Gamification has taken a blur between life and games, relegating many concepts that pertain to life and well, having it in the format of a game. From educational games and others that teach social aspects and cultures, to simulators in which gamers do 'real-life' tasks in a game world, from farming to cleaning a house to making your own life a game, they teach many ideas that can easily be utilized in the real world. And they certainly can prove to be useful. But is gamification really the way to go? Does it on a whole actually cause significant change? While gamification is certainly a creative method, whether it is as effective as we hope is questionable.
There is first the issue of extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation. Doing an action because you know you will get something is extrinsic, while intrinsic motivation is simply because the person wants to do that action. Gamifying actions and/or concepts messes with that motivation on both sides. Educational games, for instance, attempt to intrinsically appeal to those who like games, but having overt educational themes has many people lose their intrinsic motivation to play these games. Associating the games with a concept they may like could merely conditions them to view both as bad, so that can they do not partake in either anymore, games or education. And even for those who do follow through, actions and concept that may have been intrinsically motivated (doing work, having manners) may become extrinsic since they are being rewarded for it, and now they do it for the reward, not because they want to.
Another issue is that games tend to be viewed, as discussed before, a "simulate space". And while some may bring their values into a game (and vice versa), that is not always the case. After all, just because a player may do the Genocide route in Undertale, for instance, does not suddenly mean a player is genocidal. Similarly, if playing a game where it teaches you not to discriminate, that does not necessarily the person may not remove their biases. So while gamification sounds nice in text, is it truly effective?
The effectiveness of gameification is certainly a worthwhile discussion to be having, and you raise really interesting questions in your post. I think the point about extrinsic vs. intrinsic motivation is valid, but I think a good counter example would be McGonigal’s discussion of Chore Wars, in which she admits that it is not a game that you would want to play forever, but that it, for at least a temporary period of time, creates a memorable, positive experience of doing chores together, and possibly changes the way they think about and approach chores for some time (123). That is, however, just one small example. and chores need to get done whether there is a reward or not, so mayb…
I think the question you pose -- is gamification truly effective? -- is particularly significant to this class. Gamification in general attempts to make games deep, meaningful, important, even a tool to better society. What a broad claim. In the context of a class that extrapolates meaning from games, I think the issue of gamification is sort of the ultimate question. I think extrinsic versus intrinsic motivation is a great way to think about this, and is something I never considered before. Do you think that educational games could be harmful to people who have intrinsic motivation to play them (i.e. could educational games condition people to expect superficial/arbitrary rewards for "good" actions?