
Achievement Porn - pmichaud
http://www.petermichaud.com/essays/achievement-porn/
======
CoryOndrejka
"Any achievement in a video game is a fake achievement"

This is a great soundbite to build an essay around but ignores two decades of
learning, cognitive, and psychological research. There are too many examples
to try to pack into a comments, but among the most obvious:

\- 3D games are have been demonstrated to have positive effects on spatial
perception and to allow rehearsal-based training for real-world activities
([http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~daniela/SeriousGames4thePolice_Ah...](http://www.dcs.shef.ac.uk/~daniela/SeriousGames4thePolice_AhmedBinSubaih-1.pdf))

\- Medical education in virtual worlds has also demonstrated the efficacy of
training in synthetic worlds (<http://www.jmir.org/2010/1/e1/>)

\- Massively multiplayer games' positive impact on literacy
([http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.114...](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.114.4968&rep=rep1&type=pdf))

Easy to go on and on, but the short answer is that it is preposterous to
dismiss technologically mediated achievement as somehow fake.

The author's other points about variable-reward based training and the lure of
positive feedback are also well researched fields. Since Skinner we've seen
evidence that small amounts of positive reinforcement with some randomness --
called variable reinforcement -- generates the largest behavioral changes and
longest engagement, so it should come as no surprise that achievement games --
like gambling -- engage a large number of people.

Of course, the 30,000' view of the article -- that variable reward games can
consume a large amount of time and may not be making the player's life better
-- is true. However, the simple assertions that games are fake and hurt their
players are simply not supported by the data. For a very deep analysis of MMO
players, you may want to peruse Dmitri William's work on the EQ2 data:
<http://dmitriwilliams.com/research.html>

~~~
gridspy
How about : Any achievement the game rewards you for is a fake achievement.

Whenever I go up a level in WoW, or gain a kill in Quake, or beat a boss and
pick up his loot I have a fake achievement.

Sure, there are some real achievements in there, but they are not provided by
the game world - they are almost a side effect. Most likely they are not the
reason that people are playing these games, but they are a useful excuse to
continue playing.

Consider how much real achievement we would see if all the motivated hackers
put down WoW and started up their development environment of choice.

I'm not saying that games aren't cool (I love computer games and have been
strongly addicted in the past) but don't delude yourself into thinking that
they are more productive than applying yourself directly to the task you are
trying to master.

I might get HN points (i.e Karma) from posting this comment. That is not my
goal, I don't care about those. My goal is to inspire fellow hackers enough to
pay attention to my cool start-up (Gridspy). HN doesn't give me "pay attention
to me" points - I don't think that is really possible.

~~~
DLWormwood
> Consider how much real achievement we would see if all the motivated hackers
> put down WoW and started up their development environment of choice.

This is a big part of why I quit WoW late last year. I wanted to take one last
stab at self-employment before turning 40. (Yes, yet another wannabe iP*
developer) While having a day job and playing WoW prior to the achievement
system wasn't a problem for me, having to be self-motivated to work with a
constellation of "Achievements" at arm's reach probably cost me about 3-4
months of self-funding time getting underway.

~~~
nailer
Off topic, but what is 'iP*' ?

~~~
sireat
I would hazard a guess that it is: iPhone, iPad, etc

------
sgoranson
Trying to define what should be meaningful for other people is pretty arrogant
and an insular perspective on life.

My personal take on reality is that the whole shebang is a "meaningless
treadmill", but I'm willing to accept that it might not be true for the next
guy.

~~~
afgeneralist
"Trying to define what should be meaningful for other people is pretty
arrogant and an insular perspective on life." - I think this statement is lazy
in that it's taking the cultural relativist approach. By this token, we
shouldn't make judgment on female circumcision in Africa, or the one child
rule in China. In their societies these practices have very important value
but I think most of us probably feel like it's morally wrong.

I think we can argue there there is a world where there should exist universal
qualities. I certainly wont knock the author for trying to argue video games
inherently don't have the same value as say "going for a walk" and helping
your family or community...

~~~
jamesbritt
'"Trying to define what should be meaningful for other people is pretty
arrogant and an insular perspective on life." - I think this statement is lazy
in that it's taking the cultural relativist approach.'

