manueldcaruana-blog

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 10 – Mental Models in Relation to Frog Fractions

Figure 1: Frog Factions

(Twinbeard Studios, 2012)

This game was honestly on of the very first of its kind that I have ever played. I felt that my mind was continuously being trolled and faked into thinking the opposite to what I should have been thinking. In fact, I was taking the wrong decisions for most of the time. It felt as if the game designer was toying with me for most of the time.

Senge describes ‘mental models’ as “deeply ingrained assumptions, generalizations, or even pictures and images that influence how we understand the world and how we take action” (1990). He goes further than that when explaining that “we are often not that aware of the impact of such assumptions etc” (Senge, 2008)

These two statements explain perfectly what I experienced whilst playing this game. Prior to playing this game, I was informed that this game was used for educational purposes. When I started playing and saw what the game actually looked like, I immediately formed an idea of what the game should look like. For me it was somewhat similar to Bouble Trouble (Ambrosia Software, 1996). I started playing and noticed fractions; even the score was in fractions. This made sense since it was supposedly educational however, the score did not make any sense. It felt as if I was reading dates and supposedly studying history. As I continued playing I became more convinced that the Frog Factions resembled Bouble Trouble in playstyle and therefore never expected what came next. As I continued playing things started making no sense. From fractions, it changes to decimals then to equations or exponential numbers. One thing was consistent though; the feeling of not knowing what you are supposed to be learning. The only time that I felt that I would have learned something, if I had not been knowledgeable about it, was that if you rub a balloon against your body it would produce static electricity – “[s]ience!” (Twinbeard Studios, 2012). As the game progressed I found meaning in eating the insects because the action was reinforced. It became stranger when suddenly I had to type instead of clicking the mouse button. This took me a couple of seconds to figure out honestly. I was not expecting this shift; the designer clearly used my mental models against me, both the controls and the genre stopped making sense. The controls kept switching throughout the game. Things clearly turned for the worse when I bought a dragon and discovered that the insects where now shooting at me at a much higher rate. They were clearly hitting me, but nothing bad really happened. This made me feel unease throughout as well because this is not what we are accustomed to in games where you are supposed to kill your enemies whilst evading their attacks. On a different note, the movement of the dragon itself, happened naturally. I failed to notice the pop-up with the new controls due to the sudden shift to rapid-firing of the insects. However, I figured out the movement instinctively as I associated it made sense that a dragon would fly – minimal departure.

Figure 2: Bouble Trouble

(Ambrosia Software, 1996)

After a while of repeating the same things and trying to figure out to scope of the game, I realised that a certain item costed an outrageous amount of fruit. This did not make any sense and therefore I started investigating whether I missed something in the game. As I started exploring the environment, I discovered that the dragon could dive under-water. I interpreted the virtual world as I would interpret the real would – minimal departure – and therefore did not expect the dragon to go underwater. Moreover, I had never played any games that shared the same genre and was able to do anything similar. These actions contradicted my mental model of such genre games.

This discovery misled me into thinking that I should continue exploring underwater, and therefore wasted time exploring for naught; I had to go back, finish the level, buy more items and travel to space instead. The game does not stop there but I did not manage to finish the game myself. To be honest when I discovered that the game will shift to inserting text, I did not bother trying to continue. That was too much; the game had deviated too much from what I had been expecting in the first place.

References:

· Ambrosia Software (1996) Bouble Trouble [Video game]

· Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. 1 ed. London: DoubleDay.

· Senge, P. (2008). Peter Senge and the learning organization. Exploring infromal education, lifelong learning and social action, pp. 1-13.

· Twinbeard Studios (2012) Frog Factions [Indie game].

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 9 – Richard A. Bartle’s Player Type in Jostle Bastard

Figure 1: A snapshot from Jostle Bastard

(Barr, 2013)

Whilst playing displayed in figure 1, I experienced immense level of frustration. For this reason, I did not play the game for a long period of time and therefore there was the possibility of me missing out on the better parts of the game. Having said that, not every individual has the same taste and therefore what I might refer to as ‘fun’ might not be considered the same by someone else.

This is the whole concept behind ‘player types’. I usually play games that gives me greater sense of achievement than Jostle Bastard, games such as League of Legends by Riot Games (2009). League of Legends allow for a greater sense of achievement and display of skill; there are rewards, a leaderboard and also other players that can interact with you or else acknowledge your skill.

According to Bartle’s taxonomy of player types, I fall under the category of achievers. This is because I seek achievement rather than anything else and my “aim is to improve, advance, and ultimately win” (Bartle, 2004). Even though my play-style was aggressive whilst playing Jostle Bastard, this does not necessarily mean that I am the killer-type. The reason supporting this statement is that I was only hitting the police and try to beat them because it was challenging; it was impossible actually. Furthermore, Bartle states that “if … achievers regard killing as achievement, it’s bad” (2004). This continues to justify my earlier statement. Of course, the latter statement by Bartle does not apply to games whose goal is to kill your opponent.

