4 ms·

I've never played phone-games much, but enough that I wondered if I could find a better use for the time. I found one: Chess Chess works pretty well as a pho

by beloch 11y ago

I've never played phone-games much, but enough that I wondered if I could find a better use for the time. I found one: Chess Chess works pretty well as a phone-game. You can blitz against the computer and work through endlessly non-repeating permutations of mid and late game play that you'd rarely see against human opponents. Playing against your cell phone does not adequately prepare you for human opponents on its own, but it does help you improve your game. While being good at chess if of questionable utility, at least it's somewhat respected and can be used in social settings. It's viewed as a skill, unlike being good at flappy bird.

derefr 11y ago
I should note that you're taking this a step further than I was: it's not all "phone games" that are bad (is there anything that "phone games" as a genre have in common?)—it's just what are commonly referred to as "free-to-play casual social games" that are insidious. You can have great game experiences on a phone! You can build good, fun games, either in-depth or casual, for mobile, just like you can build them for consoles. In fact, just because a game is "casual" doesn't make it bad! Some of my favorite games have been casual few-minutes-at-a-time pick-up-and-put-down things; non-time-based puzzle games (e.g. KAMI[1]) work especially well for this—they're functionally equivalent to doing a crossword puzzle—but even action games like Tiny Wings[2] can work if they're self-contained. Then, of course, you can also have things like RPGs and action-adventure games, of just the same quality you'd see from a console. The most important difference, I think, is that people don't tend to play the good games in the middle of a conversation. The good games are actually engrossing, and therefore can only be played as an exclusive action—you might see someone playing them on the bus, but never just fiddling with them while hanging out with friends. It's only the games with no fun-value at all that are capable of the "empty addiction" you see on people stuck pulling a slot-machine arm all day. [1] http://www.stateofplaygames.com/work/kami/ http://www.stateofplaygames.com/work/kami/ [2] http://www.andreasilliger.com/ http://www.andreasilliger.com/
harshreality 11y ago
It's interesting to consider why it is that some games are respected and viewed as a skill. I think what sets games like chess, and to a greater extent go, apart from trivial addictive games, is that they teach concentration, executive function, pattern recognition, and in some cases jumping up and down abstraction hierarchies, in a way that probably extends beyond the game's domain into life. I don't know what to do about the morass of addictive games that are taking over human mindshare. There have always been some; even crossword puzzles are arguably the pre-computer version. They strengthen recall and concept association but how useful is that, since most of what's required is trivia? Scrabble at least is social (with the benefits that entails) in addition to strengthening recall of uncommon words.
- gambiting 11y ago
  Some time ago there was an article here about Croatia(I think?) making chess playing mandatory for all school children. The comments section was full of people saying that it's stupid because there is no correlation between playing chess and any skill useful in life. There are no studies that prove that playing chess improves anything, apart from....being good at chess. I don't know if that is true personally, but that was the vibe HN was giving.
- xenophonf 11y ago
  My grandfather used crossword puzzles to help himself learn English, so while I'm personally frustrated by the Trivial Pursuit-like nature of modern puzzles, I wouldn't regard them with the same disdain I give the average Zygna or EA title.

by beloch 11y ago

derefr 11y ago

I should note that you're taking this a step further than I was: it's not all "phone games" that are bad (is there anything that "phone games" as a genre have in common?)—it's just what are commonly referred to as "free-to-play casual social games" that are insidious. You can have great game experiences on a phone! You can build good, fun games, either in-depth or casual, for mobile, just like you can build them for consoles. In fact, just because a game is "casual" doesn't make it bad! Some of my favorite games have been casual few-minutes-at-a-time pick-up-and-put-down things; non-time-based puzzle games (e.g. KAMI[1]) work especially well for this—they're functionally equivalent to doing a crossword puzzle—but even action games like Tiny Wings[2] can work if they're self-contained. Then, of course, you can also have things like RPGs and action-adventure games, of just the same quality you'd see from a console. The most important difference, I think, is that people don't tend to play the good games in the middle of a conversation. The good games are actually engrossing, and therefore can only be played as an exclusive action—you might see someone playing them on the bus, but never just fiddling with them while hanging out with friends. It's only the games with no fun-value at all that are capable of the "empty addiction" you see on people stuck pulling a slot-machine arm all day. [1] http://www.stateofplaygames.com/work/kami/ http://www.stateofplaygames.com/work/kami/ [2] http://www.andreasilliger.com/ http://www.andreasilliger.com/

harshreality 11y ago

It's interesting to consider why it is that some games are respected and viewed as a skill. I think what sets games like chess, and to a greater extent go, apart from trivial addictive games, is that they teach concentration, executive function, pattern recognition, and in some cases jumping up and down abstraction hierarchies, in a way that probably extends beyond the game's domain into life. I don't know what to do about the morass of addictive games that are taking over human mindshare. There have always been some; even crossword puzzles are arguably the pre-computer version. They strengthen recall and concept association but how useful is that, since most of what's required is trivia? Scrabble at least is social (with the benefits that entails) in addition to strengthening recall of uncommon words.

gambiting 11y ago
Some time ago there was an article here about Croatia(I think?) making chess playing mandatory for all school children. The comments section was full of people saying that it's stupid because there is no correlation between playing chess and any skill useful in life. There are no studies that prove that playing chess improves anything, apart from....being good at chess. I don't know if that is true personally, but that was the vibe HN was giving.
xenophonf 11y ago
My grandfather used crossword puzzles to help himself learn English, so while I'm personally frustrated by the Trivial Pursuit-like nature of modern puzzles, I wouldn't regard them with the same disdain I give the average Zygna or EA title.