

Know the Limits of Game Mechanics - ryanelkins
http://kellyrued.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/know-the-limits-of-game-mechanics/

======
stcredzero
_compulsive behaviors (something that I believe is rampantly abused in MMORPG
design, but that’s another topic entirely)_

I wonder why no one has figured out a way to harness variable schedule of
reward as a self improvement tool? If it's powerful enough to destroy a life,
it could change one.

~~~
zach
It is an active point of research, but the problem is the feedback. It's hard
to get metrics people can't fake.

Inasmuch as body weight is one of those unfakeable metrics, the weekly Weight
Watchers weight-in (note that you pay less if you weigh less) is an example in
this area.

------
bpm140
Great slideshow. I'm also a huge fan of this article about common pitfalls in
creating achievements:
[http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/GregMcClanahan/20091202/3709/...](http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/GregMcClanahan/20091202/3709/Achievement_Design_101.php).
In it, Kongregate's "achievements" guy gives 14 tropes that usually spell
disaster.

My favorite is "Pretend that the player dies if he reaches a point where an
achievement is no longer earnable, and then evaluate how frustrating that
experience would be and whether it makes any sense. Since death and reaching a
point where an achievement is not earnable are essentially the same thing for
a player who’s only playing something to earn an achievement, this can often
serve as a useful check into how the player will react."

------
zackattack
This is definitely a hidden gem, an article I'd recommend to everyone. I think
it's not getting upvotes because instead of linking directly to the slideshow,
we're linked to the blog. Here's the slideshow:
[http://www.slideshare.net/dings/just-add-points-what-ux-
can-...](http://www.slideshare.net/dings/just-add-points-what-ux-can-and-
cannot-learn-from-games) Watch it in full screen.

My notes:

1) specific, measurable, actionable, realistic and timed short-term and long-
term goals (e.g. level 1 vs. level 11) 2) actions to achieve our goals are
explicit, and prepackaged so we can directly execute on them. the only
thinking we have to do is WHICH action should be done next.. sid meier: "a
game is a series of interesting decisions" 3) clear relation to action and
goal: the action will _definitely_ bring us closer to the goal 4) our status
is clear: spatially, in terms of our skills/possessions, in relation to our
goals (points and mission stats), in our relation to other players
(leaderboards/social graphs) 5) excessive positive/negative feedback (!!) 6)
challenges get excessively harder (flow) 7) CHUNKING: easy challenges train
you on basic skills, hard challenges require you to mix easy + difficult
skills 8) social comparison: facilitates social learning, and motivates
competition [who's in the game, and at what level?]

problem with transfer to work => productivity software about efficiency and
speed, not fun/emotions.. "how you feel is irrelevant". (ed: i disagree.)
easter eggs = non-functional excess = introduce a feeling of "play" games =
play = VOLUNTARY

good games are easy to learn, difficult to master fun dynamics are good.
monopoly: gaining and losing money mechanics leads to poverty gap dynamic
which leads to poor experience aesthetic for losing player.