Figure 2: Player Interest Graph

(Bartle, 2004)

 Reference List:

·  Bartle, R. A. (2004). Designnig Virtual Worlds. United States of America: New Riders Publishing.

·  Barr, P. (2013) Jostle Bastard [Computer game]. Available at https://unwinnable.com/2013/11/19/playable-jostle-bastard/

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 9 – Player type in Jostle Bastard

Figure 1: A snapshot from Jostle Bastard

(Barr, 2013)

Playing Jostle Bastard was one of worst and most dreadful experiences that me personally, have ever experienced. I must say that I did not stick to playing it for a long time and therefore this might hinder my opinion about this game, however the fact that I was not able to continue playing reflects how much I failed to enjoy it. It had no goal, and this frustrated me. The fact is that there exist other games that provide no goals to those playing them, however, at least such enables those players to create their own goal that they consider ‘fun’ and worth reaching. I did not feel that this game presented me with such an opportunity as the only fun or sense of achievement that I felt was whilst hitting people. To make things worse, I was sent to jail and after getting back out, since I decided to hit the policemen, I was sent back to jail; this time it was for a longer period. This felt as if I was being conditioned. As I repeated this behaviour, the punishment kept becoming harsher and harsher and turned from a positive-punishment into a negative-one. The game was no-longer teaching me not to repeat this behaviour, but it was refraining me from continuing to play. The fact is that I got stuck in a loop where I was getting out of jail, and back behind bars as displayed in figure 1, because the only challenge that I found was to beat the policeman; it appeared impossible.

VandenBerghe's five domains of play shows how he splits player into five distinct types. Figures 2-4 are all colour coded and they explain his theory or opinion quite well. VandenBerghe put together these diagrams to justify his statement that humans all have their own individual motivations, and that they all seek to satisfy those motivations in the virtual world. They strive to seek that motivation even more when they fail to or deem it impossible to satisfy that very motivation in the real world (VandenBerghe, 2013).

Figure 2: VandenBerghe's Big 5

(VandenBerghe, 2013)

Figure 3: VandenBerghe's 5 domains of play.

(VandenBerghe, 2013)

Figure 4: VandenBerghe's facets of motivation. 

(VandenBerghe, 2013)

I understand why VandenBerghe says that our motivations as humans would be reflected in our play-style in games, however I am not sure whether I completely agree with the manner in which placed the facets of motivation. To be honest I have not completely understood whether he intends that a player could only associate himself with one kind of domain or not. Personally, I feel that since these facets should reflect my real self, then I should be able to associate my self with different domains simultaneously as I seek different domains and various facets whilst playing games. In Jostle Bastard I felt limited to either explore or else seek conflict. In League of Legends I can seek sympathize with players, communicate and participate in team combat – seek harmony. I would be seeking harmony in my team; however, I would also seek excitement – stimulation seeker, and try and achieve – challenge seeker. My playstyle in Jostle Bastard was could be both hostile and achievement seeking and that means that I sought satisfaction through both challenge and threat-seeking.

Reference List:

·  Barr, P. (2013) Jostle Bastard [Computer game]. Available at https://unwinnable.com/2013/11/19/playable-jostle-bastard/

·  VandenBerghe, J. (2013). Engines of Play. [Online] Available at: https://chiplay.acm.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/CHI-PLAY-Keynote-2-VandenBerghe.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0S5Nm-8OJv1nAiJg7zzfr1WuX9ErGokXBy8KcU2mehDDf5Sg6ApPLifnk [Accessed 3 June 2019].

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 8 – Spacial and Self-presence in Inside

Figure 1: Inside

(Playdead, 2016)

Presence is a highly-regarded topic especially when it comes to videogames. The continuous advancements in technology such as the Virtual Reality consoles, allows for greater investigation of this topic. According to Lombard & Ditton, presence can be attained when the player stops noticing the medium – the game becomes unmediated – and it becomes somewhat difficult for him to distinguish between the real world and the virtual one (1997).

I personally did not have the opportunity to play Inside for a very long time, however I must say that there were numerous times when I experienced certain feelings such as unease or else even an adrenaline rush. High-quality and realistic audio and graphics assist greatly in achieving spatial-presence (Tamborini & Bowman, 2010). In fact, I believe that I managed to experience this feeling in this game, at least for brief moments. When playing Inside, one could hear several realistic sound-effects produced by the avatar’s movement, interaction with the environment – whilst exerting effort, walking in the lake or whilst sliding down a slope. Furthermore, although it is not a first-person shooter type of game, I believe that the perspective of the game played an important role. Since the environment was created in 3-D and used like it is done in a 2.5-D games, it created an illusion similar to one-point perspective. This means that everything was drawing focus towards the avatar as displayed in figure 2. Even the story itself, how it progresses – presenting one situation after another, has a large role at making you feel self-present. One could also notice the avatar breathing for example. I feel that this animation compliments the story well and enhances self-presence, especially in certain situations when the avatar starts breathing heavily, and the player finds himself doing the same thing. Apart from self-presence I also experienced spatial-presence. The crisp graphic and audio contributed to this feeling as well, however it is believed that the main contributor was the interaction with the environment. 

