Today I had the pleasure of playing a game for homework. While I have done so before for the games and literature class I took last semester, I found this one to be particularly entertaining. The assignment was to download a simple game from the internet involving pattern recognition and posting a screenshot online. We were to play for an hour until the game’s trial shut down. The game I played was called Zuma.

I entered this experience slightly skeptical. I assumed that I would get bored playing for an hour. Fifty minutes later, I found myself racing the clock, hoping to get the highest score possible in the few minutes left. I swore under my breath anytime I approached death, and was entirely engrossed in the game.

When I finally did stop playing, I was shaking my head in fascination of the emotional investment I had voluntarily placed in this simple, one-hour game. I knew it was a trial and I knew it had to end. The game mechanics were simple, involving shooting colored balls at rows of similar-colored balls before they reached a target. There were a few power-up options to add a little variety. The music was monotonous but grew more exciting as the balls reached a certain proximity to the target.

How could a game with such a simple premise become so fascinating? It wasn’t the music or the sounds; I had played many such games before without sound and was equally intrigued. The only reward was the score and even that disappeared after an hour. Perhaps it was the fact that a strategy could still be formed. Or maybe it was the clock: a test of speed pattern recognition proving your puzzle-solving prowess.

However, it doesn’t have to be narrowed down to a certain aspect. Each player may find their own fascination with a piece of the game as simple as pretty colors. Probably the most important experience I can take away from that one-hour diversion was that a game doesn’t have to be fancy to be fun; it simply has to engage and entertain.