
The effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills - newsreview1
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131514001869
======
bitwize
Valve playtests the shit out of their games. A lot of _Portal_ 's theming is
based on their extensive testing culture and the ways they've developed to
manipulate the player through testing. For example, the Weighted Companion
Cube came about because they wanted a level where you solve puzzles while
carrying an object. But the playtesters kept leaving the damn object behind.
So Valve's solution was to tell them it was a "character" they had to care
for.

~~~
MegaButts
Maybe this used to be true (I am not making a claim one way or the other) but
it seems unlikely they would have that approach and end up with their latest
offering - Artifact. I realize not every game is going to be a hit but that
game doesn't seem to be liked by just about anybody.

~~~
knolan
It’s not a game that I, a long time Valve fan would have any interest in, but
I’ve been told by friends who are into card games that the actual game was
fun, it was the awful pricing that killed it.

~~~
cameronbrown
I played Artifact, it was fun until it died, but a very tough set of lessons
for Valve to swallow:

1) Their reputation really has been damaged over no HL3/Dota 2 money grabs.

2) That they can't just publish anything onto Steam anymore with little to no
upfront communication.

3) Not all monetisation models are viable - especially with the recent loot-
box fiascos. If they wanted a card economy the game should've been free with
random cards, with the _option_ to purchase cards to have your own collection.

The past few months they've definitely started to change over the response to
Artifact. Dota Underlords was shipped in only 5 months, so it just shows what
they're capable of with a little pressure.

------
nickjj
I wish they did this test with people who played the Quake series (Quake /
Quake II / Quake 3 / Quake Live). They were arguably one of the most popular
non-realism based FPS games of their time (they spanned ~25 years).

The big difference between Portal is, Quake is a multiplayer game where you're
playing against a human in real time and there's no backup plan of being able
to Google an answer if you get stuck. You either practice and get better or
get utterly destroyed. It's really a good case for overcoming challenges and
persistence.

There's 1v1 matches where you need to memorize maps to such a degree that you
can almost navigate them blind folded. You're also dealing with timing
multiple items down to the second, predicting where a human opponent will go,
mastering each weapon in every scenario to maximize damage output while
minimizing damage input and also generally having a high level overview of how
the match is going to figure out when it's worth taking risks or play it safe.

That's just the mental side of it too. Then there's needing very good reaction
times and dexterity to aim quickly and precisely and each weapon has its own
style of aiming (flick shots, precise tracking, projectile prediction, instant
hit scan weapons, etc.).

And then there's other variants of the game like 4v4 TDM or capture the flag
that share similar challenges as above but now it's amplified because you're
playing with a lot of people and you need to make very interesting decisions
with powerups.

All of this happens within seconds and becomes second nature once you've
played long enough. It's actually almost unbelievable that a human brain can
react so quickly and become so well adjusted to navigating a high speed
virtual world under pressure. A lot of these Quake games were played at live
events with hundreds of thousands of dollars on the line before e-sports
became as huge as it is today.

~~~
leoc
Team Fortress 2 is (as you may know) the sequel to one of the most popular
Quake (as in Quake 1) mods, and very much a Quake mod itself.

------
gallerdude
I still maintain Portal 2 has the greatest narrative in all of video games -
it’s expressed purely in gameplay, it’s funny as hell, and has a surprisingly
deep emotional core.

~~~
seph-reed
It's not my favorite game, nor the favorite of anyone I know, but I'd be
willing to guess it's worth top 3 (or at least 5) for almost everyone. Which
is to say, in a first-past-the-post scenario it wouldn't win, but in a run-
off-vote scenario it may very well be the best game ever made.

~~~
DEADBEEFC0FFEE
It's really not useful to make top n lists. As soon as there disagreement,
distinctions and catagories evolve. Its probably sufficient to simple state
you enjoyed the game, and to highlite some aspects you enjoyed.

~~~
seph-reed
Top N lists are just another tool for organizing thought. You're right that
they aren't a silver bullet of truth.

------
DanielleMolloy
So carefully selected video games are the real brain training. Who would have
thought..

The following finding also continues to be interesting: “More remarkably, we
found that playing an action video game can virtually eliminate this gender
difference in spatial attention and simultaneously decrease the gender
disparity in mental rotation ability, a higher-level process in spatial
cognition.”
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17894600/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17894600/)

~~~
bjornjaja
Some of this stuff is common sense—it’s amazing what length people go
researching certain subjects. For instance, if your brain does a particular
type of action (like tracking fast moving objects) it gets better at doing
that in general. Same thing with studying math, people get better at solving
problems.

