Do Games Need Hooks?

The Answer Might Surprise You (It's "No*")

First off: this isn’t titled “Do Video Games Need Any Conceivable Reason That Someone Would Buy One Over Competing Products?” The answer to that question is “yes.”

What’s a Hook?

According to this oft-referenced video a hook is “something that gets stuck in people’s heads” and is both surprising and desirable. A hook can be both pre and post play.

Other frequent definitions include a “unique selling point”, a splashy concept, a novel mechanic, or a memetic / viral element.

Note on Ryan Clark

Clark is a good commentator. Video game advice is often poor, and sales / marketing advice especially so. It consists largely of hindsight, just so stories, and analysis that’s merely plausible rather than correct. It’s often characterized by low economic literacy; I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen people lament median sales data without grasping the implications of “median”, or independently discover the concept of supply and demand.

Clark’s central idea is that predicting the sales of games is a skill you can practice and develop. Anyone can write “here’s 10 reasons Flappy Bird sold well”- that requires no knowledge or insight; it’s a creative writing exercise. “Here’s 10 reasons Flappy Bird is poised to sell well” is much harder analysis to reliably produce. Nothing I’m writing is meant as a criticism of Clark - I like his approach.

Hooks and Video Game Jargon

A hook is sharp bent thing you use to catch a fish.

A music hook is well-defined: it’s the catchy part of a song. Hooks are an important part of how music has traditionally been sold. Bands create albums, and from those choose the most immediately-appealing (“hooky”) songs to package as singles for sale or radio play. (Or often, they set out to create radio-friendly singles)

The rough game equivalent of a single is a demo, and the hook would be the most immediately appealing part of that demo. Given how few games have demos, and how inaccessible demos are compared to radio songs, this should already be setting off small alarm bells.

A hook in music is not a concept. The opening notes of Under Pressure in Ice Ice Baby are a hook; Vanilla Ice saying “we’ll play a catchy riff and then I’ll start rapping” is not a hook. “It’s a concept album about the year 2112” is not a hook. Cool album art is not a hook, though it may prompt sales. Word of mouth is not a hook. “Hook” has a specific meaning.

The purpose of jargon is to simply encapsulate well-defined concepts - something game development jargon often struggles with. In geometry a convex hull is, intuitively, a shrink-wrapped tight shell. The exact definition is complicated. The Unreal Engine button labelled “generate convex hull” is a lot simpler than “generate the convex intersection of a collection of hyperplanes that minimize the sum of the positive signed distances of each point in a set to that set of hyperplanes.”¹ It’s convenient to just say “convex hull.”

Useful jargon has a precise, if complex, meaning. “This song needs a stronger hook” is a useful critique of a single because it’s specific and actionable.

The video game “hook” refers to a grab bag of unrelated elements. It can be a concept, screenshots, an art style, a unique mechanic, a sales angle, something viral. It can even be a “post-play” hook. As such “this game needs a stronger hook” isn’t useful - it’s not actionable. All it really means is “the game isn’t compelling”, or simply “I don’t like it.”

The Definitional Problems with “Hooks”

I don’t believe a “post-play hook” makes sense. Why hook a fish after you’ve already caught it and put in your cooler?

A hook, according to Clark, can be a reason someone buys the game, but also a reason someone enjoys the game after they’ve bought it - these are two wildly different things! Using the same term for both makes little sense. I’m going to reject “post-play hooks” out of hand because we can call that “word of mouth” or “customer satisfaction.” Strong word of mouth can drive sales but that’s not a hook.

Clark’s video posits that a hook is surprising yet desirable, similar to the keys to a successful restaurant. Are those the keys to a successful restaurant? I’m dubious. What about menu, head chef, location, rent, cost of service workers and food, regional preferences, competition, front of house issues, etc? Poking holes in the analogy has limited use, but I don’t think the analogy works. Certainly the key to a successful movie is not surprise. If you think otherwise check out the 2022 box office and the success of films like Top Gun Maverick.

