By Bart Hufen – Player 1 @BrandNewGame

A great example of building a brand through an in-game tournament is Nissan’s search for driving talent through the game Gran Turismo. They have been organizing this event for six years now. The virtual talents have proven themselves on the real-life circuits in races like Le Mans 24, GP3 (the championship known as the predecessor for the Formula 1) and in some cases the drivers have moved on to Red Bull’s racing driver development team.

In the past six years more than 4 million people entered the GT Academy. They all fought for a chance to become the newest NISMO Athlete. The great results so far (mentioned above) have proven that in-game training for talent is successful, which is why Nissan continues to organize the online tournament. In 2014 new talents will be delivered to drive in competitions in Europe, US, Australia, India, Middle-Esat countries, Mexico and Thailand. After an intense Driver Development Program, only five international driving champions can win the ultimate prize: becoming a real race driver for Nissan in the 24 hours of Dubai next January (2015).

Like I mentioned in my book – Gran Turismo in my opinion is a ‘simulation-game’. It tries to be as accurate in creating a real-life experience. The fact that Nissan uses this game to find racedrivers around the globe proves that games can train people to become anything they want – provided that the game was developed by professionals.

You can enter the GT Academy through the game Gran Turismo 6 for PlayStation 3, but you can also check some real live events through Facebook… More information can be found via these links:

www.facebook.com/GTAcademy and http://gran-turismo.com.

Between the Virtual and the Real: Seeking Evidence of Behavioural Transmission.

By Menno Gottmer – Player 2 @BrandNewGame

In the next couple of blog posts, I will elaborate on the ‘Gamified Self’, an idea devised by me with help of my colleagues at BrandNewGame, that serves as the main inspiration for my master’s thesis, which I hope to finish this year. Week by week, using these blog post, I will further develop my ideas about the Gamified Self, starting in this blog post with the mental steps that brought me to this idea.

The main goal of serious games or what some refer to as applied games is to learn or unlearn certain behaviours, with the goal to be able to apply these behaviours in the ‘real’ world. While the use of serious gaming concepts by various commercial and non-commercial organisations has skyrocketed over the past few years, evidence of an effective transmission between newly trained behaviours in the virtual world of serious games to the real world, has remained largely absent. Initially this could mean two things: either there is a discrepancy between behavioural change in the virtual world and the real world, or people have just not been able to study a possible correspondence between behavioural change in these two spheres. Since it has not yet been scientifically falsified that behavioural changes in a virtual environment might lead to behavioural changes in a ‘real’ environment, this leaves the second option open as the more viable one. But what in fact could be the cause of this epistemological hindrance that restricts people to research a possible transmission between the virtual world and the real world?

First let us focus on behavioural change within virtual environments, such as serious games. The possibility to acquire metrics inside a virtual environment ensures the precise tracking of all kinds of behavioural changes within that virtual environment. A metric is a measure of some property of a piece of software, which of course also includes serious games. Precise quantitative measurements are essential to do scientific research on behavioural change, and because of this, software lends itself excellently for this. Thus, metrics inside a serious game provide objective, reproducible and quantifiable measurements that can be used to precisely track behavioural change.

However, measuring and quantifying behaviour in the real world is not nearly as simple as it is in a virtual word. This in turn makes it particularly more difficult to acquire scientific evidence for the transmission between newly trained behaviours in the virtual world to the real world, evidence that is needed to prove that serious games are a valid and effective method for behavioural change.

First, what we need is an effective way to quantify human behaviour in the real world, and second, we need a way to measure the degree of correspondence between the quantified behaviour in serious games and the quantified behaviour in the real world.

