Starker on 1/4/2013 at 21:38
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
I understand why you've gone down this route Starker, you read that article/saw that talk and bought into it.
I've read it too, and whilst I perfectly understand where it's coming from I disagree. It assumes at least one step too far.
Which step?
1. Extrinsic motivators lessen intrinsic motivation for inherently interesting tasks. (pretty much all psychologists agree)
2. The tasks that have been researched so far cover a very wide range, from reading to solving puzzles. The rewards vary as well, from physical to verbal to symbolic.
3. While there has not been long term research done on video game achievements specifically, they are quite similar to the tasks performed in the studies, and a lot of the current achievements can be categorized as symbolic rewards.
I'm not saying it has been proven beyond any doubt, but does that not call for further research and at least a bit caution? Shouldn't developers be aware of this research and try to minimize the effects? Is that really so unreasonable?
I'm not calling for a total removal of achievements, I'm warning against embracing external motivators without thinking about what effect they could have on games as an artform and on gaming as a culture.
Just one anecdote from the lecture:
Quote:
I used to play Gears of War on-line. That game had a restriction where you couldn't get achievement points for on-line play unless you played ranked matches. I don't give a f*ck about achievements, but I had to play ranked matches all the time anyways, because no good players would ever play unranked. But of course, ranked matches don't allow you to play with your friends, because that might aid you in cheating, so, you'd have to do ridiculous machinations to actually play a decent game with your friends (like trying to narrow the possible servers, then joining and unjoining games before they started until you saw your friend pop up on the board).
-- Casey Muratori
Notice that this is warping the game experience based only on the external extrinsic motivators.
Judith on 1/4/2013 at 22:01
The first point is a false dichotomy — it ignores all the spectrum and complexity of situations, taking into account only one correlation: a game is more engaging if it is more intrinsically rewarding. And that's bullshit. It's just one of the factors, and it does not take into account anything that is changing in the player's situation or context.
This article is narrowing your perspective. As SE said, it goes a bit too far than necessary.
Starker on 1/4/2013 at 22:06
Quote Posted by Judith
The first point is a false dichotomy — it ignores all the spectrum and complexity of situations, taking into account only one correlation: a game is more engaging if it is more intrinsically rewarding.
No. It says that a game is more engaging if you are intrinsically motivated to play it. That's also something that psychologists agree on.
heywood on 1/4/2013 at 22:06
Quote Posted by jtr7
I find that reading the manual, checking the Hints/Tips, experimenting, exploring, taking advantage of safe areas in the maps to try things, and reading the forums gives me more information about what I can do in the game without ever needing to check an achievements list. Redundant!
Quote Posted by jtr7
Yeah, discussing things like personal--not officially sanctioned--achievements on the forums is much more meaningful and connecting.
Yes, I agree completely. That's why I've always ignored the achievements, and why TTLG is the only gaming forum I bother with. People here talk about their experiences playing the game, and rarely post the "How do I get achievement XXX?" questions common on other forums. However, I think their inclusion is harmless and they encourage many players to explore the game much more thoroughly than they otherwise would.
SubJeff on 1/4/2013 at 22:11
That anecdote is exactly what I'm seeing is the problem; people having unrelated issues and somehow finding achievements to be an issue.
That guy is complaining about not being able to play with friends, but what has that rule got to do with achievements?
Starker on 1/4/2013 at 22:17
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
That anecdote is exactly what I'm seeing is the problem; people having unrelated issues and somehow finding achievements to be an issue.
That guy is complaining about not being able to play with friends, but what has that rule got to do with achievements?
It was an example how extrinsic motivators change game experience.
He had to play ranked matches, because other people (that were any good) played ranked to get achievements.
Judith on 1/4/2013 at 22:23
This example is totally wrong and has nothing to do with achievements. The guy just doesn't know how to invite his friends to a multiplayer via GFLW or XBL (not in the game itself). The achievements here are a secondary thing. Great way to make up a story to support his theory though :cheeky:
Starker on 1/4/2013 at 22:26
I never said it was a black and white issue. The lecture also talks about endogenous rewards in more detail and there are a lot more categories by which the rewards split, some of them having more of an effect than others.
Judith on 1/4/2013 at 22:34
Still, you rely on this as if it was a Theory of Everything, and you are making mountains out of molehills. You like it, we get it already. Still, the new Thief will get achievements and they will be normal, as with hundreds of other AAA games.
