Gamification is an innovative methodology to get people to participate and be motivated and help them achieve goals by applying game design elements and methods into a non-game environment. The library can provide an interesting experience to users by utilizing gamification, and gamification can make the library more fun and engaging.

Utilizing gamification in the library

• Educating library users: Gamification makes users feel entertained and engaged, and they learn about utilizing library resources. The library at North Carolina State University provided a gamified Scavenger Hunt, so students could learn how to use the library by interacting with librarians. Users can understand and utilize the library better through fun games.
• Participating in library resource management: To allow better access to large-scale library resources, users can actively participate in the work through gamification. In the National Library of Finland, the Digitalkoot service provided an interesting game to users. It asked players to edit the text errors input by OCR (Optical Character Recognition) software. Digitalization work that was previously done manually, by crowdsourced volunteers, could be done by more general users. This could contribute to helping more people access the library resources.
• Experiencing personalized information service: Gamification can be utilized to effectively support solutions to individual information problems. For reading activities, especially, gamification elements such as challenges, rewards, and competition, can lead to consistent reading habits and make accessing necessary information more effective. Through gamified reading support service, users can personalize their reading history and interests. They will get information about future reading opportunities. In addition, they can the right level of challenges to enhance the power and motivation to continue to read. For example, Lemontree is a social game-based learning system at the University of Huddersfield, U.K., is a gamification case to effectively increase the learning performance of students by using library data. (Walsh 2014).
• Services to enhance social relationships: Interesting gamified library programs can attract more people to the library. Also, it can effectively provide the experience of making social relationships based on library resources. New York Public Library developed the augmented reality game ‘Find the Future at NYPL’ as part of the celebration of its Centenary. It’s about solving quests related to one hundred historical artifacts hidden in a library building. In the process of solving quests, 500 participants could write down personal stories based on their inspiration from the library collections. Through that process, a co-created book which included future stories was made.

Gamification to increase the public interest in library

Gamification enhances the role of the library as a social place in which everybody can participate and meet. Through gamified programs, users can access library resources more effectively. Gamification can stimulate lively interactions between librarians and users, leading to strengthened social relationships. According to Koivisto & Malik(2021) whose article includes a meta-study of gamified research papers for the aged population, gamification was proven to effectively utilize in-person communication and increase relationship numbers in elderly people. According to this research (Koivisto & Hamari 2019), recognizing the self-efficacy of old people and positively increasing social emotions such as motivation and loneliness are possible through the program of enhancing social relationships by gamification.

How to apply the gamification to the library

The most important thing that gamification must focus on, is effectively increasing access to library resources. Rather than providing unconditional fun and flow, the library should emphasize the original vision and the purpose of the program. The library can be an amazing information environment for users by coordinating its resources and services with adequate gamification. To effectively apply gamification to the library, the following should be considered.

1. Clearly defining the objective and results of the gamified program in accordance with the mission and vision of the library
2. Applying the interesting gamified elements and forms by recognizing the participants’ demands, interests, and preferences
3. Increasing the participants’ motivation by providing feedback, recognition, and rewards in program operation.
4. Ensuring the system evaluates and measures the effects of gamification for library employees and participants
5. Periodically monitoring and improving the operation of gamified programs based on evaluation

The world is changing, and the demand of users is changing along with it. In this changing landscape, gamification can play an important role in revolutionizing and reinventing the library for a new sustainable way of working. I expect that innovation in gamification methods will continue to bring new power to efforts to attract library users, into the future.

The post Libraries and Gamification first appeared on Ludogogy.

There are many moving parts in a game. For example, there are various systems to implement movement and other aspects of the interface, the gameplay needs to be designed to provide a ‘balanced’ experience, and the narrative needs to drive the game forward. The more creativity the game allows on the part of the player, generally, the higher the difficulty of the gameplay. So it is often necessary to provide a help system, or guides and tutorials so that players can realise the developer’s intention for how the game can be played.