Figure 2: Snapshot from Inside

(Playdead, 2016)

The avatar’s movement was very smooth and realistic, and this was exhibited through well executed animations. Moreover, the avatar was not just allowed to displace objects; the story empowered the avatar to control other virtual beings as displayed in figure 3.

Figure 3: Snapshot from Inside

(Playdead, 2016)

I feel that at this instance, I felt present both spatially and in the self. The reasons are two. I was able to move other humanoids the same way that I was able to move the avatar himself. This means that during that brief moment I forgot about the avatar, and I felt that I was psychologically present instead of him, whilst controlling the other humanoids. It is almost like an inception of presence. The other reason would be the fact, that I was able to move the humanoids. This made me feel as if I was present spatially, especially when I moved the humanoids in the shade where I was not able to see clearly. In fact, I unconsciously started moving my head in the real world – a form of macro-kinaesthetic involvement as Calleja would recall (2009), to try and get a better angle on the humanoids, because I actually thought that I could see them.

 Reference List:

·  Calleja, G. (2007) Revising Immersion: A Conceptual Model for the Analysis of Digital Game, pp. 83-90.

·  Lombard, M. & DItton, T. (1997). At the Heart of It All: The Concept of Presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2).

·  Playdead (2016) Inside [video game].

· Tamborini, R. & Bowman (2010). Presence in Video Games. In: C. C. Bracken & P. D. Skalski, eds. Immersed in Media: Telepresence in Everyday Life. New York: Taylor and Francis, pp. 87-110.

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 7 – Player Involvement Experience

Figure 1: The Digital Game Experience Model

(Calleja, 2007)

Calleja speaks of a ‘player involvement’ and ‘player incorporation’. According to him, ‘player incorporation’ is a sub-topic of immersion because immersion is an extremely vast topic (2007). He presented his own model to express his idea better – that depicted in figure 1. He believes that his model applies for 3D games only however I do not share the same idea since I believe that I felt incorporated in various 2D games when I was still a youngster – even kinaesthetically. Therefore, perhaps the age and the imaginative mind of a youngster have significant influence over the level of incorporation.

In this blog I will discuss Calleja’s model with regards to my experience whilst playing League of Legends by Riot Games (2009). Calleja splits player involvement into six sections and each section is divided into two sections. He tackles what is happening inside the game and also outside the game.

League of Legends is a MOBA game and therefore it allows for significant amount of shared involvement, even outside the game – the League of Legends community. To play this game, each player must start by choosing his own character to play with and therefore he can use this same character to explore the virtual environment. The player can meet and slay neutral monsters to gain in-game currencies and experience points. He could also formulate a strategic attack by which he can take out his enemies or else to create a diversion whilst another player captures an enemy turret. The rules of the game allow for such communication, plotting and action being take on those tactics. Since the player will get to play different characters that have different abilities, he will need to learn how to tackle the same situation differently, given his limitations (Calleja, 2009). Sometimes, as a player I tend to create my own rules to create my own game-mode. Such an example would be to try and win the game without killing any enemy players.

Since League of Legends is a MOBA game with a relatively small map, there is not a lot of area to cover and it takes very short time to explore. Players can become spacially involved using their in-game character and they also have a mini-map to assist them. The overall aesthetics of this game are continuously meliorated whilst kept consistent. This helps the player feels as if he himself is present in the virtual environment. This aesthetics also help the player to get involved affectively. It is quite easy for a player to find himself getting attached to a certain character rather than other due to his very appearance. This could also be because he finds himself sympathizing with the very specific character and its unique characteristics.  

Riot Games provide backstories for each character and even tries to make sense of how certain rival or close characters interact with each other during gameplay, however, League of Legends lacks a narrative that drives the game. This means that the players are only involved narratively by creating their own story as they play the game.

When it comes to kinaesthetic involvement, one must keep in mind that this game is played on a pc console and therefore players use a mouse and a keyboard to manoeuvre (Calleja, 2009). This allows for various controls and therefore one would expect a learning curve. Once that the player gets used to these controls he can start making several actions simultaneously and therefore can feel more kinaesthetically involved than in other games that offer far less controls when exploring and interacting with an environment. As far as kinaesthetic involvement outside the game, I have never experienced anything close to when playing a VR game. The only kinaesthetic involvement outside that game that I have ever experienced when playing League of Legends was to either express happiness or else rage.