And the funny thing is, such statements come off as absolutist claims about
how other people should not be making absolutist claims. I mean, isn't it
pretty arrogant to declare someone else, um, pretty arrogant? :)

It's hard to criticize someone for criticizing someone, or to judge people for
judging people.

~~~
dx
"I mean, isn't it pretty arrogant to declare someone else, um, pretty
arrogant? :)"

Isn't it then also pretty arrogant to mean that it is pretty arrogant to
declare someone else pretty arrogant? ;)

~~~
nostrademons
Yup. And it's pretty arrogant to imply that it's pretty pretty arrogant to
mean that it is pretty arrogant to declare someone else pretty arrogant.

I think this thread is heading for a stack overflow.

Anyway, I think a lot of these self-referential paradoxes have a simple
resolution. Just refuse to play. I'll do what I want, and I'll ignore whether
everyone else thinks it's justified or not.

------
elptacek
Very interesting. These two articles explain a few things for me:

1\. Why I can't ever seem to get into video games (or games in general).

2\. Why the hobbies I do enjoy use skills that are difficult to acquire and
take a lot of effort to master.

3\. Why we have such a hard time motivating our son to practice viola and
stick to martial arts. Most of the reward he's heard over the years has come
in the form of, "Wow, you're really smart." As a verbally gifted child, he has
already acquired an expansive vocabulary that impresses adults. Zero effort
for him; big payoff.

4\. And, possibly, why our daughter seems to be acquiring skills at a faster
clip than the boy does. She seems to have tapped into that other kind of
reward, for effort. Makes me wonder if this has anything to do with the
remarkably different response people have expressed to her verbal abilities,
which is typically criticism.

If you're curious, both of our children play video games, but the boy is a
great deal more "into" them than the girl. Where he will use up all of his
computer time and beg for more, I've seen her go days without using the
computer at all. Video games are a political hot button for parenting; like
watching television, the kind of parent you are is open to public scrutiny
based on how many hours per day you let your kid engage in the activity, or
even at all.

You don't have to be a parent to see the value of achievement in habilitation,
but it does help. I've met my share of 30-yr-old gamers who still live in
their parents' basements. Personally, I believe that if my kids aren't
independent by 20, I'll have failed as a parent. There is a real, deep joy
that you get from looking at an object you have formed with your hands or the
home you've made with your salary. Even if you just sit in a cubicle. We're
wired this way for a reason, right? Otherwise we'd perish.

And it's not a bad idea to consider the concept of types of achievement. The
advertising industry surely does. They feed us this tripe and most of us eat
it without bothering to sniff it first.

~~~
nopassrecover
Games are typically spatial based (shooters mostly) or strategic based and for
whatever reason (genetic or cultural) boys are more interested in these topics
than girls.

Girls have been shown to be more interested in reality based games (playing
house etc.) which is why games like The Sims are such a hit. Constrastly boys
look for an escape/imaginative games which sums up most games and is why your
son plays more games than your daughter.

~~~
elptacek
In general, I agree with you. As applied to our kids, specifically, it doesn't
ring true. They are both excited by the same games: Spore, Club Penguin, Rock
Band, Zelda, Pokemon. Some of which seem like 'playing house' (Club Penguin)
and others 'escape/imaginative.' In their non-computer time, they play a game
they've invented called "Creatures." I'm not sure what this game entails (it
appears to have no real rules), but it seems partway between 'playing house'
and 'escape/imaginative.'

