Why Great Researchers Think Like Game Designers

Designing for engagement has more in common with video game design than most realise

If Medium is your go-to reading spot, you can catch this post there too! Just click here.

Insight doesn’t just come from our questions. The setup often plays as big a role!

When we picture a good (market) research project, we tend to focus on the obvious: smart questions, rigorous methods, clean data. But all of these rely on an invisible layer: the structure that shapes how people engage.

And that’s where game designers can teach researchers something.

Game design is the art of crafting environments that make people want to think, act and explore: a well-designed game pulls you in and keeps you there. Not because you’re being forced to engage, but because you want to. The challenges feel meaningful. The structure makes sense. You’re making discoveries.

Some researchers, by contrast, default to extraction: "What’s your opinion on X?" "Rate Y on a scale of 1–5." "Describe what you did when Z occurred." The format can feel more like paperwork than participation. And, unsurprisingly, responses often reflect that: superficial engagement yields superficial insight.

So what happens when we take a page from the video game designer’s playbook? Here are five things I’ve learned.

1. Walk Off the Beaten Path

Video game designers start with a question: what would make someone want to explore this space?

Researchers, on the other hand, often lead with constraints. Everything must be clean, structured and testable. But intrigue - the feeling that there’s something worth discovering - is what draws people in.

This doesn’t mean being vague or manipulative. It means designing research prompts that spark curiosity and reward attention.

Instead of asking, “What do you think of X?”, ask: “Imagine you can’t use X for a month - what changes?”

Intrigue is a design choice. Think of it like switching from a paved highway into an enchanted forest, where each turn invites discovery. This inevitably changes the tone of everything that follows.

2. Set Up Guardrails to Shape the Journey

Good video games don’t offer infinite freedom. They offer just enough structure to make action possible. Constraints are enablers.

The same is true in research. Whether it’s a co-creation session, a workshop or even a survey, the framework you choose shapes the paths people take. Present too many options, and people flounder. Present none, and they freeze.

Game designers use mechanics. Researchers use formats. In both cases, the rules of engagement determine the quality of interaction.

Imagine a service design project, where you are running a co-creation workshop with frontline staff to improve patient intake. Instead of giving them a blank canvas (“How would you redesign the process?”), you can structure the session around three fixed constraints:

⏱️ The intake must be under 10 minutes

📝 It must be usable by someone with limited literacy

🚫 It must require no new technology

These guardrails effectively focus creativity. Rather than drifting into abstract wishlist territory, participants can get specific: they will sketch actual workflows, debate trade-offs and land on changes that the organisation can implement.

The structure makes it easier to contribute, and the quality of ideas shoots up as a result.

3. Invite Exploration, Not Just Opinions

Video games are built to be explored. They reward curiosity, edge cases, detours. But many research formats do the opposite: they ask for fast answers to narrow questions.

Insight lives in the tension, the moment when someone says, “That’s not how I see it.” If your design doesn’t make room for those moments, you’ll miss them.

The best research environments are open enough to let something unexpected happen.

Instead of asking “Do you find virtual meetings effective?”, hand participants a blank weekly calendar and ask them to map out their real work rhythm: when they feel most focused, when they collaborate, when they avoid meetings altogether. Then use that as a springboard to explore the complexity of their lived experiences and how virtual meetings might fit into that flow.

4. Treat Participants as Co-Creators

A great video game respects the player. It assumes they are capable of shaping the experience. Research should do the same.

When we treat participants as data sources, we get data. When we treat them as co-investigators, we get insight.

This might mean letting people define the categories instead of just selecting from them. You can ask participants to sketch, map or prioritise. You can given them tools to explore their own contexts before answering yours.

In a concept-testing project for a new community space, instead of asking participants to rate pre-selected features, give them tokens and a blank floor plan. Then ask them to design their ideal layout, explaining their choices aloud. You will see how agency inspires truth.

5. Builds Trust Through Feedback

In video games, feedback is constant: every choice has a consequence, and every success or failure signals that your input mattered.

In interviews or group settings (like workshops or focus groups), silence is common. We ask questions → People answer → Then nothing till you ask the next question.

But feedback - even subtle, momentary feedback - can change how people engage.

A nod, a follow-up or a shift in how the next question is framed based on a response given by the person in front of you... These things say: "I’m listening." And when people feel heard, they say more.

This is about trust, and it makes a huge difference.

The Researcher as Experience Architect

Whether you’re running an interview, building a survey or designing a workshop, the same rules apply. People engage when the environment invites them to.

Video game designers leverage curiosity, tension, flow. They build environments that make people want to interact and reflect more deeply.

Structure your research like a task, and people give you what you asked for; make it an experience, and they give you what you didn’t know to ask.

---

I'm Andrea, a management consultant with over a decade of experience across industry and academia. I work with commercial, non-profit, academic and government organisations worldwide, helping them capture meaningful insights through mixed methods research.

I write about practical frameworks to help you discover what others miss. My main goal is to translate complex concepts into techniques that readers can use immediately.