Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
View All     RSS
October 26, 2014
arrowPress Releases
October 26, 2014
PR Newswire
View All
View All     Submit Event





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
Gamification, where did the games go?
by Ruud Koorevaar on 11/03/12 04:40:00 am   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

Originally appeared on: www.ludicity.nl

Often there appears to be a disproportionate focus on the possible results of gamification. It is lauded as an innovative solution which can show juicy results like strong user retention and high conversion rates. And how to get to those juicy bits? Well, by using elements of games of course, i.e. badges, achievements, leaderboards, points and levels; that’s what games are about, right? However, due to this perspective the accent moved even stronger towards a marketing focus and a process of easy and repeatable ‘-ification’ without actually taking in regards on how to perform this, where to take the inspiration from and the extensive resource of possibilities: the games. They were taken for granted.

Where did the games go to? We need to start thinking beyond the badges and beyond merely adding a layer based on extrinsic motivators. We should look more closely at what makes (specific) games interesting and learn from them. We can use this knowledge to build entire structures and contexts, rather than adding a layer of icing.

Let’s take an example and see what it offers us. I will keep it brief just to illustrate the purpose and potential. If there are signs that there is a further interest in such analyses I will extend upon these and provide other examples.

Faster Than Light and Gamification

Faster Than Light (FTL). FTL is a recently released game in which you have to run a spaceship, strategically battle other spaceships and do other various missions as you come across them. In the words of the developer:

We wanted a game where we had to manage the crew, fix the engines, reroute power to shields, target the enemy life support, and then figure out how to repel the boarders that just transported over!

It’s a relatively simple game, but it is challenging (due to its roguelike nature) and received wide acclaim. What does it offer then that makes it interesting to analyze?

Let’s take a look at a single aspect at the very beginning of the game: choosing a spaceship. You have limited choices at the beginning, but as you play through you unlock different ships. It is then already important to note that this process of unlocking ships does not result in unlocking stronger ships, but you rather unlock different ships which offer you different play styles. This is more commonly referred to as attaining ‘sidegrades’ compared to ‘upgrades’. This keeps the initial goal of the game, to provide a challenge, healthy. Games are a lot about balance. Balancing the rewards you gain and the options you have against the challenges you encounter and what kind of experience the game should provide makes or breaks a game. It is then not even important that the game you analyze is successful or well designed or not. Bad games may offer even more valuable insights good games cannot give. Continuing such an analysis you could also take a look at the narrative structure or reward structures of the game. For instance at how choices are dynamically implemented or what kind of rewards are given out and how they incentivize certain courses of action.

Faster Than Light and Gamification

By doing such analyses you can uncover certain principles which are applicable to gamification processes. In the example above the aspect of balance in regards to upgrades and sidegrades was illustrated. This can inform decisions you make for your design and how you want to reward users to keep them engaged. When do you want to offer them upgrades and when sidegrades? How does the environment that is interacted with respond to such rewards? Does it get increasingly more difficult or do you want to make the user feel extra powerful? How does this reflect social status in a community? And so on.

We should not lose track of our source of inspiration when applying gamification. The games industry is always evolving and has done so already for decades. Not appreciating this and making use of it would mean turning a blind eye towards a great resource which is right out there for grabs and can be used to continuously lift gamification to new heights. Just take a look around, try a couple of games and get inspired.


Related Jobs

Digital Extremes
Digital Extremes — London, Ontario, Canada
[10.25.14]

Character Artist
Digital Extremes
Digital Extremes — London, Ontario, Canada
[10.25.14]

Sound Designer
Disruptor Beam, Inc.
Disruptor Beam, Inc. — Framingham, Massachusetts, United States
[10.25.14]

Lead 3D Artist
Red 5 Studios
Red 5 Studios — Orange County, California, United States
[10.24.14]

Graphics Programmer






Comments


Noah Falstein
profile image
I think Sebastian Deterding's talk says it very well:
http://research.microsoft.com/apps/video/default.aspx?id=174677&l
=i

I'm really encouraged that after an initial over-hype of gamification as a quick fix for corporate training, people are starting to see that a superficial addition of external validations like badges and scoring can actually hinder, not aid learning. There's more on the early (1949!) research that showed this:

http://us.mobileroadie.com/img/extras/232/drivepages1thru4.pdf

Making good games is hard. Influencing and motivating people to do things, particularly things they may not naturally be inclined to do, is also hard. Doing them both at once and doing it well is even more complex, and anyone saying otherwise is selling snake oil. But there ARE ways to do it well, and we're getting better at it all the time.

Ruud Koorevaar
profile image
Thank you for sharing that source of the research, good read! And indeed, Deterding covers the sentiment quite well.

I can only agree. I'm seeing more and more instances of people edging towards an opinion where the influence of gamification is changing from superficial applications towards a more subtle and informed way of approaching and solving problems. You could say that the hyper enthusiasm is subsiding and that it is allowing gamification to actually grow up. The initial extreme growth spurts of gamification may have hurt it a little bit, but with care we can avoid it having lasting damage and steer it down a right path.


none
 
Comment: