Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
.rss_ul ul {padding-left: 0px; margin-left: 0px;}.rss_ul ul li {padding-bottom: 5px;} GameSetWatch - The Psychology of Games: Those Darn Game Of The Year Debates Our sites:GameSetWatchIndieGames GamerBytesFingerGamingWiM Gamasutra
« Super Mario 64 No-Star Speedrun Is Nuts | Main | 2011 Independent Games Festival Debuts Jury For Seumas McNally Grand Prize » Friday, December 31, 2010 The Psychology of Games: Those Darn Game Of The Year Debates 
[Continuing his regular GameSetWatch column, psychologist and gamer Jamie Madigan looks at the psychological biases and quirks that may rear their head during those interminable Game of the Year debates.]
Ah, late December. The time when the gaming press gets its members together and tries to convince each other that one awesome game is more awesome than other awesome games –also known as the Game of the Year Awards.
When I worked as part of the creative team on GameSpy.com we would lock ourselves in a conference room and argue literally for hours about the minutia surrounding every big title released that year in order to generate our awards. I’m also listening attentively to the GotY content over on GiantBomb.com, which is dedicating a full week of multi-hour podcasts to the raw debates that generated its lists.
These podcasts are interesting to me because I keep seeing well established psychological phenomenon coming up, but almost as interesting is when a psychological quirk doesn’t manifest itself because the guys seem to be aware of its danger to the process and have taken steps to avoid it. So in this post I present my list of 2010's Top 5 Biases That Affect 2010 Game of the Year Discussions. Sponsored by Crest Whitening Tooth Strips (not really):
5. The Recency/Primacy Effect
The recency effect describes how it’s often easier for us to recall more information (and more salient information) about things that have happened more recently or items towards the end of a list. Similarly, the primacy effect means the same thing for items at the beginning of a list or that happened towards the beginning of an established time frame. Between the two of these effects, stuff in the middle tends to get forgotten or muddled.
The impact on GotY lists should be apparent: If you’re studying a list of games released in the last year, it’s going to be easier to recall stuff about the first and last few games. We’re also more likely to recall details about games we played more recently (like Call of Duty: Black Ops) or earlier in the year (like Bayonetta). Details and memories of games released toward the middle of the year (like Splinter Cell: Conviction) might not come to mind as easily.
4. Confirmation Bias
This is a big one for GotY discussions. Confirmation bias is our tendency to ignore or downplay information that dis-confirms our preconceived decisions or opinions and to pay more attention to and emphasize information that confirms them.
If you go into a discussion of the Best Downloadable Game of 2010 thinking that Monday Night Combat should win, you’re less likely to think about its flaws (e.g., limited maps, repetitive comments from the announcer) and more likely to remember its strengths (e.g., class balance, fun character design) relative to someone who didn’t hold the same assumption. What’s more, you’ll probably say that the pros are more important to weighting your decision than the cons.
Good ways to combat this are to get in the mindset of allowing people to challenge your assumptions and engaging in debate. It can also be helpful to list out the pros/cons (with help from others) so that you see them laid out and from a different perspective.
3. Over-Emphasizing Salient Features
I wrote at length about this concept earlier, but here’s the quick version: When puny humans are asked to justify a decision, we tend to focus on the most salient or plausible explanations and then give them too much weight.
To repeat my example from the previous article: if asked to explain why you favor Red Dead Redemption for the Best Action Game of the 2010, you may think about what should be included in the checklist for evaluating an action game, come up with “the weapons,” and then feel compelled to award or take away credit for how the game’s weapons feel and work.
The problem is, the most salient and plausible factors may not be the ones that are really responsible for how much you enjoy the game. The weapons in Red Dead Redemption are, in my opinion, largely unremarkable –the game’s appeal lies almost entirely in other areas and any weight given to how cool the weapons are is inappropriate at best.
I keep seeing this come up in GotY discussions because professional game enthusiasts tend to hate using vague, worn out descriptors like “fun” or “awesome” or “polished” even though those words may be perfectly appropriate if a bit mundane. But these Internet auteurs are determined to have something more descriptive to say, so they cast about for something else and end up falling for the trap described above.
2. Social Proof and Groupthink
This one is kind of a twofer since social proof and groupthink are separate but related. Again, I’ve written about social proof before, and the idea is that we will sometimes accept proclamations that are clearly at odds with our own senses just because we often have a desire to conform to the group’s standards.
Soloman Asch showed this in a classic study where he got people to say that a long line was shorter than a short line simply by having someone planted in the group who would immediately pipe up and say so.
The effect is even stronger with a group of strangers and statements with a less clearly defined correct answer, such as politics or game of the year awards. Which is why someone may not speak up when others in the group immediately jump on World of Warcraft: Cataclysm as the Best Role-Playing Game of the year, even though by most reasonable definitions -- being an expansion pack -- it’s not a standalone game.
The flipside is groupthink, which is when members of a cohesive, established group will ignore information, abstain from critical debate and accept otherwise questionable decisions in order to minimize conflict and maintain warm fuzzies. So again, Cataclysm might win, because so-and-so can be such a pedantic jackass about it and nobody wants to harsh the vibe or destroy the atmosphere of friendly discussion.
One way I keep seeing these two biases being disarmed from the start is by joking among the debaters about how they hate each other and how they anticipate rancorous arguments. This sets the stage that it’s okay - expected, even - to question each others’ decisions and engage in critical analysis.
