difference between gamification and game-based learning<\/strong><\/a> is important: the former uses encouragement mechanics to promote engagement, while the latter uses video games as core sources of learning material or cognitive action) is one response.<\/p>\nBy embedding diverse achievements into activities and assessments, learning progress can be refracted infinitely. These systems would be able to more flexibly respond to unique learner pathways and abilities, and would further serve as encouragement mechanics \u2014 instead of one carrot stick, there are hundreds. And not just carrots, but every fruit and vegetable imaginable.<\/p>\n
But video games have even more to offer formal learning systems. Lots more. While what actually constitutes a video game is changing with emerging technologies, in these digital playgrounds progress is usually iterative and requires players to demonstrate proficiency in certain areas.<\/p>\n
To be able to do\u00a0this<\/em>\u00a0before moving on to\u00a0that<\/em>.<\/p>\nHow Video Games Have Mastered Learning Engagement<\/strong><\/h2>\nThere are tropes in video game mechanics that players almost universally dislike, including \u2018training\u2019 sessions, where players must prove to the video game that they can perform a basic function before moving on. Turn left, turn right, jump, pick up an object, open a map, etc.<\/p>\n
Unskippable cut scenes that aren\u2019t meaningful or integral to the game itself are also not fun.<\/p>\n
A lack of player choice\u2013games where developers lead you down a single path and offer the appearance of choice without offering any agency of note? Not \u2018engaging.\u2019<\/p>\n
A game that\u2019s too difficult or too easy? Not at all engaging.<\/p>\n
A game where the mechanics themselves aren\u2019t engaging\u2013the actions and behaviors that players can actually control\u2013isn\u2019t fun because what you\u2019re doing isn\u2019t engaging. You\u2019re just operating the functions of a pre-determined system that doesn\u2019t need you, wasn\u2019t created for you, doesn\u2019t require specific genius or talent you might have, and looks and sounds and plays the same for every single player regardless of their abilities, background, goals, interests, etc. Sound familiar?<\/p>\n
While something like a basic proving ground doesn\u2019t sound bad in theory, it stifles fun because it destroys the players\u2019 own sense of pace, interest, and curiosity. It is a stern reminder that you are playing a game, that the game is in control and you\u2019re only along for the ride, which dissolves immersion as well.<\/p>\n
Not much different than school, then.<\/p>\n
Most game designers have learned, however. Mandatory training sessions and even unskippable cut scenes \u2014 breaks in play that force players to watch videos that may or may not be integral to the game \u2014 are less frequent than they were two years ago. They\u2019ve also evolved unlocking. By performing tasks \u2014 as minor as opening a treasure chest, or as significant as completing a level \u2014 new \u201cthings\u201d are unlocked: new areas, new weapons, new characters, new abilities, and so on.<\/p>\n
These mechanics serve to encourage the player because to move forward, items need to be checked off \u2014 in a manner that is not only visible, but that rewards play, experimentation, and curiosity. And in contrast to the aforementioned mandatory training session, they are incremental, intermittent, often voluntary and reward players immediately.<\/p>\n
Climb a mountain or slay a robot enemy? Bam. Shiny new item as a reward, proceeding level unlocked, game completion percentage blinks on the screen. Immediate feedback and visible progress.<\/p>\n