In the very least I'd like to offer an opposing view of gamification. Be warned, the author is a bit...aggressive.
http://tinyurl.com/3cp9xoc
In my opinion, this is someone who does not understand the ACTUAL concept of gamification, that is to say, encouraging us to be productive through fun. But then, games aren't innocent either. If you look back at my first post, I referred to a particular webcast. This week they did a piece on propaganda games. Check it.
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/propaganda-games
I think that Bogost has been a long-time proponent of alternative uses and methods of games (see: His work- Newsgames, persuasive games, etc.). He's against a particular marketing ploy. I think he understands "Gamification" as well as anyone else. If you want a less bombastic approach to where the "bullshit" is, I'd recommend looking at the exchanges between Gabe Zicherman and Sebastian Deterding. Zicherman is the "Gamification" proponent in question, whereas Deterding's approach is far less marketing and more rigorous and deep.
ReplyDeleteBogost's concerns are largely rhetorical (see his earlier article, "Exploitationware: On the rhetoric of gamificaiton").
So now, I vehemently disagrees that he doesn't understand Gamification.
In reviewing his work, I'd agree with you. I don't disagree with his concern about the misuse of gamification, but based on a brief twitter-exchange between him and I, he seems to have no hope for the concept anymore.
ReplyDelete