Enter the ‘Gamified Self’; a thought construct that functions as an intermediary between the virtual and the actual, the game and the ‘real’ world. In theory, the Gamified Self is a portal where metrics of someone’s virtual and real behaviours are continually being processed. The ultimate goal of the Gamified Self is to be an on-going objective reflection of a person’s knowledge and skills, a reflection shaped by quantified behaviours exhibited in both serious games and the real world. Using the metrics of both real-world and virtual-world behaviours, The Gamified Self will be able to set relevant challenges for people. So not only will the Gamified Self be reproduce who you are, it will also produce new relevant challenges for you. While the Gamified Self is still only a thought, one day I hope to be able to realise all this.

The ‘Quantified Self’ movement was my main inspiration for this idea, and in next week’s blog post I will elaborate on this movement, and precisely explain how it offers possibilities to bridge the gap between the virtual and the real

By Menno Gottmer – Player 2 @BrandNewGame

Last Tuesday companies around the world were once more pranking people on a massive scale. While most of these Aprils fools’ jokes were actually dull, cheesy, or even straight down terrible, one was so ingenious that many still wish it wasn’t actually a joke.

One day before April the first, Google released the following video on YouTube with the title “Google Maps: Pokémon Challenge”.

According to the video’s description: “Dozens of wild Pokémon have taken up residence on streets, amidst forests and atop mountains throughout Google Maps. To catch ’em all, grab your Poké Ball and the newest version of Google Maps for iPhone or Android. Then tap the search bar, “press start,” and begin your quest.”

Thanks to Neurensics the positive effect of gamification on our brain has been scientifically proven.

By Menno Gottmer – Player 2 @BrandNewGame

Neurensics is a neuromarketing research and consulting firm based in Holland, that has direct access to high-end neuroimaging techniques. Using these techniques Neurensics can measure the brain activity of potential customers, and subsequently determine the objective motives of these customers. As a result, Neurensics can provide their clients with unique insights into what customers are actually experiencing in their brains when dealing with certain images, products, advertisements, logos and games.

Neurensic’s research has been especially fruitful for KLM, the Royal Dutch Airlines. Early 2012, KLM developed a strategy with the qualitative objective to connect KLM to holiday spirit, and the quantitative objective to acquire people’s email addresses and their preferred holiday destinations. This was a necessary strategy, because KLM was still too often seen as expensive and merely for business, and therefore not top of mind at many holidaymakers. To reach this objective, KLM’s advertising agency developed a thematic campaign with the theme “To what new memory can we bring you?”, for which they created a television commercial.

Besides this campaign, the Crossmedia Division of the Telegraaf Media Group developed an activation campaign. The core of this activation campaign was the “KLM Vakantiespel”, an online revamped version of the well-known Memory card game. Before players could start playing the “KLM Vakantiespel”, they had to upload their portrait photo. The game then processed these photos in various vacation scenario images. As a result, in these images, you as a player could see yourself in a not yet enjoyed holiday in the Middle East, Africa, or any other distant KLM destination. These images were your ‘new memories’, as it were. For each found image match, you received a stamp in your virtual passport with the destination depicted on those matching images. After you finished the game you were asked to choose your preferable holiday destination from all the received stamps. After this, you immediately heard if you won any prices. Every day players could win two tickets to a ‘new memory’. In total, the “KLM Vakantiespel” was played more than 67,000 times, and more than 31,000 players left their email addresses and preferred holiday destinations behind.

Using the neuroimaging techniques of Neurensics, both the thematic campaign and the activation campaign were studied for their effects on the consumer’s brain. The thematic campaign’s television commercial scored positive in the brain on dimensions that are important for buying behaviour. However, Neurensics’ results also showed that the sought connection between KLM and holiday spirit was not made, something the activation campaign’s “KLM Vakantiespel” díd achieve. Neurensics’ objective neurological research showed that the game brought its players in the holiday spirit and also made the KLM brand significantly more relevant to the players. These are interesting results, not only because for the first time the relationship between gamification and brain activity has been demonstrated, but also because previous neurological research already showed that future buying behaviour and self-relevance are strongly interconnected. In short, Neurensics’ research has shown for the first time that keeping people busy with a brand via a game has great value to advertisers.

