Thank you for taking the time to highlight games, gaming, and gamification for libraries. I think it is highly needed. Don’t let the rest of my criticism in this comment change any of that. It’s a great video overall.
I myself am a hardcore gamer, as well as a librarian, so I just wanted to clarify a few of the things you mentioned.
Careful of the way you use the word “addictive” when talking about video games. It’s very tricky. Reference: http://tl-dr.ca/?p=421
Be careful with the Richard Bartle references, he has been refuted by many people and the gaming community really does not like his research. Plus, his “types of gamers” are so lacking it’s laughable. As a gamer, and having taken his test, it does not even touch the surface of “why” people play games. He may have a large sample size of people taking his test, but the test itself was poorly designed and does not accurately reflect video games. (The test itself just makes me angry to take because it’s so one sided) Especially modern day games, as the test was created in the mid 90s. That was the infancy of video games compared to now. Your examples that you use surrounding Bartle are great, the anecdotes are good, just stating the issues with the issues around Bartle and his specific research.
Also, good breakdown of the types of game design, a good analysis of how gamification and gaming in libraries should be more than “let’s get a Wii”.
Again, thanks for the video. It’s great work that needs to be done for libraries and information science.
RT @jowyang: The Collaborative Economy provides new business models for corporations: Rent/Subscribe/Share/Loan/Gift. But when to use?LoneWolfLibrarian 10 minutes ago
Thank you for taking the time to highlight games, gaming, and gamification for libraries. I think it is highly needed. Don’t let the rest of my criticism in this comment change any of that. It’s a great video overall.
I myself am a hardcore gamer, as well as a librarian, so I just wanted to clarify a few of the things you mentioned.
Careful of the way you use the word “addictive” when talking about video games. It’s very tricky. Reference: http://tl-dr.ca/?p=421
Be careful with the Richard Bartle references, he has been refuted by many people and the gaming community really does not like his research. Plus, his “types of gamers” are so lacking it’s laughable. As a gamer, and having taken his test, it does not even touch the surface of “why” people play games. He may have a large sample size of people taking his test, but the test itself was poorly designed and does not accurately reflect video games. (The test itself just makes me angry to take because it’s so one sided) Especially modern day games, as the test was created in the mid 90s. That was the infancy of video games compared to now. Your examples that you use surrounding Bartle are great, the anecdotes are good, just stating the issues with the issues around Bartle and his specific research.
Also, good breakdown of the types of game design, a good analysis of how gamification and gaming in libraries should be more than “let’s get a Wii”.
Again, thanks for the video. It’s great work that needs to be done for libraries and information science.