Redefining Trust: Truly Random Gaming
The Draw to Randomness
The draw to randomness has been a part of our social and entertainment mechanisms since ancient civilizations. In early Greek and Roman civilizations, local clairvoyants provided seemingly random solutions and rationale to illustrate the perceived meaning in natural phenomena. One great example is the attribution of meteors to specific events. The passing of such celestial objects were said to indicate a specified end to a recent event, such as Julius Caesar becoming a deity after he was murdered [1]. We have always been drawn to the unexplainable and unpredictable, whether we embrace it as luck or grasp at random correlations in efforts to avoid the devastation of our perceived fate. We have consistently pitted the randomness of phenomenal reality with human interpretation to overcome many of the mysteries we face.
Later societies introduced formal games of chance with physical readings from objects designed to behave within a statistical response. Some of these mechanisms we still engage with today. Even our most modern societies still entertain themselves with the occasional classic card game; role-playing and board games are still being played with actions based on dice rolls. On our worst game nights, it may feel like the statistical mechanism is stacked against us, but ultimately, the physics of the randomness source is simply getting the best of our inner skeptic. We can’t see all the natural effects upon the die we throw, but we know that the role is fair because it is happening right in front of us. It is, at the very least, transparent.
Modernization, From Classics Onward
We have come so far from the 50 percent randomness of a coin toss. Although such odds still have valid applications, we are now building algorithms that extrapolate a single seed into hundreds, even millions of random numbers to expand the methods to enjoy randomness. Basic algorithmic, or pseudo random number generation (PRNG), methods were sufficient as we used them in simpler games, such as Solitaire. These games were translated into online versions in which the randomization did not intensely affect the player’s level of enjoyment. We always knew there would be the same 52 cards in each game. The randomization improved the player experience, with no significant loss or defect due to the randomization.
With time, new and more complex digital games were created which had increasingly obscure randomization that caused debate over whether the game was random at all. Consider Dragon’s Lair, an arcade game released in 1983. In this game, there are multiple sets of three rooms, with each set representing the selection from which to activate each level. As the player completes a random selection from each level, they move to the next cycle until all three rooms in each set have been used. The level generator “remembers” which levels were already played and ensures the player encounters each of the level variations over the course of the game cycles [2]. In examples like this and even puzzle games from Minesweeper to The Sentinel, randomness does not prevent the game from being entertaining. It does not change the mechanics or the skill needed to win the game, it simply introduces new experiences.
As the video game industry has diversified, there is an ever-growing pool of possibilities based on randomness. It is now becoming so complex that in some cases it is impacting the enjoyment of the game. In a piece written by Zack Zwiezen at Kotaku, there is a general sentiment that players are generally put off by output randomization — the randomization caused by decisions the player makes. By design, these types of randomization seem to counter the previous randomized experiences in the game, making the player feel cheated. In reality, Zack points out, this is because our instincts do not pick up the nuances of statistics. Loot crates are fascinating because they feed off of both the human loss aversion response but also the addictive draw to gambling. Each time a loot crate is acquired which is not of the expected quality based on the advertised statistic, the human response is often more significantly negative than when the same player experiences the win of a legendary item. Even if the player sees the advertised statistic, they are likely to fall for this loss aversion bias — making them feel cheated. While there is a significant draw to the chance of getting a valuable item, there is currently no real-world value to be gained. For a successful balance, there needs to be a shift so that the perception of continued losses is less than the perception of overall value gained.
In the era before video games, randomness was transparent to the extent that you saw the roll of the dice, the draw of the card, the flip of the coin. Now randomness is all happening on the backend of an algorithm, leaving the player to wonder how truly random the encounter was. Especially as the entertainment industry has begun to monetize “randomness,” as seen in both gambling and the in-game purchase of mystery items, there is growing concern for how random the mechanics actually are, as well as the level of predictability in the randomness.
Monetizing Randomness
The gaming industry is innovating ways to capture more consistent value through in-game purchases. Loot crates are one of these mechanisms that add value through the game as the player spends time and money acquiring randomized in-game assets. According to Game industry News, game developers often do not release the odds of getting something valuable in loot crates or randomized character/asset features, leaving the player at the mercy of an unknown algorithm. Individuals consistently report getting items that they cannot use due to level barriers or repeated duplicates of items they already have in their inventory. Since many games do not allow you to buy, sell, or trade items with other players, having duplicates is often useless, and any value of in-game assets is limited to the initial owner. This has led to an overall distrust of loot boxes altogether. Transparency in statistics is something that the classic games did very well, and players are asking for that bit of clear predictability.