1. The Distinction Bias
Many Game Of The Year debates in categories like “Best [Genre] Game” come down to two similar contenders, resulting in protracted discussions where the merits of each candidate are obsessively scrutinized. This is a recipe for what’s known as the distinction bias. The idea comes from a theory that people engage in two modes of evaluation when pondering the merits of an experience: joint evaluation and single evaluation mode. The former is done when comparing multiple things at once and the latter when evaluating something individually.
The distinction bias describes how when operating in joint evaluation mode we tend to over-emphasize and over weight otherwise slight differences between the subjects. If debating Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit and Gran Turismo 5 for Driving Game of the Year, we may make a bigger deal about Hot Pursuit’s lower frame rate than we would have if we were evaluating the game by itself. As a result, when operating in this comparison mode we tend to think worse of the loser than we would have if we had evaluated it without resorting to direct comparisons.
This is perhaps acceptable in GotY debates when we HAVE to pick a winner –it’s often the fine details that act as tie breakers. But the trouble may come when you have a mix of different types of games where two of them are similar.
If you aim to trim the initial list to a set of three finalists, a tempting place to start is by comparing the most similar games (c.f., elimination by alternatives). Because of the distinction bias, the loser in that comparison may end up being evaluated worse than before and may end up getting cut from the list even though it was better than the non-similar games.
So there you have it. Five psychological phenomena that drive game of the year debates. Go listen to your favorite GotY podcast and see if you can catch them in action. If you do, post about it in the comments section!
[Jamie Madigan examines the overlap of psychology and video games at PsychologyOfGames.com and for GamePro magazine. He can be reached at jamie@psychologyofgames.com.]
Posted by Jamie Madigan on December 31, 2010 12:00 PM | Permalink CommentsThis is a neat article. When I see this "psychology of games" stuff it makes me think of my own experiences. I've always had issues with anxiety, panic attacks and what not. At any rate, certain video games only seem to cause the condition to get worse Especially first person shooters. Regardless you learn to deal with these things, and I now run a video game blog myself called imagination fascination. Swing by and check it out!
Www.imaginationfascination.blogspot.com
Posted by: Jonathan Howard | January 1, 2011 9:12 PM Post a commentName:
Email Address:
URL:
Remember personal info?
Comments:If you enjoy reading GameSetWatch.com, you might also want to check out these UBM TechWeb Game Network sites:
Gamasutra (the 'art and business of games'.)
Game Career Guide (for student game developers.)
Indie Games (for independent game players/developers.)
Finger Gaming (news, reviews, and analysis on iPhone and iPod Touch games.)
GamerBytes (for the latest console digital download news.)
Worlds In Motion (discussing the business of online worlds.)Monthly Archive January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 GameSetWatch [Twitter / RSS feed] is an alt.video game weblog from the people who run:
Recent CommentsThe Psychology of Games: Those Darn Game Of The Year Debates by Jonathan HowardRSS? GameSetWatch's RSS feed
Who? Editors: Simon Carless & Eric CaoiliAbout GameSetWatch
Search Search GameSetWatch:
Game Set Watch Jobs A2Z: Senior Game Developer part of the Amazon group of companies - A2Z Development Center [01.03.11]
A2Z: Quality Assurance Manager part of the Amazon group of companies - A2Z Development Center [01.03.11]
Technical Program Manager - A2Z Development Center [01.03.11]
Cinematic Designer - BioWare Austin [01.03.11]
MMO Game Designer - Globex Studios [01.03.11]
View All Jobs Gamasutra News
Carpe Fulghur Talks Sales Reality As Promos Lead Recettear Over 100,000 Units
Release This: Lost in Shadow, Ghost Trick Premiere Stateside
Analyst: Core Gamer Likely Led GameStop To Strong Holiday
Square Enix Polls Players On FFXIV Updates, 'Drastic' Changes
Castle Crashers Rings In 2 Million Players
CityVille Has Largest Facebook Audience Ever
PopCap Will 'Look At' Going Public In 2011
Gamasutra's Holiday Week 2010: What You Might Have Missed
Pitfall!'s Crane: 'Never Any Doubt' Games Would Rebound After Crash
2011 Independent Games Festival Reveals Main Competition Finalists
Read All News Columns Column: The Interactive Palette Column: Game Time With Mr. Raroo Column: Homer In Silicon Column: The Magic Resolution Column: Battle Klaxon Column: Sound Current Column: Diamond In The Rough Column: The Game Anthropologist Column: @ Play Column: Alt Space Column: Game Mag Weaseling Irregular Columns Berkley's BUZZ, Bastards Of 32-Bit, Shmup Me Up, Letters From The Metaverse, Game Rag Slapdown, Cherish The Chips, Game Ads A-Go-Go, Compilation Catalog, The Gaijin Restoration, Free Play, Keyboard Bashing, The Gentleman Nerd, Green And Black Attack, Arcade Obscurities, Beyond 3DO, MMOG Nation, Parallax Memories, Game Collector's Melancholy, Cinema Pixeldiso, Column: Might Have Been, Column: HDR Knowledge, Column: Beyond Tetris, Column: Play Evolution, Column: The Aberrant Gamer, Column: Roboto-chan, Column: World Of Warcraft Exposed, Column: Jump Button, Column: The Amateur, Column: Save The Robot, Column: The Z Axis, Column: Why We Play, Column: Welcome To The GameSetWatch Comic, Column: GDRI Wisdom, Column: Vox Populi, Column: Quiz Me Qwik, Column: Bell Game And Candle, Column: Lingua Franca. Copyright © UBM TechWeb
No comments:
Post a Comment