How video games are trying to get you addicted

[Ruldra]

This mostly applies to MMOs, but still a good read.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5- ... icted.html

[Drum]

Awesome article, thanks.

[Damocles]

Well...at least they're putting Skinner's work to good use.

[Ruldra]

Brainwashing players is a good use?

[Daigohji]

Yeah, that's pretty much why I don't play MMOs. A few years ago I'd logged 40 or 50 hours into Final Fantasy XI (30 of those spent killing bunnies in the starting area) when I realised I was subscribing to a marketing model, not playing a game. I haven't touched an MMO since.

Unfortunately, I often fall victim to the other expensive game addiction: the hype cycle. I get excited for upcoming games regardless of what's currently available or sitting on my shelf. It doesn't help that I'm often so miserable in most other aspects of my life that upcoming games are the only thing I have to look forward to. [/waah waah waah, woe is me]

[Ex-Cyber]

I think we can all agree that too much of this is bad. Getting rid of it entirely would probably result in a pretty boring game, though. So how much is too much? How should developers go about striking the right balance?

[EPS21]

I always felt that shmups could be addictive in the sense how casino's and slot machines are. Shiny things, sound effects that are satisfying (1-up extends anyone?), and even more analogous when a shmup has some implicit "cashing in" system with lots of gold involved (mushi futari I'm looking at you).

I think shmups don't really have the variable ratio rewards, where at unfixed intervals you get rewarded (unless you play way better on some days than others, like I tend to, then it could).

Very informative and entertaining article though. Do you guys think the skinner box/lever concept applies to shmups as well, or just to MMOs/rpgs/etc?

[Acid King]

The article is basically a collection of all the stuff people on this forum complain about modern mainstream video games.

Do you guys think the skinner box/lever concept applies to shmups as well, or just to MMOs/rpgs/etc?

I think the key difference is that one requires a modicum of skill. Walking around killing the same enemy over and over again to level up or in the hopes that they'll drop some rare item doesn't require anything from the player other than the patience to perform the same action over and over again. With shooting games, the sense of accomplishment that's addicitve is based on developing a skill, not just racking up play time. He even specifies that that's why he doesn't include Guitar Hero or Call of Duty because the Skinnerian tricks employed don't develop a skill, rather they're employed after you have the skills needed to play the game to keep you playing.

[oli_lar]

The article is basically a collection of all the stuff people on this forum complain about modern mainstream video games.

Do you guys think the skinner box/lever concept applies to shmups as well, or just to MMOs/rpgs/etc?

I think the key difference is that one requires a modicum of skill. Walking around killing the same enemy over and over again to level up or in the hopes that they'll drop some rare item doesn't require anything from the player other than the patience to perform the same action over and over again. With shooting games, the sense of accomplishment that's addicitve is based on developing a skill, not just racking up play time. He even specifies that that's why he doesn't include Guitar Hero or Call of Duty because the Skinnerian tricks employed don't develop a skill, rather they're employed after you have the skills needed to play the game to keep you playing.

Yes, I think that the lack of skill aspect means the brain switches off, hence it is easy to get caught in these cycles. With shooters your brain is switched on all the time meaning you are more aware. Extended periods of your brain being so active means that you take a break or your performance goes down. It does for me anyway.

[DEL]

Thanks for that article Ruldra, its very good.

Its also funny how I came up with the phrase: "Hamsters on a Treadmill" independently from this arcticle last year when I was posting on a WoW winge thread on NeoEmpire .
This article says the exact same thing

But the industry is moving toward subscription-based games like MMO's that need the subject to keep playing--and paying--until the sun goes supernova.

Sad but true.

[ROBOTRON]

I think Mag has set a precedent thats going to determine gameplaying for the next 3 to 5 years. MMO's are whats hot.

[Drum]

I think Mag has set a precedent thats going to determine gameplaying for the next 3 to 5 years. MMO's are whats hot.

Man, I hope you're wrong about that - but I don't think you are. XBL and achievements have even started turning your game collection into one big MMO (online leaderboards are great though).
This wouldn't bother me if people were making interesting MMOs - but so many of them are shitty, unimaginative grinds.

[TodayIsForgotten]

I think this really tends to lean towards those who have some sort of depression, illness or loneliness in most cases. I got hooked on Everquest about 9 years ago. There were two reasons: A) My brother's friend's wife was making 800 bucks a week as an enchanter and B) I was failing a class in college and was miserable.

I thought it would be real easy to make money. I picked a horrible class (wizard) and wound up spending 15 hours a day trying to level my wizard up to make money and after 2 months I realized what i just typed and got rid of the game. Never made a dime. Everyone else was though...

I don't see the point in leveling up a character to the level cap and then repeating quests over and over again. In my opinion there is no reward. If i need to be engulfed in a fantasy world then i really would need to re-evaluate my life.

I think the real nail in the coffin is achievements/trophies. I really become upset when i see on forums people refusing to buy a game due to its' achievements. I recall only 2 methods of thought as a kid when buying a game. Does the back cover look good and do the pictures and write-up of the game appeal to me? It was either yes or no. Not this trite bullshit of how hard are the achievements?

More and more "gamers" only game about the virtual number and everything in that article is referencing the latest addiction, achievements. Have i gotten some achievements that i didn't enjoy? Yes, why? I have no idea. Maybe to show off in a fixed medium? I was playing a lot of XBLA games strictly for achievements but i was getting paid by others asking me to 200 their games. Ridiculous, I know but once again people selling virtual items and people buying virtual score. I got caught up in the whole craze but i hated every minute of it other than to move up on a leaderboard - which was fun, sometimes.

I just hope that enough of the normal game players keep achievements in-check, because it has gotten to the point where people are calling games broken due to their achievements. They only seem to think a game is about achievements. Achievements and games are Oil and Water. They are two completely different things and have nothing to do with one another. It seems like people are losing focus of that and are no longer playing games, instead they are playing achievements.

[cools]

I quite like achievements as specific tasks to accomplish that you'd not normally make any attempt at during play (see Trials HD "Unyielding" for a good example).

Anything related to unskilled grinding can just sod off and die though. No interest at all.