The Errant Signal Thread

[Infinitron]

read in a high-pitched voice

Getting graded at school is not "gamification". FFS, people have been doing exams and getting grades for countless centuries!

It would be gamification if you got a (meaningless) achievement for doing your homework or something like that.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

This world is getting more and more disgusting.

 

[Jasede]

SHAVE YOUR NECK

 

[Metro]

All you people who link shitty Total Biscuit videos need to stop doing that and start watching this guy -- at the very least you might raise your IQ a few points.

 

[Jasede]

All you people who link shitty Total Biscuit videos need to stop doing that and start watching this guy -- at the very least you might raise your IQ a few points.

 

[sea]

Except for the fact that it does work and has already been used to good effect before.

Why the fuck do you think education involves such an elaborate grading system of points and distinct levels and various awards (especially for younger students)? Because people give a fuck about that shit more than if they just had a % pass/fail at the end of the year. Ditto for shit like 'Employee of the Month', collecting stamps when you go to subway, and all kinds of marketing bullshit with coupons and such like McDonalds Monopoly and Pepsi points.

The point isn't to make it more fun than an actual game, it's to make it less tedious than it was before. Which it does.

His only decent point in the video was the fact that it's being pushed a lot right now as the next big thing by people who stand to profit from it. It could certainly stand to be used more than it is now in relation to work and especially education and health (and budget/savings as well for msot people), but it's not that new, just easier to implement with the cheapness of information management in this era. Tracking a bunch of employee or student achievements on paper would be a nightmare, but it can be pretty damned easy with a computer. It's so easy these days that we can do really elaborate shit like xp bars or achievement systems with varied rewards instead of simple shit like gold stars or air miles.

I have to agree. Gamification, while a shallow psychological trick, is still very useful for structuring tasks and events in ways that are more engaging. Everything Chris said in his video is valid, but I think it overlooks the point that providing short-term goals, rewards, and manageable chunks of information to deal with can promote more efficient work while making it a bit more interesting.

While I don't think anyone is going to be so easily duped by a web site with a level-up meter (in that it's doesn't inherently make the activity of reading more fun), it can definitely serve to get you to examine things you otherwise wouldn't or interact with systems differently. It's not a magic bullet for consumers looking for fun, nor will it make workers a hundred times more productive, and it can certainly be viewed cynically as exploitation... but the underlying concept of gamification certainly holds merit. The really important thing (and one Chris stresses) is that we understand what gamification is, why and how it works, and in what ways it structures and shapes our understanding of the world we live in.

 

[Damned Registrations]

It would be gamification if you got a (meaningless) achievement for doing your homework or something like that.

Sorry, I wasn't aware that stickers were meaningful. Or the distinction between letter grades as opposed to a flat percentage that would be more accurate instead of conflating everything from 86 to 100% accuracy as the exact same. Please, enlighten me as to the grave import of these things.

This shit works because it encourages people to work slightly more to achieve the next plateau when they're close anyways. Doing an extra assignment to go from 85% to 86% isn't fucking worth it, unless it also means going from a 'B' to an 'A'. The reverse also applies (people will be even less motivated to make an effort if the grade won't change) but the grades are generally close enough together that a grade change is possible more often than not, and work has to be done to maintain the grade anyways (which works better with immediate feedback rather than finding out your overall grade after you're finished).

Even something as dumb as a level up meter on a website gets people to do shit. Fuck, how many posts do we have around here from people wanting to make some special post for their n000th post?

 

[Infinitron]

It would be gamification if you got a (meaningless) achievement for doing your homework or something like that.

Sorry, I wasn't aware that stickers were meaningful. Or the distinction between letter grades as opposed to a flat percentage that would be more accurate instead of conflating everything from 86 to 100% accuracy as the exact same. Please, enlighten me as to the grave import of these things.

This shit works because it encourages people to work slightly more to achieve the next plateau when they're close anyways. Doing an extra assignment to go from 85% to 86% isn't fucking worth it, unless it also means going from a 'B' to an 'A'. The reverse also applies (people will be even less motivated to make an effort if the grade won't change) but the grades are generally close enough together that a grade change is possible more often than not, and work has to be done to maintain the grade anyways (which works better with immediate feedback rather than finding out your overall grade after you're finished).

What you're describing is a psychological trick. It's kind of like how things are always sold in stores for N-1.99$ instead of N.00$. But it's not really "gamification".

 

[Grunker]

Wow. Black and white Codexia is having a party again. Thank god sea is here.

Errant Signal basically state "gamification is shit" and then strictly lists examples of gamification done in a shitty way as proof. The video is an extremely loaded explanation of a stance to the issue - not the all-around academic description of gamification it claims to be.