Judging by the general level of tidiness around here, nobody's really that
into 'playing house.' ;-)

~~~
tptacek
I've downmodded you for complaining about my housekeeping habits.

------
mixmax
This gem is from the posters resume page:

 _So this guy dies and goes to Heaven, and when he gets to Heaven, he’s trying
to explain to God how he spent his life.

Wait, wait, God says. Let me get this straight I gave you a body able to swim
oceans and climb mountains

Yeah, the guys says.

and you sat in a cubicle?

Right.

I gave you creativity, and you made widgets?

Yes, the guy says.

The one thing I withheld from you, the only thing you could never get more of,
time, you traded away for?

Money, the guy says._

link: <http://www.petermichaud.com/resume/>

~~~
rortian
Yeah this guy seems so full of it. Why is climbing a mountain not a fake
achievement?

~~~
electromagnetic
Agreed, climbing a mountain serves no purpose other than to say you've climbed
a mountain. I climbed aboard a plane and got much higher than any mountain
climber did on land, and I did it at a far more economical price.

If you believe sitting in a cubicle is meaningless, then don't sit in a
fucking cubicle, _it's common sense_. I can't stand office work, it's just
something I cannot do because it feels like a laborious chore, rather I choose
to work outside in construction because despite working the same hours as
anyone else, it doesn't feel like I'm forcing myself to do it. However, I'm
certain lots of people don't enjoy moving equipment that weighs hundreds of
pounds, so to each their own.

In my life I work my job so that I can afford a nice home to live with my
wife, to spend time with family, to travel to foreign cultures and to take
care of animals. This is what I like, and this is what I do. My life fulfils
me, that's why I live it this way, if someone ignorantly wants to believe that
my actions are not real achievements then so be it. Obviously their grand
achievement in life will be of wasting time caring about what other people are
thinking and doing.

~~~
blubb
Exactly right. Life is in fact devoid of meaning except for the meaning you
choose to apply to it yourself. This includes playing computer games, spending
time on facebook, climbing mountains or a career ladder and having a wife,
children and a happy dog.

~~~
wallflower
"What is the meaning of life?

It's up to you to define it."

------
tumult
I got a 360 recently to play an arcade scrolling shooter port. Microsoft
requires game publishers to have a certain minimum number of those popup
achievements in the game before they approve it for production. Cynically, the
publisher (a medium-sized Japanese company) created achievements for it like
"Cleared level 1" "Shot an enemy" "Cleared level 2" "Died" "Defeated a boss"
"Touched a power-up" "Score was a multiple of 200" "Watched the credits" stuff
like that. There are also achievements for picking certain items in the
options menus, not touching the controller for a certain amount of time during
gameplay, starting the game (yeah, just starting the game), scrolling the
selection cursor off the screen, etc. Awesome.

~~~
proxy
<http://armorgames.com/play/2893/achievement-unlocked>

~~~
jim-greer
Play it on our site and the achievements are permanent and public:

[http://www.kongregate.com/games/ArmorGames/achievement-
unloc...](http://www.kongregate.com/games/ArmorGames/achievement-unlocked)

~~~
zackattack
LOVE kongregate and armor games

------
grandpa
Seneca wrote about this in _De Brevitate Vitae_ about 2,000 years ago, and
unlike TFA, actually said it well.

Those who do not study philosophy are condemned to blog mangled versions of
it.

~~~
derwiki
I've never heard of "De Brevitate Vitae", so TFA's blog-mangled version of it
still seems useful. It also sparked this discussion on it.

~~~
wallflower
Usually referred to by the title, "On the Shortness of Life"

[http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/13/stoicism-101...](http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/13/stoicism-101-a-practical-
guide-for-entrepreneurs/)

[http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/24/on-the-
short...](http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2009/04/24/on-the-shortness-of-
life-an-introduction-to-seneca/)

------
metamemetics
I strongly agree with the proposed existence of the Achievment treadmills.
However, I think the difference between "fake" and "real" achievement
treadmills are completely arbitrary, created by a societal average and either
accepted or rejected by the individual. If society as a whole started valuing
number of facebook friends over net income, then facebook would no longer be a
a "fake" treadmill.

I think it's still a good article because it could be interpreted as
advocating narrowing in on what achievment treadmills you feel are "real", and
avoiding distracting achievement treadmills you consider are "fake".

