Comparing Voluntary and Mandatory Gameplay


  • Esther Kuindersma Netherlands Aerospace Centre (NLR)
  • Jelke van der Pal Netherlands Aerospace Centre (NLR)
  • Jaap van den Herik Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University
  • Aske Plaat Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science, Leiden University



serious games · effectiveness · learning effect · mandatory play


Gameplay is commonly considered to be a voluntary activity. Game designers generally believe that voluntary gameplay is essentially different from mandatory gameplay. Such a belief may be a challenge for serious games, as instruction is usually mandatory. The article describes the outcomes of two experiments on the impact of voluntariness on the learning effect and enjoyment of a serious game. In the first experiment freedom of choosing to play a serious game was studied, with participants who had volunteered to participate. The results suggested that, contrary to the opinion of many game designers, being required to play a serious game does not automatically take the fun out of the game. The second experiment had voluntary participants and mandatory participants, who had to participate as part of a homework assignment. The outcomes show that mandatory participants enjoyed the game as much as the voluntary participants, even if they had to play the game for a minimum required time. These studies indicate that mandatory gameplay does not reduce enjoyment and learning effect.


[1] Michael, D., Chen, S.: Serious Games: Games That Educate, Train and Inform. Thomson, Boston (2006).
[2] Wu, W., Hsiao, H., Wu, P., Lin, C., Huang, S.: Investigating the Learning-Theory Foundations of Game-Based Learning: a Meta-Analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 28(3), 265-279 (2011).
[3] Wouters, P., Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorp, H., Van Der Spek, E.: Meta-Analysis of the Cognitive and Motivational Effects of Serious Games. Journal of Educational Psychology 105(2), 249-265 (2013).
[4] Heeter, C., Lee, Y., Magerko, B., Medler, B.: Impacts of Forced Serious Game Play on Vulnerable Subgroups. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations 3(3), 34-53 (2011).
[5] Mollick, E., Rothbard, N.: Mandatory Fun: Consent, Gamification and the Impact of Games at Work. The Wharton School Research Paper Series (2014).
[6] Susi, T., Johanneson, M., Backlund, P.: Serious Games - An overview. Technical Paper, University of Skövde, Skövde (2007).
[7] Djaouti, D., Alvarez, J., Jessel, J., Rampnoux, O.: Origins of Serious Games. In Ma, M., Oikonomou, A., Jain, L. (eds.): Serious Games and Edutainment Applications. Springer-Verlag, London (2011) 25-44.
[8] Abt, C.: Serious Games. Viking Press, New York (1970).
[9] Sawyer, B., Rajeski, D.: Serious Games: Improving Public Policy through Game-Based Learning and Simulation. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington D.C. (2002).
[10] Salen, K., Zimmerman, E.: Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. MIT Press, Cambridge (2004).
[11] McGonigal, J.: Reality Is Broken. Penguin Press, New York (2011).
[12] Huizinga, J.: Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Beacon Press, Boston (1955).
[13] Caillois, R.: Man, Play and Games. University of Illinois Press, Champaign (1961).
[14] Garris, R., Ahlers, R., Driskell, J.: Games, Motivation, and Learning: a Research and Practice Model. Simulation & Gaming 33(4), 441-467 (2002).
[15] Prensky, M.: Computer Games and Learning: Digital Game-Based Learning. In Raessens, J., Goldstein, J. (eds.): Handbook of Computer Game Studies. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005) 97-122.
[16] Breuer, J., Bente, G.: Why So Serious? On the Relation of Serious Games and Learning. Eludamos, Journal for Computer Game Culture 4(1), 7-24 (2010)
[17] Cain, J., Piascik, P.: Are Serious Games a Good Strategy for Pharmacy Education? American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 79(4), Article 47 (2015).
[18] Fulton, S., Schweitzer, D.: Impact of Giving Students a Choice of Homework Assignments in an Introductory Computer Science Class. International Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 5(1), Article 20 (2011).
[19] Becker, K.: How Much Choice is Too Much? Inroads 38(4), 78-82 (2006).
[20] Gauthier, A., Corrin, M., Jenkinson, J.: Exploring the Influence of Game Design on Learning and Voluntary Use in an Online Vascular Anatomy Study Aid. Computers & Education 87, 24-34 (2015).
[21] Kuindersma, E. C., Van der Pal, J., Van den Herik, H. J., Plaat, A.: Voluntary Play in Serious Games. Paper presented at the GaLA Conference, Rome (2015).
[22] Hernon, P., Whitman, J. R.: Delivering Satisfaction and Service Quality: a Customer-Based Approach for Libraries. American Library Association, Chicago, IL (2001).
[23] Coelho, P., Esteves, S.: The Choice Between a Five-Point and a Ten-Point Scale in the Framework of Customer Satisfaction Measurement. International Journal of Market Research 49(3), 313-339 (2007).
[24] Ryan, R. M.: Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 43, 450-461 (1982).
[25] Intrinsic Motivation Inventory (IMI) Scale Description. Retrieved on March 22, 2016 from
[26] Vroom, V. H.: Work and motivation. Wiley, New York (1964).
[27] Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M.: A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological bulletin 125(6), 627 (1999).




How to Cite

Kuindersma, E., van der Pal, J., van den Herik, J., & Plaat, A. (2016). Comparing Voluntary and Mandatory Gameplay. International Journal of Serious Games, 3(3).



GaLA Conf 2015 special issue