Sign In
Replies
-
That is a fascinating article, and I agree with many of the points covered. I'm not competitive when it comes to video games, and I tend to stay away from those which require competitiveness or combativeness as a primary element to them. I play games to relax, unwind and de-stress, not to increase my agitation level. So, I don't really pay attention to the leaderboards on here. I think it's cool when I accomplish a new achievement, but I've never perused them to see which new achievement I can go after. Maybe when I run out of "fun" I'll do that, but so far, I'm just having fun playing with my friends.
-
I think part of the Glitch advantage is it's not being pitched to minors. Yes, I recognize minors are playing and will play in the future, but it's *not* the target audience. Adults tend to be aware of their compulsions, often making fun of themselves at their choice to indulge. Go check the Glitchadone Clinic if you want examples.
The article fails to mention the primary reason games have existed for centuries... to teach. What exactly is a game of chess? Under the premise of that article, each 'win' is a 'false achievement'... but is it? You've learned logic and tactics. A well-built MMO will stimulate creative pathways (which has been proven to stave off the effects of aging and certain aging diseases), bring new layers to logical and creative thinking, and be fun in the process. I think Glitch does that well.
-
I don't know about that because I'm generally utilitarian; I set my own standards for values based upon my perspective of the world around me. I don't see how the author could deem certain things meaningful and others not, especially when what impacts one person positively may impact others negatively. All I got was the writer saying that recreation and education are meaningless, and everything else was ambiguous. I have no idea what he considered to be an advancement. Curious.
-
For a counterpoint, I'd recommend the book The Grasshopper, by the late Canadian philosopher Bernard Suits. Suits argues that play — in the non-"productive"/not-important sense — is the highest form of human activity.
The book is not available online, afiak, but there are some pages around which give some details about it: link or link.
-
I do plenty of meaningful work at work. I do plenty of artistic work as a photographer. I have plenty of social interaction with my friends, both face to face and electronically. And I would like to think that the time I spend in Glitch is exactly what the author of the article posits it to be: extraneous bullsh*t. But as adults, aren't we allowed our bullsh*t and to be able to have our bullsh*t and own it to the best of our ability without being made to feel guilty about it? Who really cares if the achievements are empty of social or moral value? Glitch is a game and I will play it for all the bullsh*t I'm worth.
-
Nice stoot... read excerpts... it'll arrive in 3-5 business days. Glitch after I finish my homework? Best kind of test!
-
Or one could read the works of Nietzsche and his theory about the overman. I will see if any libraries near me have The Grasshopper because I'm looking for some interesting reads over the summer (I hope I haven't forgotten how to read for fun!).
-
stoot, i have ordered the book. thanks.
-
i don't really agree with the article itself, at least not completely, in the sense that its concept of "real" and "tangible" achievements are not articulated very well, if at all, and the whole argument hangs on the difference between those and "fake" or "bullshit" achievements.
but it does promote a good discussion, and i do think the following quote is an important one, even if to many it might seem very obvious...
"Is this activity making a positive, tangible difference in my life or anyone else’s life? Is it a real, true prerequisite for a tangibly effective activity? Alternatively, am I totally okay with doing this just because I like doing it, laboring under no illusion that it benefits me or anyone else?"
sc803 seems to fall into the second, "no illusion" camp, and Travinara challenges the idea of "real" versus "fake" achievements described in the first question.
what i take away from the article is that "achievement" for its own sake is not adequate. the suggestion is that in a game of chess you may learn something in the pursuit of victory, whereas in many modern games you do not. via education one learns, but it is the actual knowledge gained that matters more than the somewhat related ability to successfully navigate the educational system.
in the case of Glitch there are certainly challenging aspects of the game, not solely in terms of in-game difficultly, but also in challenging our understanding of our own world - re-evaluating its social dynamics, its religions, economics, environment - all from a different, participatory [though fictional] perspective.
on the other hand, Glitch offers you "badges" for mindlessly clicking on pigs for hours on end.
i'm not sure how these activities square with one another, but what i do know is that while play may the highest form of human activity, it may also have the potential to be the most pathetic.
-
I don't feel pathetic. I feel honestly thankful that I can still find amusement within a pixelated pig. Suspension of disbelief is the key to a creative adulthood (and a fulfilled life).
-
it isn't so much the "finding amusement within a pixelated pig" that could be considered pathetic.
i mean, i find just as much entertainment watching Kill Bill, which is just as virtual as a pixelated pig, if not moreso.
the issue is *mindlessly* clicking a pig for hours on end, in order to get a badge. that doesn't really describe amusement or suspension of disbelief in the way that you are in your comment.
-
I'm sure many of you have seen this, but if you want to be sobered up by your clicking:
www.cracked.com/article_184...
And for something much more academic, about the importance of play as a cultural element, the book "Homo Ludens", by Johan Huizinga... it looks like there are PDFs online, and maybe it's only Chapter 1 that's getting at what Stoot is talking about anyway.
-
I like the idea of achievements but feel that they should not be chores like "nibble 10 pigs". They should be challenges like "ride a pig off a cliff" (borrowed from minecraft).
-
Badges like those seem designed to reward those of us with uncontrollable compulsions to nibble every pig or water every tree we run past. Would I still nibble every pig even without a badge? Probably! But the badge helps acknowledge (in a humorous way) how truly compulsive I can sometimes be.
-
I'm sure many people play Glitch and appreciate the achievements but don't let them drive their gameplay (like me). I've done research on videogame players for over a decade, and have found that for many people, games are very meaningful activities. Multiplayer games in particular offer us real opportunities for social interaction and community building (an example outside of Glitch: for some western players of Final Fantasy XI Online, the game was a space to practice speaking Japanese with players from Japan, and learn from them about their culture). And sometimes games are simply fun games to play, where the main takeaway is enjoyment or escapism. Games can definitely be both, and so I think the question is what are *we* individually getting from such activities, and if we're happy with what we answer for ourselves, that's all we need to know.
-
Thanks for sharing @stri. To me this was more interesting outside of the game than as applies to the game ;P I appreciated his discussion of misaligned incentives--especially around school "achievement." I am super interested in incentives and their alignment--both at home and at work. Helpful thinking in the post. That said, I think that the idea that things are not "necessary" are therefore bullshit is goofy. I mean, of course, people had influence before Twitter but was it as wide? or as instantaneous? And why is a treadmill less than a walk. Sounds the same.
Regarding the game, for me as a novice gamer, exploring what motivates and entertains different people is interesting to me. But, ultimately, each of us decides what we want to get out of the game as well as defining the value of our achievements. If folks get bored, they move on. And if some of us are among the all above average in Lake Woebegon, who cares?