Really it all comes down to avoiding cognitive dissonance, when you observe
yourself acting in a manner that is contrary to your beliefs.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance>

~~~
billswift
It isn't really that they are arbitrary, rather there is a continuum - some
"achievements" are clearly fake and others clearly real, but there is a grey
area in between where it depends on the specific situation and goals of the
person involved.

------
jff
See here's the thing, ragging on the education system is so overdone, such an
easy target, such a bullshit "I wasn't the best so it didn't matter anyway"
thing, that as soon as somebody does it in these inevitable articles, I tune
out.

Seriously, every time somebody in one of these articles tries to get their
pseudo-philosophical think on about education or achievement or whatever, they
dive straight for AND OF COURSE WE ALL KNOW SCHOOL IS SO MEANINGLESS FNAR
FNAR.

~~~
Eliezer
Hold on, I'm not sure that's fair. Yes, everyone knows that school is insane,
marijuana is safer than alcohol, you shouldn't have different tax treatment
for corporate and individual health insurance, et cetera et cetera EXCEPT WE
DON'T ALL KNOW THAT AND THEY'RE STILL DOING IT.

~~~
derefr
Perhaps we can just make an Encyclopedia of Common-yet-Dangerous
Misconceptions, word it and print it up to look, and have the status cues of,
a religious text (but also with convincing info-graphics and cites), and
distribute them like phonebooks door-to-door?

~~~
Enra2
"Let's call the product Revipedia. The purpose of Revipedia is to be like
Wikipedia, except that it serves as a reliable source on all topics, no matter
how technical or controversial, and no matter how detached from reality the
centrist mainstream may be."

[http://unqualified-
reservations.blogspot.com/2008/01/reviped...](http://unqualified-
reservations.blogspot.com/2008/01/revipedia-how-to-defeat-us-government.html)

------
d3vvnull
Any achievement has scope and context. What one achieves in any activity may
or may not transcend that activity. The meaningfulness of the activity itself
may not carry beyond the individual or beyond a select group. So I think,
ultimately that the achiever has to make the final judgement as whether
achieving the goal really matters to the achiever and whether it matters that
the achievement is important to others.

Also, treadmills are not entirely useless, even in the metaphorical sense. I
may not visibly being going anywhere, but my mind may be active and going
through a process of re-wiring and preparation for other challenges.

------
aoriste
I had read the first article already, and this one provided an interesting
commentary. What struck me most, however, was the striking parallel it makes
to a distant, hazily defined, mmo game that a friend and I talk about creating
in our twilight years.

This game would simply be a massive simulation of a fantasy setting, replete
with deep and meaningful (in an in-game sense) game-object detail, but which
would offer no prefabricated achievement structure. The trick, as we see it,
would be to actually get people to play this "game". Without any transparent
and crudely imitable notion of "advancement", we doubt that anybody other than
space cadets like ourselves would enjoy the game. Essentially, the game would
be about being in the world and living there, and not about winning contests
and completing quests. It is not as if there would not be things to do - quite
the contrary, the player liberty might be overwhelming - too many people would
ask: "What do I do in this game?" - translation: "how do I succeed here?"

~~~
endtime
So, real life, but with unicorns and a lower poly-count?

~~~
aoriste
quite - real_life++, and, yes, probably with a much lower poly-count.

------
nazgulnarsil
this is a wonderful article. anytime there is some sort of measure of
achievement you have to be careful that it isn't easier to bend the measure
than to actually achieve. the comparison to school is great and can be seen in
even sharper relief in Japan and Korea's "Cram Schools" the existence of which
is predicated on hacking the school system.

------
xenophanes
Anyone else expect the article to be about an idea for a new porn site where
you unlock achievements?

I clicked the link wondering if you made progress by watching stuff, or had to
submit videos of doing stuff (which, from the perspective of the site owners,
could be a way to encourage users to submit free content).

~~~
vl
Yep, I clicked on it thinking guy is going to propose new business model for
porn.

------
maurycy
That's why I literally love capitalism.

The market does not give a heck about your little silly titles. You might be a
God of the Universe, but if you cannot bring a profit, you're out.

~~~
barrkel
And the corollary: you may be a master of the universe, and bring in lots of
profit, yet not actually add substantial value.