Many best-selling games aren’t surprising at all - if anything their conformance to a narrow formula is the selling point. Some modern hook analysis attempts to clumsily address this with the idea of “anchors” - positing that games need hooks but also the opposite of hooks…

The “desirable” half of “surprising and desirable” is tautological - for a game to sell well people have to desire it, yes. I don’t think “surprising” is necessarily true, and is subsumed by “desirable” anyway - it’s one reason gamers might desire something. All this definition says is that for a game to sell well people have to want to buy it.

I suppose one could argue that a hook has to be surprising simply by definition, and that any other reason someone might desire a game doesn’t technically qualify as a hook. But why would we elevate surprise above good graphics or high production value or underserved genre or any other sales driver?

In music a hook is just one type of sales driver, but it’s a prime one - it is (or was, in the radio era) a centerpiece of sales and marketing machinery . I don’t see any reason to believe that surprise in games is more relevant than any other sales driver, and there’s no sales and marketing machinery that centers surprise.

Do Steam Top Sellers Have Hooks?

Let’s look at the Steam 2021 best sellers. (I’m going to mostly ignore free to play titles, because almost none of the conventional wisdom around sales / marketing / hooks addresses them)

Does Battlefield 2042, a best selling game, have a hook?

Does it have a splashy interesting concept? Not really. Does it have a unique selling point? Is it surprising? No and no. Of course it has some differences from previous versions but that’s true of nearly every sequel. “Specialists” are new to the series but the idea of “heroes” is well-worn. It has 128-player matches which is bigger than 64 but in a very predictable way. 128 players is a new maximum for Battlefield (I think…) but MAG had 256-player matches.

I don’t believe that Battlefield 2042 sold well because it has great hooks - I think it sold well because it’s a new Battlefield, with enough changes to make it plausibly not the same game as last time.

That formula holds true for a huge number of games on the list. Forza Horizon 4, FIFA 22, NBA2K. Lots and lots of sequels that sell well because they are known quantities. CIV6, Sims 4, Age of Empires 4. Mass Effect: Legendary Edition is repackaged old games.

Back for Blood was sold on it’s similarity to Left for Dead - the “hook” there is “it’s like that other game you like.” What is the hook of DOTA2? What’s the hook of GTA5? It’s the next game in the series, it has high production value, it has multiplayer - are those hooks?

Let’s look at the games that arguably have hooks. I don’t really know what NARAKA:BLADEPOINT is but sure, let’s say it has strong hooks. Valheim is interesting - you could argue the graphics are a hook, but if the game had flopped I suspect people would point to graphics (“it looks like a PS2 game!”) as one reason why. Arguably the concept is “hooky” - but is it hooky because it’s surprising and new or because it’s solidly in a genre Steam users like?

Dead by Daylight - no arguments here. Same with It Takes Two. These are games that have a splashy unique-ish concepts. There are a few more games like those on the list. But then there’s also a Monster Hunter sequel, a Crusader Kings sequel, an Elder Scrolls game, Total War, Guilty Gear, Flight Simulator.

I’m not going to do this for the Steam 2022 games but the same analysis applies. Many of the top sellers in 2022 are sequels to top sellers in 2021, or are the same game. CounterStrike, Rainbow 6, Monster Hunter, Dead by Daylight. I have the two pages open next to each other in my browser and at one point I got confused and thought I had 2021 open twice.

The idea that people want new and exciting games sounds great - it’s optimistic and compelling. But I don’t see any reason to believe that it’s true. The Wandering Village is a game I think embodies the hook (and “anchor”) ideal. It’s “anchored²” in a genre PC gamers like, and it has a splashy original concept. But I don’t see it high on the list. Instead I see the highly original and surprising….Call of Duty. As well as Battlefield 5, two different Forzas, two different FIFAs. It’s rough out there for original concepts. There’s Stray. Ok.

It may seem unfair to compare The Wandering Village to Call of Duty. If you compare The Wandering Village to games in the same genre with approximately the same budget it still doesn’t come out looking great. (This is left as an exercise for the reader) If you compare Call of Duty to “hooky” games in the same weight class - well which games are those exactly? AAA publishers don’t appear to value hooks very highly. Presumably they believe the return on investment is higher for safe games.

