RIB 9&10 (Wogan)

I strongly disagree with McGonigal’s “Fix #9” in chapter 9 of Reality is Broken. McGonigal declares that: “Compared with games reality is lonely and isolating. Games help us band together and create powerful communities from scratch.” In the context of the chapter given the emphasis on more social games, I can understand why McGonigal would make such a claim. The games she describes in this chapter, Comfort of Strangers, Ghosts of a Chance, and Bounce, all emphasize social interaction in their own ways. Comfort of Strangers allows for players to interact in person in a large, urban settings but on a very limited level with superficial questions like “Are you a dancer or a lover?” Ghosts of chance revolved around the creation of new Smithsonian exhibit and the vast majority of social interaction for it occurred in online chat forums. Out of the three games, Bounce is probably the most interactive. In Bounce, players are connected on the phone to a person whose age is at least 20 years from their own. However, conversation is prompted by different questions generated by a computer program and points are tallied at the end based on your responses; I believe this gamifies conversation and removes authenticity from the interaction. While these games may be effective tools for overcoming isolation for others, I think that using technology as a crutch to interact with only those who are using the same crutch is isolating unto itself.

I found McGonigal’s concept of “Happiness Hacking” in chapter 10 to be a poor attempt at rebranding what most would call “common sense.” For example, McGonigal lists random acts of kindness for strangers, reflecting on the importance of our lives, and dancing as “hacks” for happiness, but I wholeheartedly think that just about anyone that has stepped outside of their house for any modicum of time and has interacted with a handful of people could synthesize the same information (no Ph. D needed). However, I do concede that I agree with McGonigal when she says that “anyone can dream up and share new solutions to the happiness challenges of everyday life. I maintain that there is little to nothing unique about McGonigal’s strategies to hack happiness; happiness is subject to the eye of the beholder.

Posted on by Wogan Snyder
Categories: Uncategorized

6 Responses

  1. Josephine Bossidy says:
    September 30, 2018 at 5:13 pm

    I agree with Wogan on his hesitation towards completely relying on games. I think if people become too dependent on games, as an escape from reality, the effects could be negative. In looking for a solution to this issue, I think people should look in reality for answers to our problems and use games as a supplement.

  2. Micaela Willoughby says:
    September 30, 2018 at 6:57 pm

    “I believe this gamifies conversation and removes authenticity from the interaction.”
    I agree with this strongly. Of course, McGonigal would only be gamifying conversations with strangers, but even still, the conversations came off as just running through a list of questions. There’s even a time limit.

    Also, when the games fizzle out (and they probably do quickly) will there be a replacement game? Gamers would probably just go back to their favorite types of games and continue on. McGonigal said that even temporary communities give lasting benefits, but I’m fairly curious about that fact.

  3. Rachel Helbling says:
    September 30, 2018 at 8:37 pm

    I liked reading about your thoughts on this chapter. I think often in this book ideas are exaggerated and can be hard to agree with. I think in some cases games could HELP improve reality through social interactions like in this chapter, but they shouldn’t be all that people rely on. Reality doesn’t have to be lonely and isolating. I think people should focus on reality, it can be more rewarding and have more of an impact. Technology should not be the focus when trying to interact with others.

  4. Ahsan Ahmad says:
    October 1, 2018 at 2:52 am

    I found Wogan’s unique perspective on the chapters to be quite interesting. Like the previous chapters, I think McGonigal once again went overboard with the “Games are the future, reality is trash!” notion with statements like: “Compared with games reality is lonely and isolating. Games help us band together and create powerful communities from scratch.” Again, however, I would argue that there is a middle ground to be found in the situation. While relying completely and blindly on games to save us from reality’s troubles is a bit excessive, we can’t deny that games do provide innovative mediums and structures to deal with the activities and troubles of everyday life and I can’t exactly see the harm in embracing those.

  5. Hyewon Hong says:
    October 1, 2018 at 10:43 am

    I fully agree with your opinion as while reading the chapter I had many of the same thoughts. McGonigal seems to be exclusionary in her viewpoint, shutting out any semblance that reality might offer different attractions and vehicles of involvement than can be achieved by playing games. I also agree that bounce seemed the mot interactive of the three games as it was the only one that really forced the player to talk to another human and seemed explicitly designed to make connections easy and fun.

  6. James Bachmann says:
    October 1, 2018 at 12:24 pm

    Wogan is correct in that if we chose to solely revolve our social lives around a game, then it would be ineffective and not genuine. Like one of many ideas Jane McGonigal has, it seems that her statements are blanket statements and do not fully take into account all factors of human interaction.