As the article says, moneymaking is its own treadmill, its own fake
achievement.

~~~
electromagnetic
By this rational everything is a fake achievement, so just off yourself and
save us this boring shit from being on the HN front page.

The majority of our life is doing useless, thankless tasks. Simply by spending
15 minutes in the shower every day I will have wasted an entire year of my
life in the shower. By sleeping in 1 hour on Sunday I wasted 1/2 a year of my
life, equally anyone spending an hour in church also wasted a year of their
life (unless on the off chance god exists, then they only probably wasted a
year of their life worshipping the wrong god). Those two teeth cleaning's my
insurance company covers per year, assuming I'm only in the average of an
hour, I just wasted almost 7 days of my life despite no medical evidence the
procedure does anything, but if I get the maximum done yearly, well that's 12
days.

Why should I brush my teeth the 2 minutes morning and evening recommended by
my dentist? that wastes 81 days of my life. Just doing 1 minute morning and
night only wastes 40 days. Why should I sleep the recommended 8 hours a night
when just getting 6 hours has no appreciable difference on longevity or
health? That's a whole 6 1/2 years saved if I just sleep 6 hours.

~~~
Psyonic
Right. You could say that. That said, I'm sure that feels a little ridiculous
to you. That money can be a treadmill, though, is as old as time. Haven't you
seen A Christmas Carol? Scrooge and Marley made money like bandits.

~~~
billswift
You do know A Christmas Carol is _fiction_ , right? That Scrooge and Marley
don't really exist?

~~~
Psyonic
You don't say. And here I was thinking that fiction could be instructive...

------
Alex3917
Rule of thumb: Any organization that allows you to level up is out to fuck
you, take your money, or both.

Examples: School, corporations, scientology, military, world of warcraft, etc.

~~~
matt1
What's the difference between "leveling up" and rising in a meritocracy?
Ideally in any organization those talented enough to run it will rise to the
top and "level up". If education and training help you achieve that, what's
the problem?

~~~
Alex3917
Merit is continuous and not discrete. When you take a continuous function and
try to make it look discrete, what you'll notice is that there is 'some extra'
between the actual merit curve and the stepwise function that touches it.
These so-called meritocracies are just a way to skim that extra off the top.

Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music
teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need
to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was
ridiculous. School is the same way, you just don't realize it because that's
the way it's always been presented to you.

~~~
starkfist
_Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music
teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need
to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was
ridiculous._

There are widespread teaching systems for musical instruments that work
exactly like this. Especially for piano and orchestral instruments. There are
organized competitions for different "levels" and books of exercises and
pieces also divided into levels. Even within orchestras, there is leveling -
you're either violin 1 or violin 2, within those groupings you're first chair,
second chair, and so forth.

I always found the piano contests a bit ridiculous, but with an orchestra you
do need some sort of leveling system to filter people into the various roles.

~~~
nostrademons
Having played violin 2 for most of college and violin 1 for most of high
school, I'd like to believe that the difference between first and second
violins is whether you enjoy playing in the high register, and not your level
of ability. Certainly the principal second of an orchestra is usually a better
player than all but the first few stands of first violins.

Though you're right, there is a pecking order by stand number, and another one
for outside vs. inside players.

Curiously, when I was in MA All-States in 2000, the conductor did an
experiment. He reversed the seating order, temporarily putting the worst
players up front and the best ones behind. And the orchestra as a whole played
_a lot_ better. When they couldn't hide in the back, the weaker players played
out and followed the conductor much better, yet the better players continued
to do so regardless of where they were placed. Unfortunately, we couldn't do
this for the concert (social conventions being what they were), but the hour
or so devoted to the experiment certainly worked out.

Make of this what you will.

------
ekiru
Although I don't disagree that one's achievements in a computer game aren't
necessarily meaningful(although this is a personal decision), I disagree
entirely with his assertion that all computer games are "treadmills that are
impossible to fail at". Anyone who plays any game with a competitive focus
will know this is false. It's very possible to fail at Starcraft or Warcraft
III. I certainly fail at WC3. I'm not absolutely horrible, but if I played
with any remotely good player, I would lose quickly every single time. It's
not just possible to fail, it's normal for almost everyone to fail. In fact,
if you consider losing a single game to be failing in that game, exactly 50%
of all multiplayer SC or WC3 players fail. In free-for-all FPS games, the
frequency of failure is even higher.