Role Playing Games (RPGs), especially, naturally includes these assistive contents linked to the quest system. So as players undertake quests they are also learning how to play the game. This can be implemented in various ways according to the user interface, but the Ask-Progress-Reward structure through NPC (Non-Player Characters) is very widely-used.

Quests Advance Narrative

Another way in which quests are used is to advance the narrative of a game. In the case of RPGs which are largely story-driven, types of quest can include scenario quests (the main story arc), side-quests (not required as part of the main story arc), epic quests (made up of many sub tasks), and recurring quests. Completed quests are linked to the ‘achievement system’ and used as end content.

So, quests in RPG games increase the immersion in the game world and the fun derived from playing as well as forming the basis of the theme and acting as the core of the gameplay.

Making Recurring Actions Fun

In gamification, using a quest structure is all about making recurring actions fun. From a general game development perspective, the same effect can happen when creating quests which are connected to the same game area or monster, or other types of grinding. A quest can make these familiar or repetitive activities less boring by attaching different narratives.

The recently published game, Elden Ring by FromSoftware, includes activities such as spellcrafting and casting, combat and crafting. Fun can be derived from playing this game just by hunting and fighting with the AI monsters. A player who is good at this activity can continue to play indefinitely, but will eventually face the ‘hurdle of growth’ because Elden Ring is also an RPG with level design. Eventually, there will come a time that the player will want to level up their character to increase their capabilities. Elden Ring which is created as an open world does not offer smooth integration of quest structures and doesn’t officially provide recurring quests as a vehicle for characters to grow. However, the player will instinctively tries a ‘value-based approach’ to find a good hunting place based on efficiency (of monster kills) per hour.

Regardless of the developer’s intention, the player finds that the more efficient play is, in terms of time, and value [time ⅹ number of trials = rewards], the more fun the player has when participating in recurring play. This can be thought of as ‘making recurring structures fun’.

Value-based Quest Design

In general, in RPGs, hunting monsters repeatedly guarantees experience points and game currency, but it’s related to randomized item tables. However, quests offer fixed and systemized rewards, for achievement, in addition to hunting-based rewards. This process can be a way of providing an ‘economic’ balance in line with the developer’s intention.

This repetitive quest structure is mainly used in MMORPG systems with a long growth period, and is implemented through narratives having various objectives such as ‘Catch # number of characters!’ or ‘Get ## number of ABC item after hunting the specific monster!’, etc. Reward-based recurring quests make the player seek higher rewards. Through this process, the past recurring quest is discarded. The idea of ‘continuous quest’ allows flexible design which combines higher reward quests (often ‘grinds’ which need to be well rewarded to keep players performing them) and interesting quests (the novel, non-grinding type).

Different Kinds of Fun

World of Warcraft especially focused on linking quests to experience points. The experience points gained by finishing single quests are much higher than those for hunting the monsters one by one. This design gives MMORPGs such as WoW a more plot-based structure, as opposed to an action combat-based adventure, which could be seen as ‘more fun’.

Different kinds of ‘fun’ are offered by WoW and Elden Ring, simply by changing the balance of rewards between monster hunting and quests. If more experience points are offered for killing monsters, you derive the kind of fun offered by Elden Ring. On the other hand, if the experience points for monsters are low and a greater amount of experience points are rewarded for quests, the fun of World of Warcraft results. This is because the player will always derive greater enjoyment of the game by seeking optimal efficiency.

The Gamification of Learning

In gamification of learning, and in creating learning games, the lessons of RPGs and their quest structures can be taken on board by designers, to create balanced designs which match the appropriate form of fun to learning outcomes.

For example, the quest structure can be mapped to outcomes which require longer-term practice or application of the learner’s cognitive skills. The shorter-term ‘fun’ equivalent to the monster hunting can be prioritized where learners need to act quickly (or repetitively), in order to reach the desired outcomes.