Now, if those problems being solved in games or otherwise are limited in
scope, well so are the gains achievable.

So, the question then is, how to APPLY that to a general set of problems. Not
how it affects the brain doing a particular task. For instance, teach a man to
fish salmon then ask him to take that knowledge and figure out how to catch
whales or even plastic pellets in the ocean?

Or how about if one study math how can it increase ones art ability or vice-
versa? It changes perceptions etc. Seems common sense to me I dunno.

~~~
whatshisface
It's not obvious that it could eliminate the gender gap. If men start higher,
why couldn't they stay in the lead as both sexes improved? That's why you have
to do the research.

~~~
oh_sigh
I wonder if any researchers controlled for video game playing time when doing
these spatial rotation studies between genders.

------
ngngngng
Anecdotal, but I completely agree that Portal supercharges your brain, and
I've believed this for years. Back around 2011 when portal 2 came out we had a
family reunion. I had been playing a lot of Portal at the time. One of my
uncles broke out one of those brain teaser type metal ring puzzles where you
have to pull the rings apart.

It made it's way around the room as we talked and no one could figure it out.
As soon as it came to me, I saw clearly exactly what needed to happen to solve
it, and within seconds it was solved. I still think it must have been all the
Portal 2 I had been playing.

------
logfromblammo
So to make _real_ genius kids, throw away those Baby Einstein videos, ditch
the "brain training" apps, and just _play_.

What would the play curriculum be?

    
    
      Minecraft
      Portal 1 & 2
      The Talos Principle
      Infinifactory
    

What else? I'm thinking something that involves a fourth spatial dimension or
causality manipulation would also be good. I'd recommend Spellbreaker if I
thought kids would tolerate text-only games these days.

~~~
NoodleIncident
Maybe I'm just salty that I didn't figure out you could pick up laser
redirectors without breaking the connection until after beating the game, but
The Talos Principle always seems out of place in these lists. I've always seen
it as a game focused on its story, which by necessity involves puzzle-based
gameplay; but I've never thought that the puzzles were that good. In
particular, it feels like the game actively discourages you from using 3D
spatial reasoning, in favor of the puzzles being about using the tools you
have to collect more tools. Most of the puzzles could have just been a 2D top-
down perspective.

~~~
logfromblammo
The puzzles needed for the low-effort ending are all like that, but some of
the puzzles required for the 100%-completion ending are literally outside the
box, requiring you to use tools from multiple discrete puzzle zones together,
or to liberate tools from their zones to use in a portion of the level outside
the puzzle fences.

Additionally, there are multiple Easter eggs peppering the game that take some
amount of subversive reasoning to see or touch.

There's a "solve the puzzle as presented" level of reasoning, and there's a
"break the puzzle" level of reasoning. Some puzzles have a "get the tetromino"
solution, a "get the star" solution, and a "get somewhere I shouldn't be able
to reach" solution.

For instance, have you found the Space Core, from Portal 2, in The Talos
Principle?

------
moron4hire
A neuroscientist friend of mine says Lumosity is not just junk science, but
junk implementation of junk science. I would imagine just about any real
puzzle solving task would have a greater impact on cognitive ability than the
specific case of Lumosity.

~~~
neves
And Portal certainly is more fun than any Lumosity game.

Educators don't usually consider fun to be important for learning.