 Reference List:

Calleja, G. (2007) Revising Immersion: A Conceptual Model for the Analysis of Digital Game, pp. 8390.

Calleja, G. (2007) Digital Game Involvement A Conceptual Model. Games and Culture, pp. 1-30

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 6 – Applying various definitions of play to League of Legends

Figure 1: League of Legends

(Riot Games, 2009)

There are various definitions of play, some of which are more game-oriented rather than play-oriented. In this blog I shall make reference to some of these definitions whilst relating them to when playing League of Legends. This game is a MOBA game and it was released by Riot Games in 2009. Personally, I feel quite addicted to this game and I feel this way for various reasons. When I start playing a game I do not feel like stopping, especially since I would be penalised, and that is something which I want to avoid. Otherwise, it will reflect in both my ranking points and also in lengthy low-priority queue that will force me to wait even longer before start playing against other people. For me this game is a form of recreational activity like Kelley described (1988). Whenever I am playing a ranked game in League of Legends I feel the need to do my best and try to defeat my opponent. Its genre suggests that two opposing teams must meet and battle against each other to try and destroy the enemy’s base and become victorious. Suits & Hurka, Crawford, Avedon & Smith all have a similar definition of play as they mention interaction, conflicts and their outcome in their definitions (1978; 1982 & 1981).

The player is bound by numerous rules whilst playing this game, however I feel that it is because of these very rules that the player experience is to good. By acting within these rules, I am able to make ‘plays’ that other players consider very skillful and that gives me more satisfaction as a player – enhances player experience. As Suits & Hurka noted, rules are accepted because they are what make such plays possible (1978).

According to Crawford a game is a representation of reality (1982). This is true to some extent because there are characters that represent human individuals to some extent and also their will to survive or to achieve. This statement can apply to this specific game however, there are other games in which it is very difficult to consider as representation of the real world. Another thing that Crawford mentions is that the end result of a game is never as devastating as it is depicted in the virtual world. I find this statement increasingly hard to accept since losing important games such as tournament finals can result in devastating outcomes. One must keep in mind that every player is different and therefore not everyone might act the same way – he might get injured whilst raging or else even worse, try and commit suicide. These might be considered quite farfetched, but there are large sums involved as price money and you never know.

 Rerefence List:

·  Avedon, E. M. & Smith, B. S., 1981. The Study of Games. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

·  Crawford, C., 1982. The Art of Computer Game Design. s.l.:Washington State University.

·  Kelley, D., 1988. The Art of Reasoning: An Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking. Tch edition edition ed. New York: W W Norton & Co Inc.

·  Riot Games (2009) League of Legends [Computer game]. Available at https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/

·  Suits, B. & Hurka, T. (1978). The Grasshopper: Games, Life and Utopia. 1 ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 6 – Discussing The Magic Circle

The metaphor of The Magic Circle was first introduced by Johan Huizinga and it was derived from what he calls “Homo Ludens” (1955).

All play moves and has its being within a play-ground marked off beforehand either materially or ideally, deliberately or as a matter of course. Just as there is no formal difference between play and ritual, so the “consecrated spot” cannot be formally distinguished from the play-ground. The arena, the card-table, the magic circle, the temple, the stage, the screen, the tennis court, the court of justice, etc., are all in form and function play-grounds, i.e. forbidden spots, isolated, hedged round, hallowed, within which special rules obtain. All are temporary worlds within the ordinary world, dedicated to the performance of an act apart. (Huizinga,1955)

According to Huizinga, the act of play happens at a separate space and time – almost like a separate dimension. That space pre-determined and its special rules apply for everyone, like in a football pitch for example. Salen and Zimmerman defines The Magic Circle a bit different.

In a very basic sense, the magic circle of a game is where the game takes place. To play a game means entering into a magic circle, or perhaps creating one as a game begins. The magic circle of a game might have a physical component, like the board of a board game or the playing field of an athletic contest. But many games have no physical boundaries – arm wrestling, for example, does not require much in the way of special spaces or material. The game simply begins when one or more players decide to play. (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004)

Salen and Zimmerman portray a different picture. Even though they agree on the pre-determined rules of the game that sets the limitations of the players within that space, Salen and Zimmerman goes a bit further and mentions that the player can create this space themselves.