Almost as retarded as Extra Credits, except on a higher level. HURR I LOSE BRAIN CELLS WHEN I SAY GAMIFY 'CAUSE IT'S OBVIOUSLY A STUPID WORD LOL AMIRITE

 

[Infinitron]

Wow. Black and white Codexia is having a party again. Thank god sea is here.

Errant Signal basically state "gamification is shit" and then lists strictly gamification done in a shitty way as proof. The video is an extremely loaded explanation of a stance to the issue - not the all-around academic description of gamification it claims to be.

Almost as retarded as Extra Credits, except on a higher level.

What about Chris Hecker's thesis, which he states at 4:45? I don't see anybody here addressing that.

 

[kingcomrade]

I've watched all this guy's videos once I was exposed to him via TB, he's very good.

 

[Grunker]

What about Chris Hecker's thesis, which he states at 4:45? I don't see anybody here addressing that.

"THIS IS SHIT" is not really good grounds for a two-way discussion, but anyway:

It's a pretty interesting point, and not something I'd heard before. I'd certainly be interested in hearing more, and it's certainly something gamification should attempt to work around. Ultimately were I dislike gamification is when the user has no interest in the system to begin with. Gamification should be a factor to ease the process or assist in the motivation, it should never be the fundamental motivation in itself.

I don't believe achievements and experience bars exemplify the farthest reaches of gamification or the best way to do it, but even if they did, ways to implement them without them taking the spotlight from the system itself must be possible.

 

[Damned Registrations]

What are games if not psychological tricks? You think there's some deep meaning in putting a ball through a hoop to get points? They're a means of making you feel like you accomplished something important when you in fact did not. Games do it for the sake of the feeling, gamified things do it for the sake of getting you to do the trick.

The difference between getting stickers and the price being 1 penny lower is that the stickers still work in a vacuum (people getting rewarded with trivial stickers do more work even if they don't have a say in the matter compared to people who don't get stickers) while the price thing is only useful by comparing it to something else (people will illogically prefer a $1.99 item over a $2.00 item even though the cost difference is under 1%, but they won't buy more of the item than they would have in the first place). Games are a way of making you want something you shouldn't logically want at all.

Though if I were a teacher I'd sure as fuck make all of my tests out of /N9 marks. Kids would fucking love how I always have smaller tests compared to those other asshole teachers with their bigass 50 mark tests

I mean, fuck, when I was in grade 2 we had a bigass sheet of paper on the wall and got to fill in coloured blocks to fill up our bar every time we had gym class based on how much running we did on the track. We had books we could put stickers in we got for getting perfect scores on quizes. There was some reading program thing to get points for too. You're telling me that shit wasn't a fucking game mechanic? I was filling up fucking xp bars before I could read 3 syllable words. Or bonus questions on tests. Having classes divided into different grades to teach different curriculum and marking tests to understand where students are learning/failing shit is purely a matter of utility, but most of the other trappings regarding frequent letter grades, honour roll, and trivial rewards are old, simple methods of making the whole thing more game like so the kids don't get so fucking bored and disinterested.

 

[visions]

Getting graded at school is not "gamification". FFS, people have been doing exams and getting grades for countless centuries!

It would be gamification if you got a (meaningless) achievement for doing your homework or something like that.

Achievement unlocked: Eager to Learn - Opened the Classroom Door.

 

[Infinitron]

What are games if not psychological tricks?... Games are a way of making you want something you shouldn't logically want at all.

I mean, fuck, when I was in grade 2 we had a bigass sheet of paper on the wall and got to fill in coloured blocks to fill up our bar every time we had gym class based on how much running we did on the track. We had books we could put stickers in we got for getting perfect scores on quizes. There was some reading program thing to get points for too. You're telling me that shit wasn't a fucking game mechanic?

Yes, these things are gamification.

Or bonus questions on tests. Having classes divided into different grades to teach different curriculum and marking tests to understand where students are learning/failing shit is purely a matter of utility, but most of the other trappings regarding frequent letter grades, honour roll, and trivial rewards are old, simple methods of making the whole thing more game like so the kids don't get so fucking bored and disinterested.

And these things are not. Making the honour roll is a game mechanic? Seriously?

Receiving a useful reward for doing good work is not "game". It's real life (well, ideally)

 

[Renegen]

If someone wants to argue gamification is everywhere, the biggest example of that is the army. Like the possibility of earning an Iron Cross "achivement" will make me sacrifice myself. Simply for showing up you get an achievement, if you get injured, you get another achievement. The best are the posthumous awards, like the dead people care.

Difference between gamification and not: if you get a real reward that's not virtual and can use it (like $$$$, or something to put on your resume), it's not gamification. I mean, are performance targets at work gamification?