~~~
inetknght
> _Educators don 't usually consider fun to be important for learning. _

That's quite unfortunate. I think fun is absolutely crucial to truly learn
something.

~~~
logfromblammo
I think my only hope for learning Spanish at this point would be a game that
starts out in a Texaslike setting, with the storyline missions sending the
player into progressively more Spanish-speaking situations, with more
Hispanic-specific cultural elements, until complete immersion occurs.

Start out ordering tacos for lunch. End by smuggling someone out of Venezuela
via the Orinoco in a narco-submarine, with paramilitary groups ready to
execute you if you mistranslate something.

------
ThePhysicist
Not surprised by this as Portals puzzles combine so many different abilities
like abstract reasoning, planning, dexterity and reflexes. Now, the question
is of course if other 3D video games (e.g. DOOM) have similar health benefits.
I'd say Portal is a pretty "intellectual" game compared to most shooters, so
I'd expect the overall effect to vary. Navigation in three-dimensional
environments seems to be quite a complex task in itself though, so maybe
that's already where most of the effect is coming from?

~~~
jplayer01
Agreed. Wish there were more games out there like Portal, but it seems to be
entirely unique in the industry.

~~~
MayeulC
Oh, there are more. Out of my mind, I can cite The Talos Principle, Qube and
Antichamber.

Maybe in slightly different categories: Fez (~2D), Mirror's edge (parkour),
infinifactory. The Stanley Parable as well, perhaps?

Then there are numerous 2D ones, and I'm pretty sure I am forgetting some that
I have in my library. Portal isn't unique, but it has one of the most dynamic
and entertaining narratives. It also spearheaded a whole lot of "portal
clones", which was nice to see, as I quite like those puzzle games.

~~~
MauranKilom
From your first three I've only seen Antichamber. I agree that it's a
cognitive challenge like portal, but I also think it doesn't involve the same
kind of spatial reasoning portal does. Well, at least not in the (otherwise
ubiquitous) 3D space.

~~~
MayeulC
Well, the most difficult part of Antichamber is that the 3D space is a non-
euclidian one, so you have to adjust the way you think space. But I still
think that the main game element is how to find your way from point A to point
B in that space. And pathfinding isn't a trivial exercise in euclidian space,
already, which is the point of the article.

I recommend the Talos Principle, even though I haven't finished it yet. Some
challenges are quite hard, and it has even more spatial reasoning than portal.
Here also, enigmas revolve around getting you from point A to point B, but you
usually have to carry along some tools to help you. This often ends up being a
variant of the Hanoi tower, or the wolf, goat and cabbage, but in a space with
more than one dimension, unlike those classic riddles. And there is some lore
hidden in the game world that can be quite interesting to puzzle together.

Now, if you want more portal, the game modding community is quite profusive
around Valve's IP. You have Portal stories: Mel, Aperture tag, Portal:
prelude. The quality is often worse than complete games, but the puzzles can
be quite challenging.

------
diehunde
I don't know any of those but could it be that Lumosity is just harder on your
brain making you more tired and mentally exhausted? I mean, if a group relaxes
for 8 hours and other group does lumosity for 8 hrs, why should the second
group do better after exhausting their brains for so long?

~~~
hcs
Good question, I think there was a break between the training and the
posttest, but it isn't quite clear from the description in the paper:

"Each participant spent 10 h in the study, which spanned four separate
sessions in the on-campus laboratory of the university, across 1-2 weeks. Each
of the first three sessions lasted 3 h. Session 4 lasted one hour - solely for
administering the posttest battery. At the beginning of the first session,
subjects in both conditions were asked to read and sign the consent form.
After signing the form, subjects were randomly assigned to one of the two
conditions. All subjects were then administered an online set of pretests.
Once they finished the pretests, they logged in to play their assigned game
for the rest of the first session. They continued to play their assigned game
for the entire second and third session (for a total of 8 h of gameplay).
During the last session, they completed the online set of posttests."

"Before and after 8 h of gameplay, subjects completed an online pretest and
posttest battery of tests measuring our focal constructs and their relevant
facets."

~~~
mattkrause
Sounds like the post-test was done separately to me.

Session 1 is probably about 2 hours of "training", with the rest of the time
eaten up by the pretest and consent paperwork. Sessions 2 and 3 would be be
almost entirely training (3 hrs each), which gets you to 8 hours of training
in 3 sessions, leaving the last one for just the post-test.

------
domnomnom
The tests for problem solving used were:

Raven's progressive matrices, Insight Test, Remote Association Test

Spatial cognition:

Mental rotation test, Spatial Orientation Test, Virtual spatial navigation
assessment

------
duxup
Could it be that Portal players felt they were more successful in their games
than Lumosity players felt?

I know that successfully completing a task(s) just before a test will result
in better performance on tests, and failing will result in poorer performance.