These structures, are, of course, completely independent of subject matter, and so learning designers should not make the mistake that they have nothing to offer more ‘serious’ settings, simply because their origins are in high-fantasy games. In workplace learning, for example, we are all playing ‘roles’, and learning is the means by which we ‘level up’ in both life and work.

The post Quest systems in Role Playing Games first appeared on Ludogogy.

“The voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles”

This is how Bernard Suits defines games, in his book ‘The Grasshopper’, first published in 1978. When a player agrees to enter into the world of the game, she does so by adopting something that Suits referred to as the Lusory Attitude.

The rules of a game are arbitrary and the Lusory Attitude involves acceptance of these rules. These rules constitute, in part, the ‘obstacles’ that the player will encounter. And it is in overcoming these obstacles that the ‘fun’ of playing is to be had – the pleasure derived from overcoming and prevailing.

The Grasshopper is available on Amazon

Without these obstacles a game is trivial and is therefore less compelling to the player.

So, is there more fun to be had if there are more obstacles, or if the obstacles are more challenging? Behaviour of some players might suggest that this is the case.

House Rules

Anybody who plays games socially has probably come across the idea of ‘House Rules’ – unofficial modifications to the rules of a game that are played by specific groups of people. These might be played in a family to even the playing field between adults and children. They can completely change the experience of a game and many groups will adopt house rules to increase replayability.

Many people will adopt house rules, either in groups, or individually, to increase the challenge of what they are facing. The kind of ‘house rule’ which makes the challenge harder for the player are the ones I am specifically interested in here. I know, for example, someone who has adopted his own ‘hard mode’ when playing Wordle. Once a letter has been confirmed as being in the word, it must be used in every subsequent guess, and if it has been confirmed as being in its correct position, it must be used in that position. (ed’s note – I have subsequently discovered that ‘hard mode’ is a Wordle setting, built into the game and not a ‘house rule’. As someone who plays wordle every day, I am both confused and embarassed that I did not know this)

As you can imagine this reduces massively the possibilities for introducing (and potentially ruling in or out) new letters, and makes Wordle a much harder challenge. Having tried this myself, I can confirm that it does also increase the feeling of achievement on success, partially because failure is so much more likely.

House rules in board games vs video games

It would seem on the face of it, much easier to adopt house rules in board games, than in video games where one’s interaction is prescriptive, at least in terms of the interface. But many house rules go on in the player’s head, and are to do with the player’s choices in play, rather than ‘bending’ any of the mechanisms. The Wordle example above illustrates this.

In more complex games, say MMORPGs, players can add challenge by deliberately choosing to approach challenges while underpowered or underequipped, or by taking a more challenging route to their end goal.

In RPGs generally, including the tabletop kind, the adoption of house rules is sometimes known as ‘Rule 0’, an acknowledgment that ‘playing as you want to’ is literally the most important ‘rule’ of the activity. In keeping with the current theme of Ludogogy, these ‘make it harder’ house rules are really personal quests, over and above those offered by the game if it is played as designed.

Self-gamification and Hypermiling

Changing the ‘rules’ to increase challenge can also happen outside of things that are recognised as games. And this is, of course, one of the fundamental aspects of gamification. Where this happens as ‘house rules’ rather than being part of some gamified application, it has a lot in common with Self-Gamification (a topic which is explored in detail in many Ludogogy articles by Victoria Ichizli-Bartels). While there is often a focus on reward, when thinking about gamification, it is the addition of ‘unnecessary obstacles’ which actually makes this gameful.

Let’s say you want to create a regular practice of writing, and you set up a system to record the number of words you write and reward you for carrying out your practice. You do not NEED to write 500 words a day; it is the unnecessary obstacle you have elected to overcome. Although you have specified a reward, that is really just a recognition that you repeatedly overcome your obstacle.

