Cognitive Dissonance in Video Game Character Design and Enviromental Factors

5 Feb

Written By JC Pass

Video games are unique among storytelling mediums because they require active participation from the player. Unlike books or films, where audiences passively observe a character’s journey, games ask players to step into a character’s role, make decisions, and interact with the world. This interactivity creates a powerful sense of immersion—but it also introduces unique challenges. When a game’s narrative, mechanics, or world design contradict player expectations, it can break immersion and create a disconnect known as cognitive dissonance.

This article explores how cognitive dissonance manifests in video games, from inconsistencies in character behavior and forced scripted actions to illogical environmental design and contradictory game mechanics. By understanding these challenges and how they impact player experience, developers can design more immersive and coherent worlds while also leveraging dissonance as a storytelling tool when appropriate.

The Nature of Cognitive Dissonance in Games

Cognitive dissonance, a psychological phenomenon first described by Leon Festinger in 1957, occurs when an individual experiences conflicting beliefs, attitudes, or behaviours, leading to psychological discomfort. In video games, this manifests when a player's perception of their in-game role conflicts with the character’s actions, attitudes, or decisions.

For example, in a film like A Clockwork Orange (1971), audiences may find protagonist Alex DeLarge despicable, but they are not responsible for his actions; they simply observe his descent into violence and depravity. In a novel like American Psycho (1991), Patrick Bateman’s sociopathic tendencies can be both repulsive and darkly fascinating, but readers are not forced to embody his character. In contrast, a game that forces a player to commit similarly horrifying acts without justification or alternative options can create an uncomfortable disconnect between the player’s personal ethics and the game’s narrative demands.

This problem is particularly evident in games where players expect agency. If a game positions the protagonist as a self-insert character, yet forces them into behaviours that contradict player expectations, the result can be jarring. The player is no longer making choices that feel natural to them but is instead being compelled to act in ways they find uncomfortable or illogical, breaking immersion.

Character Design and Narrative Consistency

One of the most common causes of cognitive dissonance in games is a disconnect between a character’s written personality and the actions the game forces upon them. If a game presents a protagonist as honourable or kind yet requires them to commit acts of brutality without acknowledging the contradiction, the player may feel detached from the experience.

This is especially problematic in games that offer choice-driven narratives. If a player is given the freedom to shape a character’s moral compass but is then forced into actions that contradict those choices, it creates a jarring inconsistency. For instance, a game may allow the player to roleplay as a pacifist but then force them into an unavoidable violent confrontation, undermining the choices they have made up to that point.

A well-designed game acknowledges and adapts to player decisions. Developers can mitigate cognitive dissonance by providing multiple pathways that align with different playstyles, ensuring that forced actions feel justified. When choice is limited, strong character writing can help by making sure that the protagonist's motivations and behaviours remain internally consistent.

Player Agency vs. Scripted Actions

A major challenge in game design is balancing player agency with narrative direction. Many games strive to create the illusion that players have control over the story, yet scripted sequences or cutscenes can abruptly take that control away. If a player has spent hours carefully developing a character’s personality and making choices that align with a specific vision, a sudden shift in agency can feel disorienting.

This issue is often seen in games that market themselves as open-ended but ultimately funnel the player toward a predetermined outcome. If a game claims to allow freedom of choice but then forces players into a single, unchangeable ending, it can lead to frustration. To avoid this, developers must set clear expectations early on. If a game offers only limited narrative control, this should be communicated through its mechanics and story structure rather than misleading the player into believing they have more influence than they actually do.

Environmental Design and the Logic of the Game World

Cognitive dissonance is not limited to character behaviour; it also extends to the game world itself. A game's environment should follow logical rules that align with player expectations. When a game presents a world that appears interactive but arbitrarily restricts movement or actions, immersion can break.

A common example is the presence of invisible walls—barriers that prevent the player from accessing areas that appear reachable. If a game presents a vast open world but then blocks access with an arbitrary invisible boundary, it contradicts the sense of freedom the environment suggests. Similarly, obstacles that should be easily surmountable, such as waist-high fences or small ledges, but remain impassable due to game limitations, create a disconnect between what the player believes they should be able to do and what the game allows.

To maintain immersion, developers must design environments with clear, consistent rules. If an obstacle is impassable, there should be a logical reason for it within the game world—such as a crumbling bridge, a locked door, or a hazardous area—rather than an artificial limitation. Games that excel in environmental storytelling ensure that every barrier feels natural rather than arbitrary.

Mechanics and Worldbuilding Consistency

Another source of cognitive dissonance arises when game mechanics contradict the logic of the world. For example, a game might establish that the protagonist is a highly skilled climber, yet the player is unable to scale a simple wall. Similarly, if a character is depicted as physically weak in the story but is capable of carrying massive amounts of inventory, the inconsistency can pull players out of the experience.

Developers can mitigate this by aligning mechanics with worldbuilding. If a game establishes a protagonist’s strengths and weaknesses, those traits should be consistently reflected in gameplay. A character who is not physically strong might struggle to move heavy objects, while an agile protagonist should be able to navigate obstacles intuitively.

Likewise, if a game world features destructible environments in combat but then prevents players from breaking flimsy wooden doors during exploration, it creates an inconsistency in what the game considers interactive. Maintaining consistency between mechanics and world logic helps preserve immersion and prevents players from questioning the game’s internal rules.

The Role of Feedback and Playtesting

Cognitive dissonance often emerges because developers have a different perspective on the game than players do. During development, designers understand the technical constraints behind certain decisions, but players do not see these limitations—they only experience the game as it presents itself.

This is why extensive playtesting is crucial. Players unfamiliar with the game’s design process can highlight inconsistencies that developers might overlook. If testers frequently encounter moments where they expect to perform an action but the game does not allow it, this feedback can inform changes that make the experience more intuitive.

Developers can also use in-game feedback to guide player expectations. If a path is blocked, a visual cue—such as debris covering a doorway—can indicate why it is inaccessible. Subtle environmental storytelling can provide justification for design limitations without breaking immersion.

When Cognitive Dissonance Becomes a Feature, Not a Bug

In some cases, developers use cognitive dissonance intentionally to create discomfort and provoke thought. Spec Ops: The Line (2012) is a prime example. Players control Captain Walker, a soldier on a mission that spirals into moral and psychological chaos. The game forces players to commit war crimes, such as the infamous white phosphorus attack, making them question their complicity in Walker’s descent.

Here, the dissonance between player and character is deliberate, mirroring Walker’s own psychological deterioration. By the time players realise they have been manipulated into committing atrocities, the game has already trapped them in an uncomfortable moral quandary. This approach works because the game acknowledges the dissonance rather than ignoring it.

Similarly, Undertale (2015) plays with expectations by making players question the morality of their choices. If a player kills enemies out of habit, the game challenges them with consequences, making them confront the dissonance between traditional RPG mechanics and ethical decision-making.

Simply Put

Cognitive dissonance in video games arises when a game’s characters, mechanics, or world design contradict player expectations. Unlike passive media such as films or books, games require active engagement, making inconsistencies far more noticeable.

To maintain immersion, developers must ensure that characters behave consistently with their established personalities, that player agency is respected within the constraints of the narrative, and that the game world follows logical rules. Arbitrary barriers, inconsistent mechanics, and forced character decisions can all break the player's sense of connection with the game. By focusing on environmental detail, player feedback, and internal consistency, developers can create experiences that feel immersive, intuitive, and emotionally engaging.