All the above-mentioned authors seem to take it for granted that a game is something that the player engages is willingly, even though one of their examples included that of being present in a court room. I would argue that the same way that not everyone would be willing to participate in a court case, not everyone would be willing to participate in a game. Personally, I agree with most of what they are trying to say, especially since while playing League of Legends I become immersed – I forget about my problems and anything else, and the special rules makes me feel empowered in the virtual world that appears to replace my real world for about 40 minutes (Riot Games, 2009). On the other hand, I find it difficult to consider this metaphor as my Bible, the reason being that it has various exceptions. I do not think that it applies for the future either. The technology is continuously developing, and it is therefore difficult to predict how things might turn out to be. Taking The Hunger Games for example, it is a movie based on possible future events where people are forced to participate in deadly game (2012). It is a game that happens in a confined space, and governed by special rules, but the participants are forced to participate. Furthermore, even though space can be considered separate to some extent, it is still part of the real world and any injuries which the player incurs, would continue existing after the game ends and ‘the magic circle’ seizes to exist. If this example might be considered to extravagant by some, then I would mention football or boxing instead. During both type of games could players get injured and their effects will be felt after the game ends.

Figure 1: League of Legends

(Riot Games, 2009)

Rerefence List:

· Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo ludens : A study of the play-element in culture. 5 ed. Boston: Beacon Press.

· Riot Games (2009) League of Legends [Computer game]. Available at https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/

· Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of Play: game design fundamentals. Visual Communication, 4(1), pp. 121-126.

·The Hunger Games (2012). [Film] Directed by G. Ross. United States: Color Force.

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 5 – Maslows’ Hierarchy of Needs in Games

Figure 1: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

(McLeod, 2007)

Maslow expressed how people feel the need to achieve certain things in life and when they do, then they set a new goal to achieve something else, one that in order to reach, first you must reach the preceding goal (1943). According to McLeod, he also “believed that individuals possess a set of motivation systems unrelated to rewards or unconscious desires”.

In games such as League of Legends, it might be more difficult to spot how the developers have accounted for such player needs (Riot Games, 2009). The game is basically a MOBA type and for most part of the game, the players must try and do their best to get rewards such as in game currencies – gold, to get an advantage over the opposing team and destroy their base. This might sound contradicting since the players are continuously trying to get rewards, however I feel that it depends on the situation or else, the player type. The situation that each player is faced with whilst playing this game is one where killing minion or enemy players to get gold or experience points is a necessity. It can almost be described as a basic need, one which you cannot do without, as otherwise you will almost certainly loose. It also makes the players feel safer since they would be at a safer position of not loosing the game, rather than they would be if they lack the resources. This can be associated to a game of boxing. If one of the boxers does not nutrition himself well – a basic need that is food, then he finds himself at a weaker position and is more likely to lose the fight. Safety is a fundamental need in League of Legends, and in fact players tend to stay closer to their allies or else to their ally turrets. Sometimes they invest a significant amount of gold for map vision. The more vision they have, the more information they collect about enemy players and their movement, meaning that they can manoeuvre with ease.

League of Legends allows for family members to play together and therefore the need to feel a certain sense of belonging can be addressed in such a way, however, there are others that might seek acceptance from others other that their own family members. In such cases they tend to showcase their skills to try and make online friends or to be praised by other players. Riot Games included various things such as mastery levels so that players can display their skill level easier. When a player starts to master this game, or else starts to understand how to play it better, he usually shifts his focus from that of surviving to that of achieving and displaying his skills to get praise. Doing so s/he will no longer be addressing his/her needs basic or safety needs, but instead s/he would start addressing his/her social and esteem needs. As players start becoming better and dominate enemy players – carrying his team to victory – s/he would receive more and more praise and eventually s/he will start experiencing and realising his/her self-actualization needs. Praise will help the players recognise their own personal potential and this will drive them towards seeking personal growth. One that the player becomes aware of his capabilities, he will set a new goal, that of achieving more and rank higher than ever to achieve self-fulfilment.

Reference List:

·  Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370- 96.

·  McLeod, S. (2007). CT2 Paper 1 – Maslow Hierarchy of Needs. HCC Certificate in Counselling Skills, pp. 1-8.

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 4 – The link between Neurotransmitters and Cookie Clicker

“Neurotransmitters are chemicals that transmit signals around the brain. They all have different functions and have different effects on us” (Marczewski,2015). Cookie Clicker is a rather simple game where the goal is to get as many cookies as you can (Orteil, 2013). To reach this goal the player must continue pressing the mouse button on the cookie displayed in figure 1.

Figure 1: A snapshot from Cookie Clicker, 2019

(Orteil, 2013)

Whilst playing this game myself, I have experienced several different feelings and levels of motivation to continue playing the game. The game starts quite slow at the beginning and you might start wondering why you are playing the game at a very early stage. It feels pointless and almost stupid. As you manage to withstand the first few agonising moments of the game, and manages to unlock certain items, you immediately start to feel something happening inside – becoming addicted. This phenomenon is easily explained through the effects of neurotransmitters. As soon as one realises that s/he can unlock an item, s/he experiences a sense of accomplishment. This feeling of accomplishment releases Serotonin in our mind. This mood-regulating neurotransmitter make us feel better when we get a sense of achievement (Marczewski,2015). Whilst playing this game one will get to experience it more often towards the start since it is almost easier to unlock items towards the start. Then it becomes less frequent since one would be unlocking items less frequent, but to some extent, one might argue that the Serotonin level is then higher because the level of achievement at that stage should also be higher.

