Game theory vs game refinement theory:

Game theory explains how to play a game to gain the best result. The theory generalizes the outcome
for game problems (zero-sum games, or more) Nash equilibrium. The minimax or extended mixed
strategy originates for players to decide their steps in games until the Nash equilibrium occurs. Recently,
people are applying this theory in many subjects: mathematics, game, and economics.
However, game refinement theory attempts to evaluate the ratio of entertainment for a game according
to measure uncertain characteristics of its outcomes the outcome is undetermined until a particular
state in a game (a game search tree); the essential properties for an enjoyable game. The theory
recognized the general pattern of a safety zone for games to pertain their high enjoyment: the games
acceleration index (/) should be in an interval of 0.07 0.08. Theoretically, basing on the
acceleration measurement, game developers could know the way how to design a more interesting
game. This theory is new, still under-investigated, but promising.
We see that two theories shares less similarity due to their different approaches in understanding game
information. Nevertheless, doing some mappings from game theory to game refinement and vice versa,
it might be exist an isomorphism: Nash equilibrium is equivalent to zone window 0.07 - 0.08, the
implementation of both theories take place during the evolution of game, the generalized strategy i.e.
minimax should be comparable to an overall approach for keeping direction to window zone in game
refinement theory (it is still there and waiting for discovering). In conclusion, game refinement theory is
now good, but it will be even better if besides recognizing patterns of enjoyable games, the strategies
for obtaining those patterns are also specified as it was done by game theory.
Game refinement extends to sport games and video games:
In terms of entertaining aspect, sport games or video games also somehow contain uncertainty in their
outcomes. For instances, football is still difficult to predict the result though we know well about each
team in the match (their tactics, skilled players, audiences encouragement), the uncertain factors are
still exist. Game refinement allows to estimate the uncertainty in such situations, therefore its applicable
expansion are undeniable. Some empirical studies also prove for its capability of various evaluation: A
game informatical comparison of chess and association football (2014), quantifying engagement of
various Games, and game refinement theory and its application to score limit games.
References:
1. Lecture Note: Which is more interesting? Professor Dr. Hiroyuki Iida JAIST-IS.
2. Game Theory, Nash Equilibrium Wikipedia.
3. Evolutionary changes of Pokemon game: A case study with focus on catching Pokemon by
Hetprayoon Panumate, Shuo Xiong, Hiroyuki Iida, and Toshiaki Kondo (2015).
4. Uncertainty of Game Outcome by Peter. Majek, Hiroyuki Iida (2004).
5. Game refinement model with consideration on playing cost: A case study using crane games by
Rachaya Chiewvanichakorn, Nathan Nossal, Hiroyuki Iida.
6. A game informatical comparison of chess and association football (Soccer) by Norizan Mat Diah,
Nathan Nossal, Nor Azan Mat Zin, Tadaki Higuchi, Hiroyuki Iida
7. Quantifying Engagement of Various Games Xiong, Shuo, Zuo, Long, Chiewvanichakorn, Rachaya,
Hiroyuki Iida

8. Game refinement theory and its application to score limit games by Nathan Nossal and Hiroyuki Iida