Gamification Coffee

  The need for backward engineering . I think I am accurate in saying that very few people, myself included, who are trying to create serious games for wellness think like this – i.e., like a game designer – about the process of gamification. From what I can tell, game designers think very deeply about the experience they want the game to promote, and then they work through the pragmatics of the game play that will facilitate this experience. This backward engineering from the point of view of the aesthetic/experiential goal to the pragmatics of the game is the opposite of what psychologists do when they think about gamification. Instead, we have parallel streams of development in which (a) we know that our “game” (read scientific protocol) is truly boring, and (b) we have to somehow decrease the snore factor. We think: “Hm, here is my very rigid experimental protocol/computerized intervention. I must overlay this protocol with some cute little animated guys, perhaps with a fun back-st

  When it comes to educating people about COVID-19, says Rick Thomas of LabX, a big challenge is the invisibility of the virus and the struggle to recognize when we’re making a difference, when we’re being overly panicked and when we’re simply being selfish.   Games, specifically their ability to visualize abstract subjects as well as their need to ask players to lean in and take an active role, can close that gap, says Thomas.  “Games are good to help combat COVID because games do a good job of translating data into stories and helping show people how individual decisions can impact larger issues,” says Thomas.  “That feedback is missing in normal day-to-day interactions with COVID. You don’t actually know if you got someone sick by not wearing your mask because there’s a several-day disconnect. You’re not being told whether what you’re doing is harmful, but in a game you can make the connection clearly. That’s why we got involved.”