Cookie Clicker is highly dependent on Dopamine. It is basically a game that runs in a loop; collecting cookies, unlocking items and investing cookies in those items to finally get more items. This goes on and on and on. For the player to stay motivated, Orteil used a system referred to as the Dopamine Loop. Dopamine is what drives the players to reach their goal – collect enough cookies to unlock or buy items (Przegalinska, 2015). The first time I experienced a rush of Dopamine was when I first discovered that I can unlock items using cookies. From there on I continued feeling motivated and wanted to continue pressing the cookie to reach my set goal. This Dopamine level was increasing and decreasing depending on how much longer I had to continue pressing the cookies so that I could unlock new items.  As I continued playing the game, I started experiencing the need ‘to give my all and make a last push’ more often. This was because the feeling of having to wait for the number of cookies to increase had become more tedious. The closer I was towards reaching that goal, I started feeling more motivated and I believe that this was because of a mixture of Dopamine and Endorphins. Endorphins are what helped me withstand that dreadful feeling of waiting before being able to reach my goal and unlock something new. Oxytocin is released when the player feels attached to a story or a character. In fact, it makes the player relate or bond with that character and feels a sort of attachment with that being. In Cookie Clicker there is no story and therefore it is difficult to say that I have experienced the effects of Oxytocin being released in my mind, however I can still argue that I might have felt something similar. Whilst playing next to my friends, it started becoming even more competitive and together with an enhanced level of Dopamine, I also experienced a connection to my cookies. It felt bad that I had to lose all my cookies after closing the game – I was not aware that I could save the game – and I also started to feel bad each time that I was going to invest all of my cookies and ‘loose’ all of them.

 Reference List:

· Marczewski, A. (2015). 4 essential Neurotransmitters in gamification. [Online] Available at: https://medium.com/gamifieduk/4-essential-neurotransmitters-in-gamification-67e3f7aafad3 [Accessed 1 June 2019].

· Przegalinska, A. (2015). Gamification - Critical Approaches. s.l.:Commission of Techno-Humanities.

· Thiennot, J. (2013). Cookie Clicker. Orteil. [Game]

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 3 – Applying the Stroop Effect

The Stroop Effect was first invented by John Riddley Stroop. This phenomenon or study

links to two ideas: [c]ertain processes are automatic and obligatory and (2) certain processes are carried out faster than others and have implications for slower processes (Macleod, 1991).

 The main reasons for these statements are the actual findings of this experiment, that proves that humans tend to read the words prior to identifying the colour of the text. This suggests that there is a delay in the time it takes the individuals to process the colour of the text since they waste time reading the text (Park, 2011).

I adopted the Stroop Effect myself and sketched a simple game that can be used to confirm this theory. This game is of course an experiment that involves time as a variable and therefore ideally time is not recorded manually using a stopwatch, but automatically. This means that it would a better idea to design this game as an app so that the time can be recorded automatically by the device.

Like it is done in the original Stroop Effect experiment, I intend to use words and colours but this time I would like to include a ranking system where players are asked to play the game and rank as high as they can because there will be a reward for that person who rank s highest on the leaderboard. This will serve both for motivational purposes and to force the players into thinking that it is a different kind of experiment, or else not even knowing that it is in fact an experiment. This methodology was also applied by Landers, et al. t whilst performing a goal setting experiment (2017) so that they could carefully monitor and study what they wished whilst decreasing some of the variables that could affect the outcomes of their experiment.

The experiment – game - displayed below, can be easily turned into an app. The goal will be to answer several questions correctly in the least possible time. The players will need to take note of the colour rather than that on the text itself and they must tick whether the first two colours do in fact produce the third colour when mixed together. In this case, examples one and three would be the only correct answers.

Ideally each player will have 3 to 5 chances so that by repeating the experiment, one would get better results. This experiment can prove the Stroop Effect theory and it can also enhance the players’ reflexes.  

Reference List:

·         Landers, R. N., Bauer, K. N. & Callan, R. C. (2017). Gamification of task performance with leaderboards: A goal setting experiment. Computers in Human Behavior, June, Volume 71, pp. 505-515.

·         MacLeod, C. M. (1991). John Ridley Stroop: Creator of a landmark cognitive task. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 32(3), 521-524. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0079012

·         Park, A. (2011). How Playing Violent Video Games May Change the Brain. [Online] Available at: http://healthland.time.com/2011/12/02/how-playing-violent-video-games-may-change-the-brain/?fbclid=IwAR0QXLvHScHTQV2LdypA4DGjsryMhxdvvdGSufwT2JtoZepGyd8BDEA7m1g [Accessed 1 June 2019].

