> Games such as World of Warcraft, which are considered very addictive, use several of these techniques.
I agree that games like WoW resemble skinner boxes, feature random rewards/simulated gambling, etc., but they don't seem deceptive or fraudulent in the same way that the dark patterns describe. It's more like addiction patterns designed to keep you subscribed? The social aspect also makes it stickier (and more fun) but doesn't seem sinister.
(But I think I would actually enjoy playing WoW, and it seems like it has a largely fixed monthly cost with fewer pay to win elements than gacha games. I do wonder about the time investment that is required to play an MMO though, and whether that is good for players, even if the game is fun to play.)
> Gamers' behavior can be “shaped” by making cycles (progress from one level to the next) slower and slower, designing complex tasks that are difficult to get out of (e.g. World of Warcraft), or conversely dividing them up in small chunks to avoid frustration (e.g., New Super Mario Bros.Wii).
Leveling slowdown is definitely a thing. But games including difficult tasks and breaking up challenges into chapters or chunks doesn't seem malicious. Games that challenge your brain, hand-eye coordination, etc. are often more fun because of that challenge. Fun seems more likely to happen when the difficulty curve is neither too hard nor too easy. Moreover, complex and difficult games are enjoyable to master, but can be overwhelming for the novice, so it makes sense to smooth the learning curve. Mario games (at least their console versions) seem pretty non-malicious to me.
> The terrible truth is that a whole lot of us begged for a Skinner Box we could crawl into, because the real world's system of rewards is so much more slow and cruel than we expected it to be. In that, gaming is no different from other forms of mental escape, from sports fandom to moonshine.
This is my favorite bit from the linked Cracked article. As they point out, addictions (and distractions) serve a rational purpose: they fill a void when you feel disconnected, and help you escape from the cruelty of the real world. Unfortunately they can also harm your physical, mental, and financial health, damage relationships, and consume all of your time and attention.
But, you can actually afford a house in World of Warcraft or Animal Crossing (though I haven't paid off my loan yet.)
I agree that games like WoW resemble skinner boxes, feature random rewards/simulated gambling, etc., but they don't seem deceptive or fraudulent in the same way that the dark patterns describe. It's more like addiction patterns designed to keep you subscribed? The social aspect also makes it stickier (and more fun) but doesn't seem sinister.
(But I think I would actually enjoy playing WoW, and it seems like it has a largely fixed monthly cost with fewer pay to win elements than gacha games. I do wonder about the time investment that is required to play an MMO though, and whether that is good for players, even if the game is fun to play.)
> Gamers' behavior can be “shaped” by making cycles (progress from one level to the next) slower and slower, designing complex tasks that are difficult to get out of (e.g. World of Warcraft), or conversely dividing them up in small chunks to avoid frustration (e.g., New Super Mario Bros.Wii).
Leveling slowdown is definitely a thing. But games including difficult tasks and breaking up challenges into chapters or chunks doesn't seem malicious. Games that challenge your brain, hand-eye coordination, etc. are often more fun because of that challenge. Fun seems more likely to happen when the difficulty curve is neither too hard nor too easy. Moreover, complex and difficult games are enjoyable to master, but can be overwhelming for the novice, so it makes sense to smooth the learning curve. Mario games (at least their console versions) seem pretty non-malicious to me.