In the modern world of information, less is more. Here, I have a prime example in the best-selling video game in history, Minecraft, developed by Mojang. Today, I will be comparing and contrasting two ways of introducing a new player to the game: One, an article on Minecraft.net written by a professional Mojang writer, and two, Minecraft itself. I will focus on the Java version of the game for PC, and I will ignore the process of downloading the game application.
Let’s begin with the article “How To Minecraft”. The article begins with an introduction. Already, we can see suggestions of audience. The title itself, “How to Minecraft” uses a noun as a verb, a contemporary style used to connect with youth. Beyond that, the article is written in a straightforward manner, using a moderate vocabulary. The tone is fun and encouraging, so fun in fact that I count 7 exclamation points. I think this suggests it is written for a younger, more casual audience.
The article also relies on lots of images of gameplay, referencing important features like the hotbar, inventory, and meters. They say a picture is worth a thousand words, and this article maximizes on this. A visual approach also caters to a younger audience, while also making the delivery clear and applied. These images also act (alongside short paragraphs with clear headers) as strategic breaks to chunk information, maximizing on scanning/skimming potential.
I found it interesting how the article uses jargon. On paper, it avoids jargon altogether, best to be accommodating for a wide audience. However, it uses strategic examples from the game to create an ambient, in-world feeling. By referring specifically to simple concepts like pickaxes, pigs, and lava, the audience gets a sense of what the game is like by using jargon everyone can easily imagine.
The article also relies on humor to give the audience a break to digest new information. Take “You’re pretty safe during the day in Minecraft, so long as you’re not taking naps underwater or trying to drink the lava”. This is not only entertaining, it also reflects Minecraft’s brand: their marketing, especially on social media, often features sarcastic and absurdist humor. When teaching things myself, I’ve found that humor is a good reset if someone is struggling, as it can disrupt their train of thought and free up their mind to take in new information.
Next, let’s analyze Minecraft’s built-in tutorial. Once launched, the game greets one with a simple three options: Singleplayer, Multiplayer, or Realms. Even to those uninitiated to video games, I think the first two options are self-explanatory. Many start on Singleplayer, which then prompts one to create a default world. Here, the explanation styles diverge: instead of a brief of instructions, Minecraft begins with a hands-on approach. Starting a world triggers a “toast” (basically a text box) that suggests that you gather wood. With each milestone you reach, it suggests a new objective, preparing you for the coming night when your first dangers face you.
Many games, such as the prototypical Super Mario Bros, begin their level-based structure with simple tasks to train the user in what mechanics will be used further on. However, Minecraft is a sandbox game with no defined path, and instead begins in a safe environment and lets the player seek out more complex, dangerous encounters.
The approach Minecraft takes could be considered vague and less comprehensive, but it also emphasizes the qualities of experimentation it values. Right off the bat, the game is teaching players to use what they know to create their own adventure. The toasts are entirely optional. You can go whichever way you like, telling your own story. Many have argued that this is a major part of Minecraft’s success: it is very adaptable and replayable, because it channels the player’s own boundless creativity.
My conclusion is that, like many smart choices Mojang has made, both options maximize communication: one caters to visual and tactile learners, while the other caters to those more comfortable with reading first and experiencing afterward. And this is all done in only a handful of words: The built-in system focuses on action rather than explanation, while the article (and many others like it) is there for those who prefer a more comprehensive explanation.
Minecraft has a wide audience, from young and old to experienced and inexperienced. However, both sets of instructions rely on high commitment: anyone interested in them has likely already purchased the game. A prospective customer would likely seek out a gameplay video or user reviews to finalize their decision. Minecraft often relies on secondary sources for information on the game, such as Let’s Play YouTubers, article authors on fan websites and wikis, among other external sources. I believe that one is expected to begin playing Minecraft using toasts, preexisting knowledge from other video games, and common sense, and let confused young/unexperienced gamers take to the internet to learn more about how to proceed.
I think that they are very effective in catering to a wide audience by providing multiple options for learning. Learning is done best through a variety of mediums, and a franchise as profitable as Minecraft is surely aware of this.