How Game Mechanics Influence Human Behavior

Most folks intuit that games and applications are designed to complement existing interests, needs, and work patterns. What is less commonly understood is how the converse occurs - how do games and the like shape human behavior?

Amy Jo Kim of Shufflebrain believes we are influenced by games because they engage us in flow. Specifically, games direct us by presenting new challenges as our skills increase; in a good game, the player is constantly challenged and engaged, but not overwhelmed.

Here are five important game mechanics that Kim shared at Supernova 2006:

• Collecting items - accumulates items for bragging rights, completing sets, etc.
• Earning points - can be earned via achievement, or socially earned a la eBay; often redeemable for value
• Receiving feedback - not only to learn and accelerate mastery, but also to stimulate engagement and interest
• Making exchanges - becoming part of the social and economic network
• Personal customization - investing yourself into creating a persona a la MySpace, or even choosing interface customizations that feel tailored to you

Kim called out that eBay is also a very game-like experience. Users have the action of creating an auction, the anticipation and building up of excitement over time, the reputation system of points, etc. - it's all a game. Emergent exchanges such as MySpace are also very gamelike, since one of the most fundamental ways that human beings trade feedback is in a conversation. (Note: You can dig deeper into Shufflebrain's approach by downloading their fat slide deck on "Putting the Fun in Functional.")

Feedback trading is not something that eBay or MySpace have dialed in; rather, tit-for-tat feedback is a social phenomenon in which people trade good feedback for good feedback. In MySpace, users' guestbooks often show "thanks for the comment, I'm leaving you one!" or "thanks for the add, I'm adding you on!" etc. - more and more tit for tat. Environments with this foundation foster a more gamelike atmosphere around participation, strengthening the system.

Philip Rosedale of Linden Lab speaks of Second Life as a hyperaccelerated demonstration of what the Internet broadly enables with Web 2.0 applications. (Disclosure note: Omidyar Network is a funder of Linden Lab.) People collaborate and build rapidly, forming fast relationships using the structured context that has been developed by the Second Life community. Rosedale likens this to eBay, which started with two core elements: the auction/payment mechanism, and the forum. The forum was key to amplifying the community, and driving excitement about the new trend.

Doug Failor, Chief Gamer of the US Joint Forces Command's Joint Futures Lab, made the interesting comment that it's hard to make a distinction between those that do and those that don't play games. Their research does show, however, that kids respond to games differently from mature adults. If you're of the game-playing generation, you can pick up Quake or World of Warcraft and just start playing comfortably. Kim thinks that because of this phenomenon, parental involvement will become more important to kids' online activity and gaming. (PLUG: Common Sense Media, a nonprofit I've been talking to recently, is a great venue for parent and kids to create and share clear reviews and ratings on media, including games.)

For those of us who are -uh- older, this pattern-matching is analogous to how we can hop into any car and just start driving. In both cases, the user's general competence means that new instruction is not required to get started. What was left unsaid was whether or not someone can still learn to drive naturally in their 50's, 60's, and so forth. Given the rapid evolution of online interactions and their associated human behaviors, let's hope that will be the case.

Tags: christine herron christine.net space jockeys supernova supernova2006 second life linden lab gamepipe shufflebrain joint futures lab gaming best practices technology

Comments

[Casey]

You got a good point there however I think that individuals choose to play a certain game depending on their preference whether they like grinding wow gold or shooting rivals. Whichever game they choose, gamers customize the character to represent themselves or their complete opposite. I agree that games and applications are designed to complement an individual's interest, etc.
For the WoW gamers out there, I think you should read how safe it is in World of Warcraft.
-- http://www.2articles.com/story/safety-world-warcraft

[Christine]

You're welcome! Thanks for commenting. :)

[Pat Coyle]

I too am a bit, uh, older, but even though I don't have first hand experiences with many of the gaming environments they describe, their theories make sense nonetheless. We're about to launch a social net for Colts fans and I'm glad to have my eyes opened to the importance of basic, human aspects of the online community.