Here’s the Steam most-wishlisted games³. #1 is Hogwart’s Legacy. #2 is The Day Before.

The Day Before is an open-world MMO survival set in a deadly, post-pandemic America overrun by flesh-hungry infected and survivors killing each other for food, weapons, and cars.

This is a lot less hooky and a lot more “give the people something predictable.” I wrote this section before the controversy around The Day Before arose. One aspect of that controversy is that it uses shots and staging cribbed from other games and trailers. That it looks like a mishmash of existing games is why it’s anticipated.

What’s the hook of any of the games on the top 10 November 2022 NPDs?

Hindsight Analysis (Is Easy)

A major issue with hook analysis is that it’s mostly post-facto. (Which is why I appreciate Ryan Clark’s predictive approach, even if I don’t agree with his hook take) If you believe that games need hooks to sell and a game sells well you might skip over “does this game have a hook?” and right to “this game must have a hook, so what is it?” Conversely if a game does poorly it must be due to a weak hook, and your job is to identify that weakness.

What’s the hook of Overwatch? It’s a hero shooter - hardly unique. It’s a hero shooter mixed with TF2 or Counterstrike or something - isn’t that also Paladins and Valorant? Also Gigantic and Battleborn to a lesser degree? And a bunch of other games I’m forgetting.

People claim that the heroes are the hook. Every hero-shooter has heroes. Maybe Overwatch has the coolest-looking heroes? But here’s the rub: if Overwatch had done poorly people would say “the heroes weren’t compelling.” It’s a lot of broad archetypes / stereotypes. Cowboy-man, emo guy with a skull mask, Japanese Ninja / Samurai guys who say things like “swift as the wind.” There’s Sexy Girl, Sexy Girl with ‘Tude, Sexy Girl with a Mech Suit, Sexy Girl with a Suit that Looks like a Mech Suit but Technically isn’t a Mech, Sexy Girl with a High Tech Suit Who is Different From Previous Girl Somehow, Sexy Sniper Girl. And Neinhalt Sieger.

On paper Lawbreakers has stronger hooks: gravity shenanigans and “the fastest game around.”

What’s the hook of Hollow Knight? The trailers for the game do what marketing experts tell you not to do - it’s mostly generic. “Master new powers.” “Tight, fluid gameplay.” You could claim the art style is unique but an indie platformer with a unique art style might be the single least unique indie game pitch. “You can use mana for spells but also to restore health” is a mechanical detail, not a hook. If you’re a person who believes games need hooks you can probably find them in Hollow Knight but that’s motivated reasoning - AKA cope.

If Gotham Knights sells poorly you can claim it lacked hooks - it’s a Batman game without Batman and it ditches the well-liked Batman combat system. If it sells well you can claim it had strong hooks - it’s a Batman game with co-op and 4 selectable characters with unique play styles.

That’s the vast majority of video game marketing and sales analysis - explainers for past events. When sales and marketing gurus try to predict rather than explain they often admittedly aren’t particularly good at it.

William Goldman famously wrote about the movie business “nobody knows anything.”

Nobody knows anything...... Not one person in the entire motion picture field knows for a certainty what's going to work. Every time out it's a guess and, if you're lucky, an educated one

In video games everybody knows everything. There’s so much advice on every topic, including sales and marketing, from people who have no apparent expertise and are never deterred by being wrong.

Why People Buy Games

Chris Zukowski wrote two related blogs about how players navigate steam and how they shop during a sale. These were well-received, I think because they match the experience most readers have, but contradict some established video game wisdom. In particular shoppers look for genre fit rather than novelty.

When trying to pitch your game to publishers or press, the general advice has always been “tell them why you are unique. What distinguishes your game from all the rest?” That is still true for gate keepers and curators. But in the hours of user testing I did, none of the participants said “I wonder what makes this game unique?” or “What is the unique selling proposition for this game?” or “hmm why is this game different from all the others” Instead I heard a lot of people saying “Oh so this game is just like game XYZ” or “this is right up my alley because I like these games” or “Ah this is my type of game.” 

