MendelSchmiedekamp comments on Open Thread: August 2009 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: taw 01 August 2009 03:06PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (188)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Tom_Talbot 02 August 2009 06:10:30PM 4 points [-]

This comment doesn't really go anywhere, just some vague thoughts on fun. I've been reading A Theory of Fun For Game Design. It's not very good, but it has some interesting bits (have you noticed that when you jump in different videogames, you stay in there air for the same length of time? Apparently game developers all converged on an air time that feels natural, by trial and error). At one point the author asserts that having to think things through consciously is boring, but learning and using unconscious skills is fun. So a novice chess player gets bored quickly having to think through all the moves, while an expert 'just sees' the right moves, and has fun. It made me think of the concept of flow and of Alan Kay's work on Squeak and Etoys, making learning more fun and intuitive with computers (particularly learning mathematics) I think it's called constructionist learning.

It does seem though that we don't have much of a theory of fun, most of the stuff we know we learn through trial and error. If we had a decent model of fun we might be able to make boring learning activities fun, which would help with motivation and akrasia and so on.

Comment author: MendelSchmiedekamp 02 August 2009 10:44:56PM 0 points [-]

A few years ago I had developed a theory of game playing and low pressure social group interaction which starts at a similar place as Koster's. I was able to take that starting point about play and patterns and produce empirically testable hypotheses with formal mathematical models of what is happening during play.

And then I stopped working on it because I couldn't seem to get across the concept that learning and fun might be related well enough. Now that I've had a chance to read his book, I might have to reconsider.