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 3 – Applying the Octalysis Gamification Framework for MCAST

Figure 1: The Octalysis Gamification Framework

( Economou, D. et al., 2015, pp.392)        

In this blog I will be stating one possible way by which the experience at MCAST can be gamified for both the student and the teachers, using the Ocalysis Gamification Framework displayed above. I will be including as much sub topic as possible but sometimes this is quite difficult since one sub topic can influence the other negatively and therefore it might become useless in the sense that it will not be as motivating as one would like it to be.

When applying this framework, one must also keep in mind that the Right Brain core is related to the creation, self-expression and social aspects and it has to do with intrinsic motivation. This means that the players go not need a goal to reach because they are satisfied with the task itself – find it motivating. On the other hand, the Left Brain core is related to things such as logic, calculation and ownership. These factors allow for extrinsic motivation meaning that the task is not motivating enough for the individuals unless there is a goal to reach (Economou, D. et al., 2015, pp.391-392).

MCAST can invest in an app that can eventually motivate both its teachers and its students. Ideally it will be free to download and it should be downloaded willingly. Everyone could make their own account and monitor his performance – ranking. This means that both students and teachers can have a separate leaderboard and their performance can be reflected on it. Of course, since there is data protection involved, it is recommended that everyone will be asked whether they wish for their personal details and records to show on this ladder or not. They could also set this preference theirselves. The introduction of this personal account and the capability to be in control of such things will affect both ownership and the empowerment aspects of this framework whereas. The leaderboard is a gamifying-method in itself and it gives meaning and a sense of accomplishment to any task at hand.  

The ranking could be affected in various ways. For example, if the individual skips class or arrives late, this can hinder his performance, therefore affects his rank negatively. On the other hand, when s/he arrives on time, this will gain them points. There are a lot more things that can be used to monitor the individual’s performance such as behaviour, class participation, assignment marks and so on. In the case of teachers, students can use their accounts to insert a number from one to ten that justifies the teachers’ performance after every lesson. The average number will be considered for the leaderboard. The same methodology can be applied from the teachers’ side so that they can influence their student’s ranking. This system can enhance the sense of accomplishment and also that of empowerment to both sides.

At the end of each week there should be a winner or a number of winners – the reward should be scarce - that will shall gain something from ranking high on the weakly leaderboards. Such rewards could include discounts at the school’s cafeteria or free meals for example. It is important to have more than one reward so that every week it can be a different one and include the matter of unpredictability. This leaderboard and rewarding system can be even more effective if a monthly ranking or a yearly ranking can be introduced as well. This means that the individuals we be more likely to find themselves motivated to continue performing throughout the whole year, rather that for the early few weeks. In doing so, the rewards must be larger in value, such as winning mayor discounts from stores, winning a dinner for two, or else maybe even winning a vacation. This will make the reward even scarcer and one which is more worth reaching. It can provide more meaning to wanting to participate in this leaderboard and perform and also for the individual, it can make his work feel more meaningful as well, even though some might argue that it might not be the best way to motivate a teacher that should be willing to teach his or her students.

 Bibliography:

Calleja, G. (2007) Revising Immersion: A Conceptual Model for the Analysis of Digital Game, pp. 83-90.

Calleja, G. (2007) Digital Game Involvement A Conceptual Model. Games and Culture, pp. 1-30.

Economou, D. et al. (2015). Evaluation of a dynamic role-playing platform for simulations based on Octalysis gamification framework. In: D. Preuveneers, ed. Workshop Proceedings. The 11th International Conference on Intelligent Environments. UK: IOS Press, pp. 388- 394.

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 2: Classical / Operant conditioning in games

Ever since the nineteenth century, various individuals have contributed in the formulation and the development of what is referred to as Psychology. In the past several schools of thought emerged, each having their own distinct theories regarding this common subject of how humans behave. Nowadays psychologists are more open minded when it comes to such theories, in fact they borrow and share a vast number of ideas from around the world. The Behaviourists’ influence on the subject was substantial and some of their conclusions are still highly regarded in the present.

The discoveries that these men have made are being adopted and implemented, or sometimes even exploited, by different creators and designer nowadays. This phenomenon can be observed in applications such as Facebook and Tinder and in videogames such as League of Legends by Riot Games and King of Thieves by ZeptoLab.

