Gamification from a Nerd

Introduction

Gamification has been a buzzword in our field for some time. Given my interest in games of all types, (board games, card games, video games etc.) I wanted to write something about the topic.

To keep things in scope, I’ll focus exclusively on video games. I’d consider them to be my… *ahem* realm of expertise. It’s also where training professionals seem to draw the most inspiration for their gamification initiatives.

What’s the Appeal of Gamification?

I think most people see gamification as a way to make learning fun. Training and learning can be tiresome work. Gamification can lighten the tedium that study and rigorous practice can entail. Points, competition and team-oriented play can also be used as an artificial motivational tool.

Games are also software. It’s critical that games can quickly teach players how to navigate their interfaces. If a video game fails to do these things, players can disengage and move on to something else. It’s easy to relate these challenges to what we encounter as IDs on a day-to-day basis.

What do People get Wrong about Gamification?

Gamification is often thought of as just points, badges and leaderboards. These mechanics can add fun and foster a sense of competition, but points, badges and rankings don’t have any inherent value on their own. If only one or two people want to play or even care, then what’s the point (no pun intended)?

Translating Game Structure into Performance Enhancement

Let’s look at things from a bigger picture and talk about the attributes of games.

Video games are innately required to quickly explain rules and teach skills to players. Players are asked to use those skills to solve challenges presented by the game. In order to fully experience a game, players have to steadily enhance their performance to keep up. See the connection here? Instructional Design is the business of enhancing performance!

Here’s the level progression structure for one of the most popular video games ever, The Legend of Zelda.

Straightforward, right? Get a sword, run around and take out all the pests and minions in the dungeon. Finally use the sword to beat the boss.

How about we reframe how we think about this structure?

This now looks like a traditional learning path. Introduce and properly explain a new skill. Practice to the point of mastery. Take a quiz to prove you’ve learned the skill after lots of practice.

Speaking of assessments, let’s look at how bosses are structured in this game.

Let’s put on our ID lens again.

As you can see, the overall game structure lends itself to a traditional learning path. The key? Lots and lots of practice and timely assessments. Who knew Zelda would have so much in common with Cathy Moore’s Action Mapping?

What Else can we Learn from Games?

Good Art and Sound Matters

Games use a ton of assets. The industry hires a ton of artists. Graphics matter to players. People want to be immersed in worlds that only games can deliver.

It almost goes without saying, if you’re serious about gamification, your UI should NOT look like a PowerPoint.

Obviously, music tastes are subjective, but if they can evoke a mood or immerse a user in a situation or an environment, bring it in.

Use Your Imagination

Why does eating a flower allow Mario to shoot fireballs from his hands? Why do blocks rain from the sky in Tetris? Why can Yoshi throw eggs? Why do you have to throw a ball at the Pokémon to capture them? The justifications for in-game mechanics often sound absolutely absurd on the surface. But many these abstractions are foundations for some of the most iconic games out there. Games have the ability to set the rules around mechanics and technical limitations and be accepted at face value.

Not only would extending this creativity to learning go a long way towards making learning experiences fun, but would also make them more memorable.

It’s Not Just About Points

There are no points in the Legend of Zelda. There are no points in lots of games. For a lot of games, their purpose is to present a fun and memorable experience. Keep that in mind when you’re developing scenarios and other writing-centric learning objects.

Keep them Coming Back for More

A more recent phenomenon is game design enticing people to come back to games they might otherwise leave behind. This can come in the form of rewards for returning or prizes for checking in. The ability to maintain engagement from users is something our field should continue to monitor.

It’s Okay to Fail…

What usually happens when a player hits the game over screen? They usually press start and try again! A lesson we can learn from games is that it’s okay to take off the kids gloves and let learners fail. A well-crafted learning experience will allow the learner to understand why they failed so they can succeed next time.

And They Don’t Need a Pat on the Back When They Succeed

Players don’t play games to receive praise from them. Success is inherently rewarding (Youtubers aside) for a lot of them. Don’t underestimate a learner’s intrinsic motivation to do well. This ties into the C(onfidence) and the S(atisfaction) of Kellar’s ARCS model.

It’s not for Everyone

Some people like strategy games. Some may think that is too boring and need action. Others may prefer puzzle games. Sadly, there may be some who view games as a children’s activity, not worth their time. Tastes vary and that’s okay. Still, it’s important to be upfront with stakeholders that they may receive pushback for introducing games into performance based learning.