Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
would the real mary poppins please stand up? approaches and method in gamification Sebastian Deterding / @dingstweets Digital Creativity Labs, University of York January 27, 2017
cb
<1> introduction
we are all game designers
old idea: learn enjoyment design from gamesMalone 1981, Carroll & Thomas 1983, Blythe et al. 2004
recent surge of interest
gamification
serious games
persuasive tech
gaMification The use of game design elements in non-game contexts
Deterding et al. 2011
health & wellbeing
sustainability
education
the pursuit of happiness
the unwitting figureheard
two conflicting theories of fun
<2> what is fun?
(baby don’t hurt me)
(a)
“just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down”
aka fun as additive substance
some things are inherently fun
and some things are not
so: add funstuff™ to nonfunstuff™ for more fun
aka 1990’s edutainment
a resounding
failure …Squire 2006, Egenfeldt-Nielsen 2007
Bruckman 1999
gaMification The use of game design elements in non-game contexts
Deterding et al. 2011
… which doesn’t bode well for this
(b)
“in every job that must be done, there is an element of fun”
aka fun as emergent systemic quality
Every activity can become fun, interesting
experience is a dynamic, emergent qualityHassenzahl 2010
aestheticsmechanics dynamics
Hunicke, LeBlanc & Zubek 2004
Hunicke, LeBlanc & Zubek 2004
aesthetics
Frustrating end game
mechanics dynamics
Slow poverty gap
+$ !+-$ !-
so how do you design that?*Deterding et al. 2013
* obligatory visualisation of ephemeral design work with people pointing at post-its
<3> gameful design
methods
lots of industry work, little researchDeterding et al. 2013
if you want to know more
• Conceptual development of requirements from literature
• Review of existing methods against requirements
• Iterative design-based development and evaluation of method through 19 projects & workshops with teams of 2-6 (n=335)
guiding questions 1. What are the enjoyable, motivating experiences
characteristic for gameplay? 2. What game structures and processes afford
these experiences? 3. How does game design create these structures
and processes? 4. How can we integrate this into design methods
for non-game systems?
raph koster
»Fun is just another word for learning.«
a theory of fun for game design (2004)
#1
raph koster
»Fun from games arises out of mastery. It arises out of comprehension. It is the act of solving puzzles that makes games fun.«
a theory of fun for game design (2004)
edward deci, richard ryan
»An understanding of human motivation requires a consideration of innate psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness.«
the what and why of goal pursuit (2000)
chief source of game enjoyment: overcoming challengesMalone 1981, Csikszentmihalyi 1990, Koster 2005, Przybylski, Rigby, & Ryan, 2010, Klimmt & Blake 2012
Not fun Funhttp://www.flickr.com/photos/sulamith/1342528771/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/photonquantique/3364593945/sizes/l/
#2
raph koster
»Fun is just another word for learning.«
a theory of fun for game design (2004)
through interesting challenges
goals …
+ rules …
constraining actions …
= interesting challenges
+ feedback …
= experiences of competence
formal structure of games: skill atoms/loops Cook 2007, cf. Dormans 2012
aestheticsmechanics dynamics
Hunicke, LeBlanc & Zubek 2004
#4
how the user experiences it
aestheticsmechanics dynamics
Hunicke, LeBlanc & Zubek 2004
how the designer creates it
Rainer Knizia
»The life blood of game design is testing. ... Why are we playing games? Because it‘s fun. You cannot calculate this. You cannot test this out in an abstract manner. You have to play it.«
shift run stop, episode 40 (2010)
iterative experiential prototyping & testing
central goal conflict of applied game design
Goal conflict
game design Enjoyable
inefficiency
interaction design Usable
efficiency
#4
how do we make one support the other?
Goal congruence
game design Enjoyment
interaction design Efficiency
intrinsic integration: core challenge = to be learned skillHabgood & Ainsworth 2011, Echeverría et al. 2012
what about real-world output,
not learning?
john M. Carroll & John C. Thomas
»Tacking on ad hoc complications will not evoke fun.«
fun (1988: 21)
intrinsic integration: restructure inherent learnable challenge
For ticket, drag red dot through labyrinth
Ticket
Level 2For ticket, drag red dot through labyrinth
Ticket
Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi
»Mowing the lawn or waiting in a dentist’s office can become enjoyable provided one restructures the activity by providing goals, rules, and the other elements of enjoyment to be reviewed below.«
flow (1990: 51)
create find and restructure already-inherent challenge
needs formative research to elicit challengesKhaled & Ingram 2012
<4> summary
gaMification The use of game design elements in non-game contexts
Deterding et al. 2011
TO DESIGN FOR GAMEFUL EXPERIENCES …
Bruckman 1999
don’t sugarcoat nonfunstuff™
FIND AN INTERESTING CHALLENGE
STRUCTURE IT WELL
AND playtest and iterate ’TIL YOU GET IT RIGHT