------
jfi
Pete – Great post! I understand your point that a site like StackOverflow
awarding points, rep, badges, whatevers, is pointless and some people pursue
them without stepping back to ask why (which is a bullsh*t pursuit on their
part).

I would argue that some members that answer programming questions posed to
them actually do take passion / interest in what they are doing AND their
actions contribute to society (in this case – to the programming community in
general and for the person asking the question specifically). It could also be
a way for interested developers to initiate conversations, etc.

Where would you draw the line on something like this? When do you think taking
part in a service like StackOverflow crosses the line into fake achievement /
pointlessness? Interested to hear your thoughts, thanks!

------
Slashed
I have always thought that _achievement_ is when one accomplishes his/her
goal, be it $1B worth startup or a level-up in a game.

Though, I think the author is talking about _useful achievements_. This gets a
bit tricky: it's all about how you see the world. In my opinion, I would make
a useful achievement when I influence people to take some action. This could
be: subscribing to my webapp or even making people follow me on twitter, if
that was my goal. The key word here for me is - influence. Nevertheless,
achievement is all about reaching your goal. At least that's how I see it.

------
TheTarquin
It seems to me that this essay is based on a strained analogy and a whole
bunch of convenient equivocation. His whole "achievement" link to video games
seems to be a largely rhetorical one. What if those were called (as they are
on some systems) trophies? Starts to make the rest of his essay sound a bit
strange.

Furthermore, to compare arbitrary accomplishments in games and saying that the
only thing which distinguishes them from achievements in life is that the
video game ones are too easy or in some way "false" is to ignore that they're
fundamentally different kinds of undertakings.

To play a video game is to, as Merlin Mann says, "move your hands a little and
make small decisions". The activity is essentially medatative or recreational
in nature and the results further that goal. The point of these "achievements"
is to relax and have fun. The point of the "achievements" in real life is to
better ourselves or our circumstances.

Furthermore, the in-game "achievements" are rigorously structured, those out-
of-game are radically open-ended.

Both the structure and purpose of the two kinds of achievements are completely
different. To conflate them and then deride video-game achievements for being
inferior misses the point. It's like people who say that Guitar Hero doesn't
make you a good guitarist.

Well, duh. But no one's making the argument that it will. We don't play Guitar
Hero to get good at guitar. We don't play video games to accomplish anything.

------
Androsynth
I recognize this, it was auto-generated by the Arrogant Crank's Mad-Lib Blog
Tool. Seriously, plug in 'work life balance' and this could be the year 2000,
'too much tv' and its 1990... Will this be all we hear for the next decade as
social games take over and Jesse Schell is proved correct?

------
tybris
Who decides what's useful and not? Perhaps the future will adapt to exploit
the skills of gamers and those who never pursued these "fake" achievements
will be useless. I'm not a gamer, but I could think of a number of ways how to
make humans solve relevant tasks through games.

~~~
te_platt
You do. The author is calling on you to asses what you choose to achieve.

