top of page
Search
nmclean

Gamification: a Tool Becoming Weaponized or a Weapon Already?

Ian Bogost’s article about gamification being bullshit led me to think about some of the implications of gamification. Although he described it in a very unforgiving light, gamification is simply a tool. As shown by Chore Wars, this tool can be used to greatly improve people’s lives, relationships, and view of the world. However, Bogost is not wrong that gamification has also become a tool used by corporations and businesses to forcibly capture our attention, devotion, and addiction, in a certain sense a weapon.

To me, an important point in this discussion is that tools and weapons are extremely similar. A tool is designed specifically for a purpose, and helps a person (or people) to achieve that. A weapon is similar, but to the detriment of others’ wellbeing. Although no one can determine the mindset of the person who invented the spear, I can imagine it was first a tool for fishing, hunting, or something similar. Over time, it has become known almost solely as a weapon, rebranded from it’s original purpose. Some tools are designed to be weapons (like missiles), but others (like fireworks) serve another purpose until they are weaponized. So who is responsible for this phenomenon, and what can be done? Are we cursed to continue hurting other people with tools we design, like the way we see gamification used to squeeze money from “whales” or drive people to fund corporate greed?

This all comes down to a simple question: should designers always be afraid of the consequences of their designs? If I design an amazing new tool with the full intention of helping as many people as possible, but it becomes weaponized, how responsible am I and should I have taken steps to prevent that? A great current example, although unrelated to gaming, is a new Stanford-developed AI that tries to identify your sexuality based on facial features. It has a surprisingly high success rate (around 15-20% higher on average than a human being). The minute I read about this algorithm I was shocked, wondering how on Earth the developers could not at least wonder if this could be used for discrimination. But do they have a responsibility to wonder that? Where do we draw this line of responsibility?

22 views3 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Competitive Failing

Blizzard's Hearthstone is a virtual cardgame developed by Blizzard interactive. In the game, each player plays as a class of hero from...

3 Comments


tjuan9513
Nov 19, 2018

I guess the whole rebranding from its original purpose depends on cultural context behind games, as we've read that some societies don't discriminate between productive/unproductive actions. But I would say that this certain re-purposing has become somewhat evident to the public with the whole EA/Star Wars Battlefront 2 and consequent loot box controversy of the last year. Here's a link to an article about Activision patenting a matchmaking system meant to increase microtransaction purchases: https://www.polygon.com/2017/10/18/16498610/activision-dlc-microtransactions-patent

Like

guarinoj
Nov 18, 2018

I'm curious to hear more of your thoughts about what this process of "rebranding from its original purpose" in the specific context of games. Things like the spear have lost their association with one of their original intended purposes over time - do you think this will happen to games?

I agree with your points about games being weaponized, but do you think this will ever get extreme enough for games to lose their original association of being fun/a way to pass free time? I think games can be both fun and weaponized at the same time, but I wonder at what point games could actually lose their function as entertainment and become defined as brainwashing weapons.

Like

Jersey Fonseca
Jersey Fonseca
Nov 14, 2018

I think you and Bogost bring up very good points. I think the predicament of responsibility has risen because for a long time, everyday technology was used just to produce more. There was less of a need to talk about ethics when you created a machine that allowed farmers to plant more crops.


But we aren't at that time anymore. The technology being made isn't just making annoying tasks faster and more plentiful. We are creating algorithms to manipulate human beings through marketing, and surveilling every aspect of their lives. For example, marketing research now focuses on neuropsychology to ensure that advertisements circumvent your rational decision making skills to ensure that you are more likely to buy their product. This…


Like
bottom of page