What gets someone to pay for a video game? I don’t have any hard data so this is just my read, based on which games sell and how I and my friends shop.

1. The game is a sequel to a game they like

2. The game is from a publisher / developer they trust, so they at least consider the game in question

3. The game is a style they like - if not a sequel it’s a spiritual successor or in a preferred genre

4. The game looks expensive and well-made - it has high production value and seems “AAA” (this is more applicable to console games, particularly Sony and MS)

5. The game seems buzzy due to a combination of word of mouth and marketing

These aren’t mutually exclusive with having a hook. Stray has a hook and also looks expensive. But if you look at sales figures and probably your own buying habits you might be surprised at how rarely the “hook” matters.

What is the hook of God of War: Ragnarok? I don’t know that Ragnarok even has a twist. The marketing message is “it’s another God of War” - it’s “bigger, better and more badass” in non-specific ways. The same is true of Horizon: Forbidden West - it has underwater sections is that a hook? (Gamers famously love underwater sections!)

Some sequels are at least plausibly different from the preceding game. Monster Hunter: World is different from Monster Hunter: Generations, and Monster Hunter Rise is genuinely different from World. (Largely by circling back to the older game style…) I don’t think there’s anything markedly different about the latest Madden or FIFA or NBA2K or Call of Duty. I’m sure superfans of those games would tell you about small mechanical changes that make them different, in the same way I would assure people that Street Fighter 2: Hyper Fighting is totally different from Street Fighter 2: Champion Edition - basically a whole new game!

A hook doesn’t seem important if you have an established franchise or an established IP. It’s probably not very important past a certain budget level - the “hook” of the The Last of Us is that it’s another Sony-exclusive expensive cinematic AAA game from the makers of Uncharted.

But what if you’re making a low to mid-budget game with no established franchise or IP? Maybe then the hook matters a lot? I’m still not convinced.

Yes there needs to be a reason someone would buy your game. But that’s not necessarily a hook, unless “hook” is incredibly broad. What about all those Steam survival games? Or light-RTS / Sim-City medieval village builders? A lot of those do well and from a high level look similar.

The Misguided Quest for Hooks

From Reddit’s game design sub:

I'm just now getting an idea for a video game I want to design with Phaser.js, and although I like the concept, I'm sure we can all agree that it's quite uninspired sounding: the concept is to choose one from a bunch of Public Domain characters to fight creatures from mythology, gaining levels, recruiting other public domain characters, and using currency to buy more monsters along the way.

I don’t think this sounds particularly uninspired.

“Public domain characters fight creatures from mythology” sounds a lot like God of War or Age of Mythology or Fate/Grand Order. If you think your own idea is uninspired players are likely to as well, but there’s nothing particularly uninspired about this idea.

When described in simplest terms most games sound uninspired. In Diablo you go into a big hole and click on some skeletons. I’m phrasing this for dramatic effect but I think you have to admit that doesn’t elide much. Starcraft is Warcraft with different races. What is inspired about Elden Ring? An open-world fantasy game where you run around with a sword and bop creatures on the head oh wow totally original!

When talking to a friend recently I described Souls games as games with a specific coherent vision, but the individual elements of that vision are mostly generic. You fight against a guy with a sword. You fight against a different guy with a different sword. Maybe a guy has a hammer instead of a sword. You can fight a dragon, and a different kind of dragon, and a third kind of dragon. I’m not being dismissive - my point is that high-level novelty is hard to find.

Souls doesn’t have splashy unique mechanics either. The Team Ninja souls-like games (Nioh, Nioh 2, Wo Long: Fallen Dynasty) have way more mechanical jeuje: ki, morale, stances. Elden Ring is more Street Fighter than Guilty Gear.

People who offer game sales advice often push for twee game ideas. If you present a Steam capsule description⁴ like "an RTS town-builder where your band of Vikings establishes a foothold in a new and foreboding land" they'll tell you that's boring and samey, but "you play as a telepathic dog who teams up with an alien baby to solve The Mystery of the Missing Snausages" is dynamite. Which of these games will sell better? An unfair question with too many variables but probably the first one.

