Notify Message
Journals » Entry

Gamification is a Trend, and not a Fad?

by Mind Erasure on Aug 04, 2012 at 07:44 PM}
(This is a double-post to ensure that more people can see and respond to my inquiry on gamification) ;)

Hi All:

Below is a "futurism" based video related to the ludic fallacy, in that it envisions a possible extreme end to gamification (in terms of gamifying all social tasks, and not just gamifying educational objectives):

"Sight" by Sight Systems

Although the video shows a "nightmarish" end to gamification, it also answers the question at hand on whether or not gamification is a fad, or a trend that will continue to rise in education.

I don't think we can get away from gamification as long as we continue to become increasingly technology-driven and technology-dependent. Ironically, the video supports the argument that the ludic fallacy exists in simulations, reminding us of the nature of simulations as hyperrealities, or even hyper-hyperrealities as Baudrillard has warned us many years ago. When discussing the ludic fallacy, we really need to include Baudrillard in the discussion:

Jean Baudrillard and Hyperreality

The above article outlines Baudrillard's definitions of "Simulation," and when "Simulation" becomes "Hyperreality":

-the process in which representations of things come to replace the things being represented . . . the representations become more important than the "real thing"

-4 orders of simulation:
1. signs thought of as reflecting reality: re-presenting "objective" truth;
2. signs mask reality: reinforces notion of reality;
3. signs mask the absence of reality;
-LA life: jogging, psychotherapy, organic food
4. signs become simulacra - they have no relation to reality; they simulate a simulation
-Spinal Tap
-Cheers bars
-new urbanism
-the Gulf War was a video game

-a condition in which "reality" has been replaced by simulacra
-Baudrillard argues that today we only experience prepared realities-- edited war footage, meaningless acts of terrorism, the Jerry Springer Show
The very definition of the real has become: that of which it is possible to give an equivalent reproduction. . . The real is not only what can be reproduced, but that which is always already reproduced: that is the hyperreal. . . which is entirely in simulation.

Illusion is no longer possible, because the real is no longer possible.

Division between "real" and simulation has collapsed
-stage a fake hold up"

For further explanation, please see wikipedia's entry:

"Simulacra and Simulation"

Quite interested in your feedback.

Sherry Jones


Page 1