knowledge | Reduces replayability |
Conflict with quick games: Deep or wide hierarchies are difficult to sustain in short-session games — players cannot reach higher-level closures.
Examples
- Zelda: A Link to the Past — three-layer progressive revelation (princess → wizard → dark world overlord)
- Pac-Man — eat pills (subgoal) → complete levels (mid-goal) → high score (meta-goal)
- Chess — capture pieces/control space (implicit subgoals) → checkmate (main goal)
- Most RPGs — immediate quests → chapter arcs → game-length narrative goal
- Candy Crush — clear board arrangement (subgoal) → complete level (closure point) → beat episode (outer loop)
Related
game-loops | interest-curves | closure-points | meaningful-decisions | narrative-design | level-design | internal-economy | source-patterns-in-game-design