Blockchain offers at least a few ways to facilitate trust and true ownership of in-game assets and ensure a quality gaming experience within such complex environments. Game developers can achieve a good long-term relationship with players by offering transparency and true randomness to their players through tools that are already being built. Blockchain-based games and gambling are already being developed and introduce transparency as well as give the gamer more control and power with their items. The introduction of true random number generation would only improve the groundwork already made in the industry.
Being transparent is one angle of trust. Another is being able to prove that randomness. Transparency in virtual games includes proving either programmatic or true randomness, just as dice throws have done for us in the physical randomness used for centuries. In traditional gambling games brought to Web3, we already know many of the statistics. What is missing is the ability to ensure that randomness is executed. Gambling online has introduced additional barriers to transparency which can only be solved by introducing a way to ensure that randomness — that the house is operating honestly. Since the stakes can be incredibly high with gambling, the more entropy in any randomness mechanism, the more appealing the value proposition becomes.
Both the gaming and gambling industries must address user experience in improving their randomness mechanisms; however, the gaming industry arguably has more to consider on the path to improvement. With loot boxes expected to bring in over $20 billion by 2025, the industry has acknowledged this value by increasing loot box introduction to various types of games [5]. The gap to be closed is how the user experience impacts their level of engagement to mystery items. When players spend countless hours earning in-game currencies to purchase randomized crates hoping to broaden their collection of inventory, being met with identical items (or even acquiring the same class of items) does not feel random or fair. Even if the randomness is honest, the player often feels victimized simply due to the inability to confirm that the game is acting on the advertised statistics.
Truly Random Gaming
As the gaming community grows and the number of items each player earns increases, there enters a use case for identifying greater quantities of unique items to the player who earns them through a truly random identifier. Quantum random number generation (QRNG) is a method of number generation which utilizes an isolated natural phenomena to come to an unpredictable, or truly random, result. With this quantum level of randomness now accessible through Australian National University’s QRNG and loot boxes creating so much excitement and revenue for a growing industry, the opportunity for growth only increases with added transparency and reliability. With the use of smart contracts, the value proposition of Web3 gaming could be cemented. Upon purchase, an ID could be generated housing all details necessary to allow developers to segment players into award pools or even grandfather them into original gameplay in the event of a core development change.
There is a need to at least be able to ensure that the randomness they claim in loot box structures is executed regardless of which randomness mechanism they use. With the introduction of smart contracts, game designers could even go as far as to introduce innovations, expanding the opportunities to grow revenue potential as well as improve user experience. One possibility is for a smart contract to read the players inventory and offer something of the same randomized value which the player has not already been offered. Introducing items as NFTs would allow for such functionality, putting more value on items via reduced redundancy and saving users from the disappointment of an essential loss. Another opportunity is to develop universally unique identifiers to items so that on-chain gaming assets could be used in other on-chain games. To do this, a universal identifier would need to be introduced to ensure the item is uniquely identified among the games involved in the item-sharing. An efficient way to do this would be introducing a true random number to identify each item so it can be tracked regardless of which gaming ecosystem it joined. Both of these changes would offer more revenue potential while also thinking about the user experience.
To execute on such innovations, smart contracts need access to true randomness. Australian National University’s QRNG provides a source of true randomness and is the first true randomness introduced to Web3. PRNG is often sufficient for randomness in our current environments, but QRNG offers a less predictable randomization which is more secure while offering the benefits inherent to randomization, such as the ability to mint unique items as in-game NFTs, increasing the value, variety, and uniqueness of items even further.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Erich Dylus and Ryan Boder for facilitating idea generation, Alex Clote for his thorough editing expertise, and Tom Watson for final clarifying additions.
Footnotes
[1] Ancient Origins. Myths and Meteors. https://www.ancient-origins.net/news-science-space/ancient-meteor-001056
[2] Dragon’s Lair Project. Dragon’s Lair Scene Sequencing. http://www.dragons-lair-project.com/games/related/sequence.asp
[3] Kotaku. Randomness In Video Games Is Not All The Same. https://kotaku.com/randomness-in-video-games-is-not-all-the-same-1841049263
[4] Game industry News. WHY EVERYBODY HATES LOOT CRATES IN VIDEOGAMES. https://www.gameindustry.com/news-industry-happenings/why-everybody-hates-loot-crates-in-videogames/
[5] WHICH-50. Revenue from online gaming loot boxes will exceed $US20 billion by 2025: Study https://which-50.com/revenue-from-online-gaming-loot-boxes-will-exceed-us20-billion-by-2025-study/