In King of Thieves the designers try to condition the players from the start. As soon as the players start playing they are forced to first completing a tutorial before starting to play on their own. During this tutorial they are exposed to the concept of notifications as depicted in figure 1. Players would soon start to realise that as soon as they see an exclamation mark or a number inside a red circle, it signifies that following action is required or that something has happened. Operant conditioning is also exhibited in this tutorial as the players gets either rewarded or punished for certain behaviour. The tutorial was intended to motivate the players to play the game and get hooked to it very early and therefore during this tutorial one shall encounter frequent positive reinforcers such as bonus game currency, gems, ranking points and other resources, some of which are displayed in figure 2. There were minor instances when the players were punished for their behaviours. One instance was when they were introduced to the concept of other players or thieves trying to steal their gold or gems. As the players start playing the game on their own, they notice that this negative punisher can occur more frequent, depending on the number of times that their dungeon is successfully raided as displayed in figure 3. This type of punishment is neglecting the player from his own resources and from reaching higher ranking. This means that the player will need to take better defensive action to try and defend both his resources and title.

Figure 1

(ZeptoLab, 2019)

Figure 2

(ZeptoLab, 2019)

Figure 3

(ZeptoLab, 2019)

During the game, players will try and level up by stealing other players and increasing their own resources. As humans, the players might experience conflicting emotions about this goal especially since it is perceived as unethical behaviour in the real world. Using various operant conditioning techniques, the game designers are trying to re-condition and influence the player’s natural behaviour. When stealing from dungeons players can get hit by enemy traps. This is a form of positive punishment as the players will lose some of their health and chance of stealing gold and gems, whilst having to re-set their invasion. This way the player will try and take evasive action to reach to his goal. In case players find a specific dungeon too difficult to invade, that might be demotivating to them to continue playing and therefore to counter this scenario the designers introduced powerups to help the players complete their goal. Such negative reinforcer would allow the player to disable an enemy trap for example.

Amongst the immediate reinforcers there are gold and ranking points which can be rewarded after every successful invasion. There are also the keys that are resupplied to the player upon successfully raiding a dungeon on his first attempt. This can be extremely motivating to the players at it can also serve as a secondary goal that can be reached extremely fast and would also be rewarding.

Figure 4

(ZeptoLab, 2019)

Figure 5

(ZeptoLab, 2019)

The game has certain delayed reinforcers which impact the players motivation differently. Figure 5 portrays the action of gold mining which takes a fixed interval of time to complete. This is therefore considered fixed-interval reinforcer and it is more likely to increase the players’ motivation towards the end of its completion. The act of combining gems to form more valuable gems is also considered a fixed-interval reinforcer; it makes the action feels forever before one can get his reward. Like this is the way by which players level up. In this case players must collect a pre-determined number of experiences orbs as indicated by the experience bar. This is a form of fixed-ratio reinforcement and it is more motivating than the previous reinforcer.

To make sure that players do not become accustomed to the routine of receiving rewards and lose motivation to continue playing, designers introduced the element of randomisation. This appears to enhance players’ motivation. Variable-ratio reinforcers and variable-interval reinforcers allows the players to feel continuously motivated. Such examples would be when players steal gems or when the players receive gold for damaging other players when trying to raid their dungeon, respectively.

It is particularly interesting how such theory can be adopted to various use and still works; designers manage to influence or change another person’s behaviour.  

[manueldcaruana-blog]

Week 1: General player experience

It was my first time ever playing Molleindustria's Everyday The Same Dream. I am more familiar with competitive games rather than story-driven game and therefore this felt different when playing it. One might even argue that the game has no story, but it is rather a simulation. The name of the game itself is somehow agreeing to this statement.

Usually, I feel tenser and more cautious when playing League of Legends (Riot Games, 2009). When I lose a game there would be repercussions and therefore I take such game more serious. In fact, I would argue that the correct term in that case would be gaming rather than playing. On the contrary, whilst playing Everyday The Same Dream I felt more relaxed. I was not sure what the game was about, what I should do or if it was even possible to beat the game – maybe the name of the game was a bit misleading or maybe it was intended that way. As I started playing I thought that there was only one correct way of moving but as I continued playing the game I noticed that certain actions led to different outcomes. This changed my overall opinion of the game which until now was that of a very boring game with a dreadful routine. I believe that it was intended that way to mimic the boring life of someone who works at an office and is considered no more than just a number. I started exploring every possibility and the game suddenly felt more enjoyable to play. As Johan Huizinga stated, I felt that if I had entered a new space or dimension which had its own time (1949, p13). The game was rather easy to beat but as Jesper Juul correctly stated, it still required some effort from my end as a player, to try and figure out how to beat it (Juul, 2003).

The game offered a level of constrained freedom where it allowed me to move or act in certain ways which I preferred, however I constrained by the number of very little options. For this reason, if I had to place this game on the Paidia-Ludus scale I would say that it should fit somewhere between the middle and the Ludus side. As a game it is still highly reliant on its rules, however it offers more freedom than Monopoly (Parker Brothers, 1935) does when it comes to player movement.