~~~
raganwald
Normally spelling corrections are somewhere around Argument Level -1, but I
just wanted to point out that when you wrote: "The author is calling on you to
asses what you choose to achieve." I read it at a glance as _The author is
calling on you asses to choose what you want to achieve._ A moment later I
understood you meant _assess_ , and while the two statements mean much the
same thing, the one I misread is far more memorable :-)

~~~
te_platt
That's funny. It's pretty sad when a spelling mistake improves my writing.

------
shawnps
I disagree with his statement that learning is not itself an achievement. I
enjoy learning on its own, and see it as an achievement in itself. I often
learn things without the goal of applying them to anything in life, just the
goal to learn them and know about them.

------
Aron
1) People are driven to accumulate achievements. 2) People are a bit confused
about which ones lead to their long term happiness and prosperity, and which
don't. 3) Owners of a service can increase the stickiness of their service by
embedding an achievement system. 4) Are the service owner's goals aligned with
yours? Partially, but not in a deep sense.

It all highlights the need for improvements in our psychological defense kit
needed for modern society, along with for example, general awareness of how
marketing functions to manipulate us (another thing with good and bad).

------
contagionhealth
Most "achievements" are ways to mark time until we die, and make us feel
better about what we spent our lives doing up to that point. Whether they are
artificial or perceived benchmarks or 'real' accomplishments is not as
important as what we do after we think we've accomplished something, no matter
how big (starting a company) or small (high score on Minesweeper, because
there's always something else to 'achieve.' Achievement porn or success - the
definition (and the embodiment) is up to you.

------
billswift
I think the author is talking about the _feeling_ of achievement. And that the
only reason people care about (have the goal of) video games is that
_feeling_. Basically, he seems to be arguing against wireheading, while those
here arguing that all achievement is fake or that all achievement is real are
effectively claiming wireheading, living in a permanent VR simulation, or
similar is just as good as the real world.

------
davidfstr
Marketers and game designers are just catching onto the notion of achievements
(fake or otherwise), and are planning on harnessing it.

Take a look at this DICE presentation that follows these lines:
[http://fury.com/2010/02/jesse-shells-mindblowing-talk-on-
the...](http://fury.com/2010/02/jesse-shells-mindblowing-talk-on-the-future-
of-games-dice-2010/)

------
chrischen
> _Any achievement in a video game is a “fake achievement.”_

(Disclaimer: I'm assuming he's talking about _any_ achievement in a game,
whether it was placed there by the creators or naturally occurring).

Life is a game. What's the difference between rules in a game of monopoly and
laws governing corporate actions? Controlling a predator drone in real life vs
in Call of Duty? A game is usually something with predefined rules of which
you'll need to manipulate and work around to do something. A video game is a
new type of game, which also provides audio visual stimulation, _as well as
mental_ (however little).

It's true that fake achievements that are setup so that anyone who plays the
game can achieve them, like leveling up, is pointless. But when a game is
skill based and competitive, you can position yourself against others. And as
far as I know, every game opens up the potential to compare your performance
with other peoples' in a task with predefined rules. What's life if it isn't
full of rules? There is really no line between _virtual_ and _reality_.
Everything you do is in reality, even your imagination, because it will carry
over where ever you are in this world.

> _The easy part to culling the bullshit is to ask yourself: Is this activity
> making a positive, tangible difference in my life or anyone else’s life? Is
> it a real, true prerequisite for a tangibly effective activity?
> Alternatively, am I totally okay with doing this just because I like doing
> it, laboring under no illusion that it benefits me or anyone else?_

What does the Olympics do besides motivate and inspire people (and bring in
money to the host city)? Can't (video) games theoretically do the same things?
Whether or not an activity makes a positive difference in your life, or
anyone's else's life is relative to everyone's priorities. There is no
absolute universal law which defines what "benefit" is. Whether or not it
benefits people depends on whether or not it can get what people want. And
what people want these days vary.

I think the author is confusing what _he wants_ and what _he thinks is
beneficial_ to be what other people want and think are beneficial. It's a
matter of preference if I want to walk on a treadmill or go for an actual
walk. Whichever one is better is highly subjective. Everything you do is in
this world, has consequences and benefits in this world. And as I have argued,
games, video or otherwise, are simply isolated well defined subsets of our
universe which are also analogous to the universe (both are defined by rules).

~~~
cousin_it
> _What's the difference between rules in a game of monopoly and laws
> governing corporate actions? Controlling a predator drone in real life vs in
> Call of Duty?_

