Summary
A design pattern in which the chance of receiving a reward is linked to some risk of receiving a penalty if the player fails. Risk/Reward makes choices meaningful by ensuring that advantageous and disadvantageous outcomes are both possible from the same decision (Björk & Holopainen 2004, see source-patterns-in-game-design).
Present in virtually every game — the question is not whether to use Risk/Reward but how to calibrate the probabilities and stakes.
Implementation
Three sources of risk:
- Randomness — players know the probability distribution but not the outcome (dice rolls, loot drops, card draws). The simplest form; players can calculate expected value. See randomness-in-games.
- Imperfect information — players may take the wrong action because they lack full knowledge (fog of war, hidden opponent hands, exploration). Risk stems from knowledge gaps rather than pure chance.
- Other player interference — opponent actions can negate the player’s reward-seeking (interruptible actions, player killing, social dilemmas). Risk/Reward becomes social when others are the source of failure.
Calibration variables:
- Probability of reward
- Probability of penalty
- Magnitude of reward
- Magnitude of penalty
These four variables together determine whether a Risk/Reward decision feels interesting, trivial, or overwhelming. An interesting choice requires that neither outcome is certain and that both outcomes matter (see meaningful-decisions).
Extending duration:
- Committed Goals — players initiate actions but results are not revealed immediately (bluffing in poker; building in strategy games)
- Geometric vs Arithmetic Rewards — geometric returns (exponential growth) raise the stakes of investment decisions; arithmetic returns flatten them
- Meta Games — betting on the outcome of a game extends Risk/Reward beyond the current game state
Trade-offs
| Factor | Effect |
|---|---|
| High randomness | Accessible, feels lucky/unlucky; reduces mastery |
| Low randomness | Skill-dependent, rewards expertise; can feel unfair |
| Transparent probability | Enables calculation; may remove tension |
| Hidden probability | Creates tension; may feel arbitrary |
| Large penalty magnitude | Increases tension; risks frustration |
| Small penalty magnitude | Reduces tension; may make choices feel inconsequential |
The pattern conflicts with Predictable Consequences — a game where all outcomes are certain has no Risk/Reward. Partial predictability (known odds, unknown outcome) is the design sweet spot.
Examples
- Poker — canonical example; fold/follow/raise is a pure Risk/Reward decision against known probability structure
- Dark Souls — ember usage (increased health, ability to summon) risks losing it permanently on death; high-magnitude asymmetric Risk/Reward
- Civilization’s technology tree — investing in a research path risks being behind in military while pursuing scientific advantage
- Platform game collectibles — detour from the main path to collect an item risks time or health loss
Related
meaningful-decisions | randomness-in-games | game-balance | internal-economy | balancing-effects | hierarchy-of-goals | resource-management | source-patterns-in-game-design