It is the limit (of 500 words) which makes this an unnecessary obstacle, rather than simply a task you want to perform, because that measure gives you a finite point at which you have achieved. In short, an obstacle is not an obstacle unless you can achieve by overcoming it. ‘Writing’ is not an obstacle – 500 words is.

Another gamified activity which many have chosen to participate in recently (at least according to the Guardian) is Hypermiling.

This is the practice of optimising driving to get the maximum distance from your fuel. The unnecessary obstacle you are constantly seeking to overcome is your current MPG (or KPG, KPL, whatever). While saving fuel is already desirable (especially given current prices), stating an obstacle, not only makes your success measurable but makes the practice ‘fun’ – and perhaps those two are one and the same thing.

House Rules in a Learning Setting

In learning settings the use of ‘house rules’, might provide us with several interesting possibilities. In this article we are only looking at ‘challenge’, but obviously there are other kinds of house rules which could alter the experience in other ways.

• If a player can adjust the level of difficulty of the challenges they face in the game, they are more likely to be engaged, being in a state of flow.
• In workplace learning it is not unusual for employees of different grades / job roles / experience to need to approach the ‘same’ learning at differing levels of challenge, so the ‘house rules’ flexibility allows for increased relevance to individual learners.
• If the players themselves are the ones who create the new rules, this is, in itself, a creativity practice which facilitates valuable ‘incidental’ learning, whatever the topic of the learning experience.
• If ‘house rules’ are recorded, they can provide a valuable resource for use with future cohorts or in future learning game designs to implement situations where challenge is required.

We could do this by ‘designing in’ several different rule options in different situations, but this carries a considerable design overhead, and it is also impossible to design a sufficiently diverse rule set to fully realise the advantages above with all cohorts of learners.

A far more sustainable option, which also optimises differentiation, would be to implement a learning /playing environment which encourages the creation and use of ‘house rules’ by players. In fact, the idea of ‘house rules’ requires that players are the ones which devise them, so if they were ‘designed in’ before they wouldn’t be ‘house rules’ at all, just alternative rule sets.

Examples of the kinds of rules (or quests) that players might devise might be:

• Acting with fewer resources (than usual) within the game
• Acting / decision-making with less information than is usual
• Beating a previous outcome in the game
• Setting constraints within which to play (‘Do x within 4 turns’, Do y without the support of my team’ etc.

How to design for or encourage house rules

Many people like to ‘follow the rules’ and will find the idea of a game where you can ‘bend the rules’ a little intimidating, especially if they are not used to being asked to exercise their creativity in coming up with new ways to do things.

It is easier therefore not to design rigid rules which then have to be ‘broken’ but to design a more open playing / learning environment in the first place, upon which players can then apply their own constraints. Get players to think about the constraints they already act under in the situation which the learning relates to. Typically, constraints relate to:

• Time
• Information
• Money
• Other resources
• People (as in headcount)
• Capacity and capability

‘Do-overs’ are a useful structure to implement, because they allow players to try different constraints on different instances of play.

If play starts with players/teams well-resourced, with all the information they need to achieve easily, learning can gradually be ramped up by removing resources, or increasing constraints with each iteration.

Providing a challenge, with a stated outcome, but not specifying how the outcome will be achieved, gives players considerable latitude to design their own route to achievement. Asking  ‘What would you need to make that easier to do?’ provides clues also as to what would make it more difficult, and players can try to achieve both with and without their ‘aid’.

Set up a ‘bidding war’ where teams / players compete to identify the ‘most difficult’ route to achieving the outcome. As an example of this (not probably one you would use in workplace learning setting), think of the ‘Name that Tune’ challenge, where players compete to name the tune in the fewest number of notes. This has recently been implemented in Wordle style as Heardle.

Make sure you record any ideas that either you or players create as you go. These will prove valuable later on to inform further design of challenge-based learning.

The post Learning Games – The Challenge of House Rules first appeared on Ludogogy.