应用程序什么时候可以成为游戏？
有时，应用程序中类似游戏的功能可以使工作变得有趣。 例如，Stack Overflow 使用徽章和积分来强迫用户工作。
- 有哪些类似游戏的功能 可以转移到应用程序吗？
- 有哪些类型的应用程序 适合类似游戏的功能吗？
- 为什么类似游戏的功能在应用程序中并不常见？
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（8）
您可以看到这一原则得到有效应用的地方之一是使用人员来生成或索引内容的应用程序。 在这些情况下，类似游戏的方面是鼓励自我调节的一种方式。 例如，在 SO 上，代表和徽章旨在鼓励建设性行为，例如更高质量的答案、同行评审等。许多通用论坛以及 boardgamegeek 和 维基百科。
我可以想象这种事情对于社区/公司维基、软件文档或遵守编码标准或测试覆盖率等事情很有效。 与以往一样，问题在于如何阻止游戏成为主要焦点。 例如，如果您可以请代表来整理您的 Intranet wiki，我可以保证会有一些人会整天这样做，而他们的主要工作却完全不同！
One of the places where you can see this principle being effectively applied is for applications that use people to generate or index content. In these cases, the game-like aspects are a way to encourage self-moderation. For example, on SO, the rep and badges aim to encourage constructive behaviour like higher-quality answers, peer review etc. Similar systems exist on many generic forums, as well as sites like boardgamegeek and wikipedia.
I could imagine this kind of thing working well for things like community/company wikis, software documentation, or adherence to coding standards or test coverage. The problem, as ever, is to stop the game becoming the main focus. For example, if you could get rep for tidying up your intranet wiki, I can guarantee there would be some people who would do that all day, when their main job was something quite different!
游戏确实是教育应用程序。 确实，他们通常教的是如何玩游戏，但他们仍然具有教育意义。
当您完成一款典型的游戏时，您已经成为十几种不同机制的专家，知道如何处理复杂的场景，并且可以识别多个不同的敌人及其模式。
虽然游戏机制本身（“跳跃！”）可能不适用于典型的应用程序，但看看游戏如何进行教学肯定可以。
Games are really educational applications. True, what they generally teach is how to play the game, but they're still educational.
By the time you finish a typical game, you're an expert in a dozen different mechanics, know how to handle complex scenarios, and can recognize multiple different foes and their patterns.
While game mechanics themselves ("jump!") may not be applicable to typical applications, a look at how games approach teaching certainly could be.
闪烁的灯光和其他闪亮的东西。 好的游戏是充满色彩的，能够像看烟花一样给人带来愉悦的刺激。
Flashing lights and other shiny stuff. Good games are loaded with colour and give the same pleasant stimulation as watching fireworks.
毫无疑问，应用程序中的“游戏”功能可能会分散许多应用程序的注意力并降低其有效性。
在产品中添加游戏功能的想法是为了提高生产力——工作的理由。 例如，这里的徽章有点整洁，但真正促使人们在 SO 上做得很好的是声誉。 它使他们能够产生更大的影响和更大的影响，然后还将他们与对网站的责任感联系起来。 我认为SO在这里确实取得了很好的平衡。
不过，其他应用程序中的游戏功能可能具有侮辱性，想象一下：
编辑
您可能想要非常具体地回答的问题是“您奖励什么行为，为什么奖励它，奖励是什么？” 如果所有这些都与生产力有关，而与某些正交幸福（即社会地位）无关，我不确定它是否会起作用。
结束编辑
另一方面，您必须观看有关“人类计算”的演讲。 哇。
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8246463980976635143
谈论使用游戏为 Google 分类图像。 有点偏离主题，但你可能会喜欢。
It's definitely true that 'game' features in an application might be distracting and detracting from the effectiveness of a lot of applications.
The idea of adding game features to a product is to impose some sort of economy to productivity--a reason for working. For example, the badges here are kinda neat, but what really drives people to do well on SO is the reputation. It enables them to make a larger difference and more impact, and then also ties them to a feel of responsibility for the site. I think SO really strikes a good balance here.
Although, game features in other apps can be insulting imagine this:
Edit
The question you might want to answer very specifically is "What behaviour are you rewarding, why are you rewarding it, and what is the reward?" If all those have to do with productivity and nothing to do with some orthogonal happiness (ie social standing) I'm not sure its going to work.
End Edit
On a completely different note, you must watch this talk on "Human Computation". Wow.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8246463980976635143
It talks about using games to categorize images for Google. A little off topic, but you might appreciate it.
如今，游戏已成为社区的代名词。
大多数业务线应用程序不包含各种多人游戏或社区方面。
Nowadays, games are synonymous with community.
Most line of business applications don't include a wide variety of multiplayer or community aspects to them.
埃文，问得好！ 现在我给出明确的答案：
我认为，如果你将任何工作分解为可实现的挑战，它都会变得有趣。 当应用程序提供这些挑战、解释它们并衡量成功或失败时，它就变成了游戏。
将挑战构建到应用程序中的困难是......
工作，这样努力就花掉了
克服挑战也是
实现用户目标的进展。
否则挑战只是
分散注意力。 应用程序用户有
很少有共同目标，因此有一个预先确定的
一系列挑战不可能非常大
有用。
由于这些原因，将特定挑战构建到应用程序中的价值非常有限。 社交游戏可能是一个例外，因为其他用户部分地定义了挑战并根据具体情况适当地衡量进度。
Brilliant question Evan! And now for my definitive answer:
I think that any work can become fun if you break it into attainable challenges. An application becomes a game when it provides these challenges, explains them, and gauges success or failure.
The difficulties in building challenges into applications are...
work, so that effort spent
surmounting the challenge is also
progress towards the user's goals.
Otherwise the challenge is only a
distraction. Application users have
few common goals, so a predetermined
set of challenges cannot be very
useful.
For these reasons, building specific challenges into an application has very limited value. Social games may be an exception because other users partially define challenges and gauge progress appropriately on a case-by-case basis.
Doom 作为流程管理的界面，有人知道吗？
http://www.cs.unm.edu/~ dlchao/flake/doom/chi/chi.html
Doom as an interface for process management, anyone?
http://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/flake/doom/chi/chi.html
我认为主要问题是在大多数应用程序中，它们都是有目的的。 他们不需要通过让用户变得更“有趣”来激励用户，但这通常会分散注意力。 想象一下，如果 Visual Studio（或任何您最喜欢的 IDE）给您徽章，会发生什么……就像这里一样，许多人会专注于获取这些徽章，而不是编写好的代码。
另一件事是，至少就徽章/成就而言，它们对于离线应用程序来说毫无意义。
I think the main issue is that in most applications, they are used for a purpose. They don't need to incentivise the user by making it more "fun" and it's generally a distraction. Imagine what would happen if Visual Studio (or whatever your favorite IDE is) gave you badges... Just like here, many people would concentrate on acquiring those badger instead of writing good code.
Another thing is that, at least in the case of badges/achievements, they're fairly meaningless for offline applications.