 

[SCO]

Difference between gamification and not: if you get a real reward that's not virtual and can use it (like $$$$, or something to put on your resume), it's not gamification. I mean, are performance targets at work gamification?

Yeah, since you'll get cheated of them anyway.

 

[Damned Registrations]

The honour roll is a trivial distinction. The only reason anyone gives a fuck if that is on your resume or wherever the fuck you're bragging about it is because of the grades behind it- which look every bit as impressive on said resume.

A scholarship is a useful reward. Honour roll is an achievement you put on your mom's bumper sticker, same with whatever award they give out for never being absent.

 

[Gragt]

Except for the fact that it does work and has already been used to good effect before.

Why the fuck do you think education involves such an elaborate grading system of points and distinct levels and various awards (especially for younger students)? Because people give a fuck about that shit more than if they just had a % pass/fail at the end of the year. Ditto for shit like 'Employee of the Month', collecting stamps when you go to subway, and all kinds of marketing bullshit with coupons and such like McDonalds Monopoly and Pepsi points.

The point isn't to make it more fun than an actual game, it's to make it less tedious than it was before. Which it does.

His only decent point in the video was the fact that it's being pushed a lot right now as the next big thing by people who stand to profit from it. It could certainly stand to be used more than it is now in relation to work and especially education and health (and budget/savings as well for msot people), but it's not that new, just easier to implement with the cheapness of information management in this era. Tracking a bunch of employee or student achievements on paper would be a nightmare, but it can be pretty damned easy with a computer. It's so easy these days that we can do really elaborate shit like xp bars or achievement systems with varied rewards instead of simple shit like gold stars or air miles.

I'm drunk, and while I'm not entirely sure of what you're talking about, you talk about it so well that I'll vote for you next time you present yourself for world dictator. No homo.

 

[Teepo]

Except for the fact that it does work and has already been used to good effect before.

Why the fuck do you think education involves such an elaborate grading system of points and distinct levels and various awards (especially for younger students)? Because people give a fuck about that shit more than if they just had a % pass/fail at the end of the year. Ditto for shit like 'Employee of the Month', collecting stamps when you go to subway, and all kinds of marketing bullshit with coupons and such like McDonalds Monopoly and Pepsi points.

The point isn't to make it more fun than an actual game, it's to make it less tedious than it was before. Which it does.

His only decent point in the video was the fact that it's being pushed a lot right now as the next big thing by people who stand to profit from it. It could certainly stand to be used more than it is now in relation to work and especially education and health (and budget/savings as well for msot people), but it's not that new, just easier to implement with the cheapness of information management in this era. Tracking a bunch of employee or student achievements on paper would be a nightmare, but it can be pretty damned easy with a computer. It's so easy these days that we can do really elaborate shit like xp bars or achievement systems with varied rewards instead of simple shit like gold stars or air miles.

I'm drunk, and while I'm not entirely sure of what you're talking about, you talk about it so well that I'll vote for you next time you present yourself for world dictator. No homo.

Except both of you are homos. Butthurt hipster retards if there ever was any.

 

[Pika-Cthulhu]

Congratulations, you have gained (Straight A's), Achievement unlocked! [Dux/Valedictorian] Post to Facebook?

University likes your [Dux/Valedictorian]

Congratulations! You have unlocked [University placement]

 

[felipepepe]

I enjoyed the video, but will call the guy a bit naive. Yes gamification will work in the aspect of making people use/stay more, but not necessarily engage them more. Ok, but who said the suits are after that anyway?

Chances are that, if your company engages employees and cares for their well-being you don't have to give them achievments and Xp so they stay longer or work more...that is what a competitive and "cannibal" companies will want; it's a mechanic for McDonald's workers, make them work more, faster and "better" in exchange for a shinny gold star; in short, it's just a step ahead of "Employee of the Month" portraits.

 

[Dim]

Am I the only one who sees the 'posts' number under everyone's name? Actually, like the video says, getting recognized for something a person feels they deserve is good overall. But that is not part of the definition of gamification. Maybe stupid people do have more fun.

Edit: Maybe its just the methods that are stupid. I am working very hard to buy some badges. this user did too http://videogamegeek.com/user/frumpish. It takes 8 picture or video submissions to get one of those shiny badges. Maybe this example doesn't count?

 

[Derek Larp]

In the schools I went to we never had consoletarded popamole bullshit like this, just grades, and it worked fine.

 

[DraQ]

http://www.errantsignal.com/blog/?p=275



Love the subtle dig at Extra Credits

First I thought that I would brofist, but it would be against the very point the video made.
OTOH not brofisting would be kind of bleh for different reasons, so in the end I chose to brofist the OP ironically.



Haven't all the military medals and distinctions been popamole gamification shit since forever, BTW?