Gamification : The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

1. Gamification: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly Noah FALSTEIN, The Inspiracy

2. My Background • Began as a game programmer, 1980 • 16 years in companies – LArts, 3DO, DWI • 16 years freelance design worldwide in console, PC, serious games, social, mobile • Former IGDA Chairman, Design author • Advisory Boards: Serious Game Summit, Games for Health Conference, G4H Europe, Game Connection Europe

3. Gamification • Adding game mechanics or dynamics to non-game to make it more effective • Many names – simulation, edutainment, serious games, impact games • Very popular name, very controversial • Best critique: http://www.bogost.com/blog/gamification_is_bullshit.shtml • Deceptively seems like a Simple, Reassuring, Repeatable method

4. Gamification – What’s in a Name? • Good – Simple, clean, seems easy, Serious Games, Edutainment were poor • Bad – Implies adding score, badges, leaderboards is easy, better than nothing, cheaper than hiring experts • “I don’t have time to craft a meal, I’m just going to cookify some food” – Ian Bogost via Twitter • Extrinsic, not Intrinsic Rewards • Ugly associations: Falsification, Mortification, Vilification, Defecation

5. The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

6. What I’ll Discuss • Examples and discussion of gamification techniques • Before, During, and After Production • For each, discuss good, bad, and ugly implementations • Because these are subjective opinions, I will describe, not name the Bad and Ugly examples

7. Teams and Roles • The Good: Mutual respect, well defined roles. Agree who does what task. • Designer, Producer, Code, Art, Marketing • Learning specialist, SME’s, researchers • The Bad: Assumptions, Jargon, Misunderstanding (my Cisco problem) • The Ugly: Disdain and contempt

8. Cisco Mindshare Game

9. Fit Genre to Purpose and Budget • The Good: Explore all game genres, discuss specific learning objectives, consider your audience, know costs • The Bad: Underestimate costs, require executives to learn 3D navigation • The Ugly: World of Warcraft for €200,000 and an audience of seniors • You CAN be creative:

10. Zombie Division (2007)

11. Prototype early, iterate often • The Good: Solid goals but flexible means, team experienced in agile dev • The Bad: Rigid goal, team that has done games but not gamification • The Ugly: Theoretical premise, inadequate budget/time, team with no game dev experience, grad students

12. Play Forward – Yale anti-HIV game

13. Simplicity! • The Good: “Everything should be as simple as possible, but no simpler” – A.E. • The Bad: Gradually add features that may even be good but confuse or obscure the core purpose of the title • The Ugly: Trying to do everything, succeeding at nothing. 3D world because you have an engine for it • Simple doesn’t necessarily mean cheap:

14. Good: Wii Fit – Simple controller, 23M sold!

15. Testing and Assessment • The Good: Preserve at least half your budget for careful scientific testing • The Bad: Trust that your hypothesis is right, test later (worse: no hypothesis) • The Ugly: Sometimes your attempt to cause positive behavior change may work exactly opposite:

16. Harry Harlow Ironically, he’s the less hairy one here

17. Harlow’s Earlier Work

18. Harlow’s Surprising Conclusions • Rewarding monkeys actually diminished motivation compared to the control • “A manipulation drive, strong and extremely persistent, is postulated to account for learning and maintenance of puzzle performance. It is further postulated that drives of this class represent a form of motivation which may be as primary and as important as the homeostatic drives.”

19. Good practices for testing serious games? • Still only one solid example:

20. ReMission from Hopelab

21. ReMission Screenshot

22. ReMission Results • Teen Cancer patients not taking chemo • Study with over 400 patients • Control group gets commercial game • Test group gets commercial game AND Re-mission • Control group shows 10% drop off per month of chemo for 3 months • Re-Mission group – steady levels! • Next? Look for Dr. Gazzaley’s work on Neuroracer, fMRI testing during play

23. Conclusions • Mutual Respect, Define Roles • Fit Genre to Purpose and Budget • Prototype Early, Iterate Often • Keep it Simple! • Prepare for Testing and Assessment • And if this seems like a lot of preparation and precaution, just remember:

24. Even Clint needed extra protection!

25. Merci Beaucoup! Noah Falstein The Inspiracy Email: www.theinspiracy.com Twitter, Skype: nfalstein