The quest for hooks often leads developers to mechanical “unique selling points” that are detrimental to game quality. Devil May Cry (DmC) has color-coded enemies immune to some weapons. Only half your arsenal works against some enemies - is that fun? Bayonetta 2 has flying sections with unintuitive controls that similarly reduce your moveset. Xenoblade Chronicles 2 has many novel mechanics that add nothing or detract from the game - field skills that compel you to tediously navigate menus, a combat system designed for boss battles that leads to inflated HP on normal enemies. Each new Mario RPG has a gimmick like using stickers or splashing colors when what people want is traditional mechanics like levelling up.

Arguably systems like these help sell the game even if they don’t make the game better, by serving as marketing bullet points. But is anyone buying DmC because it has red and blue enemies?

Effective marketing often doesn’t require much in the way of underlying mechanics. Telltale got great mileage out of “Suzy will remember this” but that’s the illusion of mechanic more than actual mechanic - the branching in those games is based on discrete major crossroads not cumulative micro-decisions. Almost every The Last of Us 2 preview and review mentions that enemies have names, which is supposed to make killing them more emotional. Final Fight had named enemies - that’s not a novel feature. Another major talking point was that Ellie can jump.

The new gameplay features being implemented in The Last of Us Part 2 are rather mundane from a broader context. For example, The Last of Us Part 2 will allow Ellie to jump. However, for The Last of Us Part 2, it's a major addition. Ellie being able to leap over obstacles grants her a level of dexterity that Joel could never have managed. It opens up a ton of new gameplay options that Naughty Dog has to build The Last of Us Part 2 around, as well.

This is a preview that’s very excited about jumping - a mechanic that’s been in a zillion games since Donkey Kong and Pitfall. This is smart marketing not unique mechanics.

Having a mechanical unique selling point is different from simply saying you have one - sometimes the latter is enough. And I’ve played so many games where the unique mechanical gimmick is one of the worst aspects. Tactics Ogre for PSP added multiple novel mechanics that uniformly made the game worse, then Tactics Ogre: Reborn removed those and added some new novel mechanics that, while better than the PSP version, also made the game worse.

In some games the unique mechanic is the game - you can’t have Octodad with standard controls. But in many, many games with “unique” mechanics those mechanics are non-essential and annoying.

In Conclusion

Maybe it’s unfair to ask “do games need hooks?” Not many people passionately argue that games absolutely need hooks. But we do talk about hooks an awful lot.

“It’s good if your game has a hook” isn’t controversial, but it’s also not useful. Your game needs a good trailer or good screenshots or a good concept or a good elevator pitch or a unique mechanic or a unique art style or it needs to go viral somehow or maybe it needs a “post-play hook” AKA make it high quality and enjoyable - well sure.

A player might say an action game “has loose controls” or “feels unresponsive.” An articulate game developer would hopefully say something more meaningful: “the camera has high inertia and low acceleration, so it feels unresponsive” or “the engine itself has significant input lag” or “the game has apparent input lag because animations have long, subtle blend-ins.” Saying that a game feels unresponsive isn’t wrong and it’s minorly helpful but it’s not real analysis - at best it kicks off real analysis.

Hook analysis is similarly not real analysis - it’s someone shrugging and saying “I dunno it’s just not exciting - it’s not grabbing me.” That’s fine from a layman but not from an “expert.”

This was a long winding road so summarize:

1. “Hook” is too broad to be useful, and narrower definitions are often arbitrary or simply don’t make sense

2. There’s not much reason to believe that hooks, whatever their definition, impact sales all that much

3. The search for hooks often leads developers to add annoying, superfluous elements to games

4. “This game needs a hook”, “what’s the hook?” and similar statements are observations you’d expect from people with limited knowledge of games, not domain experts

(* Honestly who knows)

1. This may or may not be a good definition of convex hull

2. I don’t know why we’re using fishing terminology

3. It’s changed since I started writing this but you get the picture

4. There’s no reason to believe that Steam capsule text descriptions matter to any real degree. Look up some best-sellers and personal favorites on Steam and read their capsules.