4 ms·
It doesn't change the fact that game design is based on variable-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Many people have issues with them (see gambling).
by ivm 9y ago
It doesn't change the fact that game design is based on variable-ratio schedules of reinforcement. Many people have issues with them (see gambling).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- cousin_it 9y agoNot sure I agree. Take a typical video game like Tetris or Super Mario Bros 2. There's no variable ratio reinforcement in sight, the reward is based on how well you play. Oh, but you could say the unpredictability (variable ratio) comes from the game throwing new stuff at you. That sounds reasonable, until you remember that books and movies also throw new stuff at you unpredictably as you keep turning the pages. Are books also Skinner boxes then? Is it even a useful concept if you stretch it this far? I think it's better to judge games on the axis of compulsion vs fun. Some games you play because they feel inherently fun, like Mario. Others you play because you can't stop pressing the lever and it doesn't feel much fun, like grind heavy games. Only the latter kind of games should be called Skinner boxes IMO. And nobody dreams of making games like that! So the whole subthread started by your remark seems a bit unnecessary, no?
- ivm 9y agoYou can disagree but it's the basics of game design, both Tetris and GTA are made fun by tuning variable-ratio reinforcements: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/131494/behavioral_game_design.php https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/131494/behavioral_gam... Game designers dream and talk a lot about creating the "flow" which is also achieved by correct reward ratio: https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/166972/cognitive_flow_the_psychology_of_.php https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/166972/cognitive_flow... The problem with the whole subthread is me assuming that everybody is more familiar with the subject and not writing a detailed explanation from the beginning.
- cousin_it 9y agoThe article on reinforcement doesn't mention Tetris or Mario, only RPGs with experience points and such. The article on flow doesn't mention reinforcement or reward. I can see you're thinking of them as parts of one narrative, but I don't think the articles support it. Flow is a pleasant challenging activity which is easy to accidentally drop out of. It's very different from clicking loot crates, which is unpleasant, unchallenging, and hard to stop. I'm not sure they even involve the same parts of the brain.
- ivm 9y agoRPG is just the best example. The article about flow says the same in the requirements but it doesn't use the terms from psychology: > 1. Have concrete goals [Reinforcers] with manageable rules [Contingency]. > 3. Have clear and timely feedback [Response] on performance and goal accomplishment. I'm not making things up – just retelling the common knowledge that I used for work. Ask other game designers if you do not believe me. I understand that deconstructing pleasant experiences into a set of primitive triggers is uncomfortable (hence, over a dozen downvotes) but it's useful to see what pulls the strings from behind the curtain.
- PhasmaFelis 9y agoI'm sure some people do have trouble with those. Those people would probably do well to avoid video games if they disrupt their lives. Upthread, santaclaus said "I'd say games (and any art, for that matter) can and do improve lives," and you immediately disagreed. You appear to be arguing that games are always harmful. That's silly, and that's why you're getting such pushback.
- ivm 9y agoIf I wanted to argue that games are always harmful, I would write this explicitly. I also didn't disagree with the statement but pointed to the problems that are unique to games.