I am finally prepared to answer your monounsaturated comment on the meaning of gamification to you.
I think the difference between how you see gamification, and I fear Josh, too, is best illustrated by a question on the dating site, OkCupid:
When conducting yourselves with others, do you prefer to be:
| | Tactful
You see, your answer tells me you are a man of knowledge and a man in search of truth, in this case proper function. Here is where you learn you are not in control of the system. To strengthen your best students may require the same plan of action as to maximize their numbers- avail merit to those who would not have it without gamification, as was your parent’s act in taking care of you before you knew you existed.
The game is the journey, for you and for me, for all of us. It is our mutual responsibility to co-create a reality filled with streamlined experiences rather than choppy and disjoint ‘tools’. When done correctly it becomes a legacy as few applications ever have been.
My specific points of disagreement:
1. You keep calling them artificial rewards. I don’t agree they are artificial but rather ingrained yet ignorable ‘all this time’.
2. You say ‘without the abstraction of the game system’. We are talking about working with computers, right? ‘Without the abstraction of the game system’ doesn’t exist anymore.
What I loved:
1. Your definition of quantitative metrics, stressing comparability, is well said.
2. That you said ‘Shouldn’t we then make everyone game designers…Everyone is excited to play.’ LOL! That doesn’t make any sense- that’s two opposite roles. Designer and player.