When I get insignificant amounts of change, like a nickel, I leave it on the nearest outdoor object, thus teaching people that they can collect small amounts of money by searching random objects.
I do that too. Also, I had a sign by my front door that read “no plot here” so that wandering adventurers aren’t tempted to investigate too deeply and make a mess of my house.
I once decided to search my sofa and found a pair of nunchaku there.
“Excuse me, sir...” “Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!” ”Uh, okay, anyway, would you happen to know where...” “Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!” ”...” ″Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!”
Games often fall into the trap of optimizing for addictiveness which is not quite the same thing as pleasure. Jonathan Blow has talked about this and I think there is a lot of merit in his arguments:
He clarified, “I’m not saying [rewards are] bad, I’m saying you can divide them into two categories – some are like foods that are naturally beneficial and can increase your life, but some are like drugs.”
Continued Blow, “As game designers, we don’t know how to make food, so we resort to drugs all the time. It shows in the discontent at the state of games – Radosh wanted food, but Halo 3 was just giving him cheap drugs.”
…
Blow believes that according to WoW, the game’s rules are its meaning of life. “The meaning of life in WoW is you’re some schmo that doesn’t have anything better to do than sit around pressing a button and killing imaginary monsters,” he explained. “It doesn’t matter if you’re smart or how adept you are, it’s just how much time you sink in. You don’t need to do anything exceptional, you just need to run the treadmill like everyone else.”
I work in the games industry and I see this pattern at work a lot from many designers.
Interestingly, some of the best mathematical analysis I’ve ever seen happens in WoW, and to a limited extent in other MMOs. When you want to be the top 25, 100 or even 1000 out of 13 million, you need to squeeze out every advantage you can. Often the people testing game mechanics have a better understanding of them than the game designers. Similarly, the first people to defeat new bosses do so because they have a group of people they can depend upon, but also because they have several people capable of analysing boss abilities, and iterating through different stategies until they find one that works.
It’s unfortunate that there’s so much sharing in the community; players who aren’t striving to be the first to finish a fight can just obtain strategies from other people. People who don’t care to analyse gameplay changes, or new items, can rely upon those who do to tell them what to wear, what abilities to choose, and what order to use them in. Back when I played one of my biggest frustrations was that nearly everybody in the game out of the few top thousand simply lack the ability to react and strategise on the fly. Throw an unexpect situation at them and maybe 1 in 10 will cope with it.
And that great mathematical analysis is being directed at solving meaningless made-up problems that generate no value for the world. It’s pure consumption, zero production. Yet it’s complicated, goal-oriented consumption, it feels like doing work, and hence scratches the productive itch for many people...without actually doing any good in the world.
It’s a powerful opiate (a drug which makes the time pass pleasantly and users wish to use all the time, as opposed to psychedelics which are used occasionally and make the rest of your life better). Which, I believe, makes it on the side of evil not of good.
At least the first part could be said word-by-word for modern-day astrophysics, except that this is socially accepted and the guys and gals doing it are (in most cases) being paid for (and even the people seeing fundamental knowledge over the universe as goal in itself will agree that there are far more important things to divert workforce to)
I also find it funny when mathematicians pejoratively speak of “recreational mathematics” (problem solving) as opposed to theory building: “If I build a lego hat, that’s just for fun, but if I build a lego Empire State Building, that’s serious business!”
I also find it funny when mathematicians pejoratively speak of “recreational mathematics” or problem-solving as opposed to theory-building: “If I build a lego hut, that’s just for fun, but if I build a lego empire state building, that’s serious business!”
I don’t disagree much with your post (my only complaint is that fun is a reasonable goal in and of itself, and if someone chooses that, then so be it). However my objection is to Blow’s (amongst many others’) characterisation of the game and the players. Contrary to his thesis, being smart and adept are actually massively rewarded in WoW by comparison to other games; nearly everybody who plays the game is aware of the best players. There is a lot of status up for grabs just by being the best on a server, let alone best in the world.
Accepting his analysis at its face value would lead you to conclude that there are no lessons you can take from WoW or other MMOs. In fact, to me WoW demonstrates ways in which people can be motivated to work upon hard, mathematical problems. It would be a shame if people were to dismiss it off hand, when it has the potential to demonstrate how to structure hard work to make it more palatable and attractive to tackle.
I know several people who used to be the best players on a particular WoW server—they said it was generally boring and not really as prestigious as one might expect, since the sheer number of servers out there means that being the best on one doesn’t even necessarily mean you’re all that good at the game as a whole.
I suppose it would depend on the makeup of your particular server. Though we were nowhere near world best, my guild had decent competition on our server and there was always need to strive to be the first to win an encounter. Both groups were reasonably well known on the server, and I would reasonably often have people messaging me out of the blue.
