Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you ever get around to playing "co-op" Robinson Crusoe, you'll see in a hurry what "alpha gamer" is.

It's the guy (or gal) who is ends up driving things as the de facto leader of the group. Whether by charm, experience, insistence / persistence, or sheer loudness.

In a co-op game all players strive to solve the same puzzle, what to fight, were to fight, how to split the rewards and so on.

The "Alpha gamer" is the gamer who takes over dictating to the other players how the game should be played, there are many reasons why this happens, it may be a veteran who knows the optimal strategy, or somebody the group allows to lead, someone who think "knows better" than everybody else ectr.

This usually ruins the experience from everybody else and delivers a co-op game were one plays a solo game and the others are there to roll dice and obey commands.

X-com (the boardgame) has been credited as a nice attempt to stop this because the timer leaves little to no time for such thing to happen.

In MMOs this was an emerging trend, but the MMO designers embraced it creating the raid leader position.

The other way to do it is by having a coop game with either a hidden traitor, or secret objectives, therefore making it closer to semi coop.

An example of this is "Dead of Winter."

So you have a situation where, only 1 person wins, but you can very much lose as a group.

Dead of winter, Shadoes over Camelot, battlestar Galactica and many others are "semi co-op" I feel its safe to say these are now a different category on their own.

 Compel wrote:
The other way to do it is by having a coop game with either a hidden traitor, or secret objectives, therefore making it closer to semi coop.

An example of this is "Dead of Winter."

So you have a situation where, only 1 person wins, but you can very much lose as a group.

SO much like House on haunted hill where the whole game is about the group rather than a single person.


I do find it interesting that Alpha Gamer was a term that is missing in the Art of Design book by Jesse Schell.

So there are principles that are suppose to stop this behavior in design correct?

So for a solo game is that a big problem?

For a solitaire "solo" game, Alpha gamer isn't an issue, because it's one person.

Alpha gamer + lackeys only is a problem for co-op games, if one doesn't like their role as a dice monkey lackey. or as squirrel herder alpha. As people are used to having leaders and following them, it's not necessarily a problem.

In terms of game design, there are some fixes, but designating an actual leader of sorts isn't a bad one. Alternately, simultaneous blind orders.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
For a solitaire "solo" game, Alpha gamer isn't an issue, because it's one person.

Alpha gamer + lackeys only is a problem for co-op games, if one doesn't like their role as a dice monkey lackey. or as squirrel herder alpha. As people are used to having leaders and following them, it's not necessarily a problem.

In terms of game design, there are some fixes, but designating an actual leader of sorts isn't a bad one. Alternately, simultaneous blind orders.

So if i remember right the games that say the person the left of the dealer is the DM or the like would be a way to get around it.

For a solo game no, a player can be the "alpha gamer" of himself as much as he wants, solo games issues are more in keeping the player engaged, repetition, length and bad story telling is the downfall of most solo games.

"Alpha gamer" is a problem of Co-op games I am not sure there is are solid design principles on countering such behavioral and not mechanical problem so far, it is worth noting that co-op games a re relatively new and not entirely explored territory.

To be honest I find interesting we try to solve behavioral problem with game mechanics.

Edit not exactly, a DM is a VS person, even if temporarily, in pure Co-op the opposition is purely mechanical, not needing human control.