Easy. The difference is morality. In real life the consequences of your
actions can hurt other people. The "life is a game" position is amoral, as
numerous writers have noted and as your Predator drone example eloquently
shows.

~~~
chrischen
No, I meant the difference in skill. Your skills in any of those activities
are at least somewhat interchangeable with _real_ life.

Monopoly is only amoral because in the subset of the universe we've isolated,
we've taken out some of the details that would normally result in morality.
You also don't have to worry about eating in monopoly, or in Call of Duty.
That's why it's a subset.

Rules in monopoly and rules governing corporate actions are analogous, not ==.
That's what I meant by asking what's the difference.

When you play monopoly it's like isolating variables so you can hone specific
skills. Obviously playing monopoly does not equal an MBA, but that's because
monopoly is a scaled down version of life only dealing with buying and owning
property (and without concern for individual human lives), and it certainly
can hone some business skills. But this is, to some degree at least, how all
games are. Some games will be more of a waste of time, others less, some none.

------
zach
Need I mention the real-world achievements of those (no, not me) who have
attained the rank of Eagle Scout?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts_%28Boy_Sco...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eagle_Scouts_%28Boy_Scouts_of_America%29)

------
vilya
The author decries meaningless achievements without ever saying what he
considers to be meaningful. This is nothing more than a load of badly thought
through opinions that the author attempts to pass off as insights.

------
endtime
Behavioral economics taken to a horrifying extreme. I thought that's what he
was warning of - until I got to the conclusion and realized he was condoning
it. Yuck. It's like a bad episode of Sliders.

------
castis
He may just be upset because he's no good at video games.

------
spektom
I wonder whether video game developers are also wasting their life? (I'm not a
video game developer)

------
J3L2404
Unfortunately, as much as I enjoy HN, I think "Achievement Porn" is a danger
on this site - I've recently recovered from an unproductive karma obsession.
Although necessary for HN, karma is of little value (over a minimum
threshold), except maybe for credibility reference for certain comments. The
occasional binge can be instructive - everything in moderation I
suppose(including moderation).

------
rick_2047
I don't agree with the author on one point, not all achievement in a game are
"fake". Well, that actually depends on your perception of the definition of
what is fake. In my opinion, if you actually solve a problem, a puzzle or a
quiz in a game that amounts up to a "real" achievement.

~~~
barrkel
Please explain what you mean by "real achievement". At a minimum, I would
think that it must include making people's lives better, directly or
indirectly. By that metric, solving a puzzle - e.g. sudoko - is fake, as the
puzzle could be solved much more efficiently e.g. by a computer program, and
the human effort put into solving it could be much more productive - and
"real" - elsewhere.

~~~
pohl
That's a good question. Does building muscle mass by lifting weights count as
a real achievment? Being fit makes that person's life better (and possibly
others, since wellness travels along social networks). Repeated problem
solving is cognitive exercise, so perhaps it can also be "real". The trick
would be to be honest about the benefits of said exercise. Imagine someone who
only worked their biceps, but deluded themselves into thinking their
achievement were greater.

~~~
barrkel
I make a distinction between exercise and work. The things you do repeatedly,
all else being equal, are the things you get better at. Do actual physical
labour, and you'll get stronger; do fake physical labour in a gym, and you'll
also get stronger. But modern life doesn't need much in the way of actual
physical labour. FWIW, I've never been in a gym in my life, and view the
religion of the church of the gym with some bemusement, but I'm not
particularly unfit - right in the middle of normal BMI, and I enjoy cycling as
a means of commuting, rather than exercise.

Mental work, on the other hand, there is an abundance of. There's no end of
things a motivated person can put their mind to and affect real people
positively. Cognitive exercise is at best a cultural experience - such as
games - or mental chewing gum for those waiting periods, but as we grow more
connected with gadgets etc., there are fewer excuses to waste effort with no
substance.

~~~
electromagnetic
> But modern life doesn't need much in the way of actual physical labour.

Ha! Come work my job. Did you ever wonder how houses were built, or how
shelves are stocked in supermarkets, or how trucks are loaded . . . just
because you work in a cubicle doesn't mean everyone in the western world does.
Despite a recession, the construction sector in the majority of the world is
still rapidly growing, in parts it stayed well within the double figures.

BTW BMI in its present form and fitness have nothing whatsoever to do with
each other. It was designed to study muscle development amongst soldiers, and
more over it was designed to show muscle development on an individual basis
over military training. IE where they started vs where they ended. In its
original iteration it had nothing in it whatsoever to do with measuring
obesity, because it was literally the heavier the better.

~~~
barrkel
I stand by my statement: in the days of farming, easily 90% or more of the
population was doing hard physical labour. (And I don't work in a cubicle.
Actually, I work from home.)

And BMI was just a useful shorthand to indicate that I wasn't e.g. overweight
or obese (or a musclebound athlete).

------
freebsd_dude
gradubation...lol