To try to generalise the post a bit better, I think the lesson from this is that to encourage rational analysis and quick thinking in important areas it’s important to have good competition, an easily verified criteria for ‘winning’, preferably milestones towards the ultimate goal, and a reward for winning whether status or monetary. Off the top of my head, the people behind the X-Prizes seem to have used this model well to encourage innovation in select areas.
Seconded. It seems to be a rather unfortunate video game meme in itself that MMOs (WoW particularly since it somewhat defines the genre currently) Massively reward time spent over skill. No amount of grinding low level content will make you capable of taking down say the Lich King in heroic mode (both skill- and gearwise) and to claim otherwise just shows that the extent of the knowledge of the person making the claim is limited to a single South Park episode. The most “celebrated” players are exactly the people who master the most difficult content first without the benefit of shared tactics (and usually with the highest gear handicap), not the the first guy who kills a billion sewer rats (even if there were such an Achievement).
It has been said by WoW developers responsible for generating new high-difficulty content that most of the challenge come from the fact that the best players are much, MUCH better than the average player (even more so that actual player community is aware of) that making content which is not trivial to the top guilds but is also beatable for the average joe has become somewhat impossible without certain gimmicks.
Certainly, you can become say the richest player on your server just by investing massive amounts of time (though actually manipulating the Auction House seems nowadays a better strategy than grinding), but that just means that you’ll be known as the guy who spent the most time gaming the AH (we actually have just such a player on our realm). If anyone think that’s the game rewarding you for time spent instead of skill, I seriously suggest they spent a little more time researching the subject before pontificating on it.
Finally I apologize for the slightly combative tone of my first post, but I hope it’s an excusable reaction, especially on this site, to a nearly “accepted wisdom” that doesn’t really even survive the slightest scrutiny.
(Not meant as a rhetoric question): Does “mathematical analysis” really mean that someone with an IQ of 170 has (in average) a real advantage to someone with an IQ of 160 (if you don’t count effects on information processing ability and reaction time) in solving really hard mathematical problems, or is it rather a combination of clicking fast, knowing how the monsters will react and calcing through what will happen if you do X?
I’d never heard of Every17. Based on the description on Wikipedia I’d say it’s borderline whether it qualifies as a game. I’m not sure it meets the minimum level of interactivity required. Non-game entertainment can fall into the same trap of addictiveness vs. pleasure however, some TV for example.
When I get insignificant amounts of change, like a nickel, I leave it on the nearest outdoor object, thus teaching people that they can collect small amounts of money by searching random objects.
I paint question marks on boxes and leave hallucinogenic mushrooms in them.
I just leave handgun ammunition everywhere.
I randomly assault people who wander outside of the city centre, but only if they look strong enough to kill me easily.
For my part, I force rabid dogs to swallow gold coins. Defeating an aggressive dog ought to earn you both experience and precious metals.
I do that too. Also, I had a sign by my front door that read “no plot here” so that wandering adventurers aren’t tempted to investigate too deeply and make a mess of my house.
I once decided to search my sofa and found a pair of nunchaku there.
Whenever anyone comes up to me but doesn’t say anything, I repeat the same phrase over and over again.
How many NPCs does it take to change a lightbulb? (The answer)
“Excuse me, sir...”
“Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!”
”Uh, okay, anyway, would you happen to know where...”
“Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!”
”...”
″Hi! I like shorts! They’re comfy and easy to wear!”
So, wait. This means the entire premise of this article is wrong?
Our intuitions aren’t being driven off track, we’re simply turning reality into a videogame.
Video game authors probably put a lot of effort into optimizing video games for human pleasure.
Workplace design, User Interfaces etc., they could all be improved if more ideas were copied from video games.
Games often fall into the trap of optimizing for addictiveness which is not quite the same thing as pleasure. Jonathan Blow has talked about this and I think there is a lot of merit in his arguments:
I work in the games industry and I see this pattern at work a lot from many designers.
Interestingly, some of the best mathematical analysis I’ve ever seen happens in WoW, and to a limited extent in other MMOs. When you want to be the top 25, 100 or even 1000 out of 13 million, you need to squeeze out every advantage you can. Often the people testing game mechanics have a better understanding of them than the game designers. Similarly, the first people to defeat new bosses do so because they have a group of people they can depend upon, but also because they have several people capable of analysing boss abilities, and iterating through different stategies until they find one that works.
It’s unfortunate that there’s so much sharing in the community; players who aren’t striving to be the first to finish a fight can just obtain strategies from other people. People who don’t care to analyse gameplay changes, or new items, can rely upon those who do to tell them what to wear, what abilities to choose, and what order to use them in. Back when I played one of my biggest frustrations was that nearly everybody in the game out of the few top thousand simply lack the ability to react and strategise on the fly. Throw an unexpect situation at them and maybe 1 in 10 will cope with it.
