Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Home ›› Business Value and ROI ›› 6 Key Questions to Guide International UX Research ›› POP UX! Scrabble Teaches Restraint

POP UX! Scrabble Teaches Restraint

by Andrew Zusman
3 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

In both design and the strategy its gameplay requires, Scrabble teaches us the value of restraint.

The game of Scrabble has changed little since its inception in the 1930s. There have been minor rule tweaks, but players today use basically the same rulebook and game board as players did 75 years ago. Much to game creator Alfred Mosher Butts’ credit, the distribution of letters and the point values for each letter have never changed. Continuity is certainly a notable attribute to Scrabble’s gameplay and success, but what the game really teaches UX practitioners—both in it’s design and in the way it’s played—is restraint.

Simplicity is sometimes mistaken for restraint, but restraint can only occur when there is the possibility of being complex or elaborate. Here, a choice is made to hold back and avoid complexity. Something that is merely simple may or may not offer the option to be complex. Butts had the opportunity to make Scrabble a complex game designed for only the best wordsmiths, but instead he held back and made the game widely accessible.

The game’s rules, its playing surface, the equipment, and the player’s strategy characterize restraint. It’s often tempting to play your best letters as soon as you get them, but the better strategy is to wait until you can use them most effectively to make a really great play. In this way, Scrabble, like the best websites and mobile applications, requires you—as player in the latter case and designer in the former—to exhibit restraint.

Designing with restraint means ensuring that the limits and boundaries of a website or application are clearly defined to the user. The best designs define those limits and boundaries without any explanation. As with Scrabble’s short rulebook and standardized game board, web designers must consider what the rules are for a website or application and maintain convention and standardization. The website DIY.org is an example of a site that is very complex, but has set boundaries and limitations.

The home page has just three options and there are clear and concise boundaries. The site’s rulebook is short and its navigation, succinct.

Codeacademy.com is another website that shows restraint. While it’s certainly possible to teach people how to code in a vast multitude of ways, Codeacademy has a standardized method built around quick, simple explanations. A site with as much information as Codeacademy provides could easily be flooded with intricate features and complex designs. Just like the design strategy behind Scrabble, however, the site is accessible to anyone, regardless of skill level, while simultaneously catering to people with advanced skills.

Graphic designers may want rich graphics and programmers may want to write broad, all-encompassing code, but way more often than not, the best experience for the user is a simple one. Part of the challenge of user experience design is to build systems using restraint. Rather than showing off, websites and applications often do better by holding back.

Keeping things simple and accessible certainly worked for Scrabble, which has been translated into about thirty languages and can be found in over half of the countries in the world. The game has sold millions of copies and there are dedicated players who take part in heated international tournaments.

(“Restraint” is, for our purposes, an ironically low-scoring word)

Scrabble could have been complex—it could have been crafted only for those with large vocabularies. Instead, Butts did something the best user experience practitioners do all the time: he designed a hugely accessible product using restraint.

post authorAndrew Zusman

Andrew Zusman
Andrew Zusman is a user experience designer at Inkod-Hypera and the creator of the 52 Designers project. Andrew is also the writer of a popular user experience design blog. He lives in Tel-Aviv, Israel with his girlfriend Natasha and their dog Indy.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

Another lesson from studying UX with Laura Klein.

Article by Paivi Salminen
The Agile Trap Designers Fall into: Feeding the Beast
  • Agile teams are fast, but designers get stuck in an infinite loop of visual work: redesigning the same components over and over instead of solving real UX problems.
  • Design systems break that cycle, defining the building blocks once, freeing designers to focus on how the product works, not how it looks.
  • When the basics are in place, teams can start working together sooner, prototype faster, and release incremental features without the interface falling apart.
Share:The Agile Trap Designers Fall into: Feeding the Beast
4 min read

Real engagement is about designing experiences that people want to have. Here are some things that games do well that most apps don’t.

Article by Montgomery Singman
Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Conclusion
  • Most apps use gamification as a manipulation layer to drive metrics, but people engage with things that are truly worthy of their time, not points or streak guilt.
  • Apps that people stick with do this by designing for intrinsic motivation, making the experience itself rewarding.
  • The true measure of success is whether users feel more capable, accomplished, and enriched for having used your app.
Share:Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Conclusion
8 min read

For researchers, AI tools are making the move from advising to building easier than ever. But the real obstacle was never technical. Meet the researchers who allowed themselves to create — and what the cost was.

Article by James Lang
The New Makers
  • The article says that becoming a maker as a researcher is less about learning new tools or skills and more about giving yourself a new identity, and that without fixing the internal permission structures that define your swim lane, even the most democratized AI tools won’t turn a researcher into a maker — you don’t have a founder; you have a frustrated advisor with a prototype.
Share:The New Makers
20 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Get Paid to Test AI Products

Earn an average of $100 per test by reviewing AI-first product experiences and sharing your feedback.

    Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

      This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and