~~~
ChrisClark
They aren't asking how a player felt about Portal or Luminosity. It looks like
they did some standardized tests after they played the respective games.

~~~
mikey_p
Yes, but parent is arguing that the feeling _could_ be what is affecting the
test results more than any cognitive abilities or enhancements as a result of
playing the game. I.e. if you "won" the Lumosity games (which normally get
harder until you fail) and "lost" at Portal, is the effect the same or is it
reversed?

A very valid question indeed.

------
thrillgore
All the marketing for Lumosity reeks of unclaimed benefits/snake oil. At least
Portal 2 is objectively fun and rewarding narratively to play.

~~~
SketchySeaBeast
It increases your "hours spent listening to J.K. Simmons rant" count, and
that's way more important than poorly sourced "neuroplasticity" training.

~~~
javajosh
Ok, HN seems to frown on tomfoolery, but amen: JK Simmons was absolutely the
best part of the Portal 2 story.

------
bhhaskin
A study of only 8 hours isn't much of a study at all.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Most studies probably use much less than 8 hours of a respondent's time, I
believe. The greater issue is the use of only 77 test subjects to begin with.

~~~
Donald
Read the paper, the authors did a power analysis to arrive at their
participant sample size. (
[http://myweb.fsu.edu/vshute/pdf/portal1.pdf](http://myweb.fsu.edu/vshute/pdf/portal1.pdf)
)

> We needed at least 34 participants per condition to estimate moderate effect
> sizes in our analyses, with a power of .90.

------
isaacgreyed
I wonder if any of this boost, or even a significant portion, comes from just
being happier and relaxing after playing a game for 8 hours. Rather than some
perceived brain training.

------
nurettin
People who have played a funny, pretty looking and relaxing puzzle game prior
to solving skill based questions perform well. What have we learned? Was it
the puzzles or GlaDOS?

~~~
vintermann
Maybe all GlaDOS' subtle (and not so subtle) digs at humanity encourages
humans to do their best.

Or maybe the humorous absurdity of a testing-obsessed "abusive mom" computer
makes people relax more in actual testing situations. I suspect these sorts of
aptitude tests get a lot of their power from the intimidation factor.

------
lliamander
But how long does that benefit last?

------
personjerry
Wait is everyone here commenting just from reading the abstract? I couldn't
get access to the pdf (elsevier paywall)...

------
wlesieutre
The idea of rounding up a bunch of test subjects and having them play Portal
to collect data on them is hilarious to me.

 _Hello and welcome to the Aperture Science computer-aided enrichment center._

I wonder if there was cake at the end.

~~~
tiborsaas
I wonder if they were promised cake upfront :)

~~~
jtms
If they were, it was most likely a lie.

------
ChrisMarshallNY
I would kill for Portal 3...

sigh...

~~~
whitebread
I would peacefully protest for HL3

~~~
umvi
I would self-immolate for a game that simultaneously served as the sequel to
both HL2 _and_ Portal 2 (i.e. Gordon Freeman has both a gravity gun and a
portal gun)

~~~
lvturner
No you wouldn't.

~~~
dymk
At least give him a chance.

~~~
lliamander
It would rather defeat the purpose.

------
boringg
sample size please - how is this even publishable?

~~~
robbrit
From the article:

> In this study, we tested 77 undergraduates who were randomly assigned to
> play either a popular video game (Portal 2) or a popular brain training game
> (Lumosity) for 8 h.

~~~
boringg
Sorry my comment should have been clearer. I wasn't actually asking for the
sample size - i was making a statement that the sample size was ridiculously
small as to be irrelevant. It was more like an eye roll. Thank you for
responding to my literal comment snd reminding me to be clearer in my messages
:)

~~~
robbrit
77 is a large enough sample size to produce statistically significant results
in a lot of cases, depending on the problem. For example, using 77 men and
women, you could easily see a statistically significant difference in height
between genders.

This paper is pretty simple, it's just a straight-forward before-and-after
test. They are holding a lot of factors constant and not doing an
observational study, so 77 is actually a fine sample size for something like
this.