And that great mathematical analysis is being directed at solving meaningless made-up problems that generate no value for the world. It’s pure consumption, zero production. Yet it’s complicated, goal-oriented consumption, it feels like doing work, and hence scratches the productive itch for many people...without actually doing any good in the world.
It’s a powerful opiate (a drug which makes the time pass pleasantly and users wish to use all the time, as opposed to psychedelics which are used occasionally and make the rest of your life better). Which, I believe, makes it on the side of evil not of good.
At least the first part could be said word-by-word for modern-day astrophysics, except that this is socially accepted and the guys and gals doing it are (in most cases) being paid for (and even the people seeing fundamental knowledge over the universe as goal in itself will agree that there are far more important things to divert workforce to)
I also find it funny when mathematicians pejoratively speak of “recreational mathematics” (problem solving) as opposed to theory building: “If I build a lego hat, that’s just for fun, but if I build a lego Empire State Building, that’s serious business!”
I also find it funny when mathematicians pejoratively speak of “recreational mathematics” or problem-solving as opposed to theory-building: “If I build a lego hut, that’s just for fun, but if I build a lego empire state building, that’s serious business!”
I don’t disagree much with your post (my only complaint is that fun is a reasonable goal in and of itself, and if someone chooses that, then so be it). However my objection is to Blow’s (amongst many others’) characterisation of the game and the players. Contrary to his thesis, being smart and adept are actually massively rewarded in WoW by comparison to other games; nearly everybody who plays the game is aware of the best players. There is a lot of status up for grabs just by being the best on a server, let alone best in the world.
Accepting his analysis at its face value would lead you to conclude that there are no lessons you can take from WoW or other MMOs. In fact, to me WoW demonstrates ways in which people can be motivated to work upon hard, mathematical problems. It would be a shame if people were to dismiss it off hand, when it has the potential to demonstrate how to structure hard work to make it more palatable and attractive to tackle.
I know several people who used to be the best players on a particular WoW server—they said it was generally boring and not really as prestigious as one might expect, since the sheer number of servers out there means that being the best on one doesn’t even necessarily mean you’re all that good at the game as a whole.
I suppose it would depend on the makeup of your particular server. Though we were nowhere near world best, my guild had decent competition on our server and there was always need to strive to be the first to win an encounter. Both groups were reasonably well known on the server, and I would reasonably often have people messaging me out of the blue.
To try to generalise the post a bit better, I think the lesson from this is that to encourage rational analysis and quick thinking in important areas it’s important to have good competition, an easily verified criteria for ‘winning’, preferably milestones towards the ultimate goal, and a reward for winning whether status or monetary. Off the top of my head, the people behind the X-Prizes seem to have used this model well to encourage innovation in select areas.
Seconded. It seems to be a rather unfortunate video game meme in itself that MMOs (WoW particularly since it somewhat defines the genre currently) Massively reward time spent over skill. No amount of grinding low level content will make you capable of taking down say the Lich King in heroic mode (both skill- and gearwise) and to claim otherwise just shows that the extent of the knowledge of the person making the claim is limited to a single South Park episode. The most “celebrated” players are exactly the people who master the most difficult content first without the benefit of shared tactics (and usually with the highest gear handicap), not the the first guy who kills a billion sewer rats (even if there were such an Achievement).
It has been said by WoW developers responsible for generating new high-difficulty content that most of the challenge come from the fact that the best players are much, MUCH better than the average player (even more so that actual player community is aware of) that making content which is not trivial to the top guilds but is also beatable for the average joe has become somewhat impossible without certain gimmicks. Certainly, you can become say the richest player on your server just by investing massive amounts of time (though actually manipulating the Auction House seems nowadays a better strategy than grinding), but that just means that you’ll be known as the guy who spent the most time gaming the AH (we actually have just such a player on our realm). If anyone think that’s the game rewarding you for time spent instead of skill, I seriously suggest they spent a little more time researching the subject before pontificating on it.
Finally I apologize for the slightly combative tone of my first post, but I hope it’s an excusable reaction, especially on this site, to a nearly “accepted wisdom” that doesn’t really even survive the slightest scrutiny.
(Not meant as a rhetoric question): Does “mathematical analysis” really mean that someone with an IQ of 170 has (in average) a real advantage to someone with an IQ of 160 (if you don’t count effects on information processing ability and reaction time) in solving really hard mathematical problems, or is it rather a combination of clicking fast, knowing how the monsters will react and calcing through what will happen if you do X?
Where do visual novels such as Ever17 fit on this scale? Do you count them as games at all?
I’d never heard of Every17. Based on the description on Wikipedia I’d say it’s borderline whether it qualifies as a game. I’m not sure it meets the minimum level of interactivity required. Non-game entertainment can fall into the same trap of addictiveness vs. pleasure however, some TV for example.
Life imitates Zelda.
All this before we even mention Burning Man?
Thank FSM that you don’t leave weapons there.