Unfortunately, many famous brands still turn towards traditional one-way advertising methods, such as television and radio commercials. Although gamification and serious games are becoming increasingly more used for various purposes by various companies, they are still not used that much for brand related purposes. While working at BrandNewGame, I learned that among many of the biggest brands there is still a largely negative connotation towards gaming in general. It would be wise for them to stop burying their heads in the sand, and look at the scientific facts that research firms such as Neurensics provide.

The world is changing. Constantly of course, but faster and faster so it seems, especially in my world – the (applied) games and gamification world. Where we were ashamed to call ourselves ‘gamer’ five years ago, geek-chic is becoming more and more an accepted ‘style’. Maybe also because of the silicon valley billionaires like the founders of Google, Facebook, YouTube and Whatsapp – the ‘second generation nerds’… with great ideas and great wealth. In Amsterdam it has been a trend to go to ‘dress-up’ parties for some time now and seeing this video below – I don’t think that ‘cosplay’ is far from the next ‘normal’ thing in life. Where maybe now it’s an anomaly to see a stranger in a morph suit… soon we will all walk like heroes….

As stated before and proven over-and-over again: reward and punishment do not work when trying to motivate people to change their behavior. MIT did research and Daniel Pink states it in his book Drive, check out the video below for the essence of his findings in ten minutes.

Research shows that if you wish to motivate people on a ‘higher’ level than just ‘do this or that’ you need to manage three pilars:

1. Autonomy (let me try myself)

2. Mastery (let me progress in what I do)

3. Purpose (give me a reason why I should do this). Every game has objectives and challenges, that make this one easy.

In my new book ‘Playing on the Job (due next year) I will describe what ‘doing’ actually is. In my opinion, to be able to DO something, we (as an individual) need to:

1. Want (not have to) : in organizational terms this is your ‘Vision’ (why do we do what we do)

2. Know how (as opposed to being ignorant or lacking knowledge) : in organizational terms this is your ‘Strategy’ or ‘Approach’ (how can we achieve our goals)

3. Can do (physically and mentally) – in organizational terms this is the execution of your sales proposition.

4. Dare (as opposed to fear to fail) – most managers lack this ability, but great leaders and great organizations thrive on this… Daring to be different, daring to take the lead, daring to try, daring to fail and daring to change will create experience. The more experienced you are, the more progress you make… This is why we challenge all our client’s employees through games to do things they normally would not do, just to try and fail… Learning by playing…

An important accelerator for ‘doing’ is context. I would never kill a chicken for no reason, but note that when I am starving, chances are I will… In games we usually use ‘time’ as a pressure to pursue progress… But of course scarcity is a good mechanic as well…

TNO – The leading Dutch research company recently published a report of their extensive research how serious games contribute to the effectiveness of ‘learning’ in an educational environment. The stunning conclusions can be read in the summary below.

“They conclude that play has a firm foundation in evolution and individual development. It not only drives the physical, social and cognitive development of animals and man, but also functions as a behavior generator that simulates the development of new types of behavior and skills.”

There are three main motivators in play: development of competence, the feeling and experience of ‘autonomy’ and self-realization. External conditions that help to increase motivation are feedback and rewards, meaningful goals (in the game) and rules that restrict us to achieve these goals. These elements are all present in my basic ‘Game Design Mechanics’ model that I published over a year ago and it’s nice to see that TNO has scientifically proven I was right 😉

Recently, I downloaded another ‘free to play’ game for iPad. I thought I would give it another try after being disappointed a lot of times, by poor gameplay or cheap ‘engagement’/payment -tricks. And also because I was looking for a decent tactical / strategy game.
So what do you do when you’re looking for a good game? You surf the web, read reviews and download a game developed by a team you know and a publisher that is known for ‘relatively’ great games, right? I know I loved ‘Cut the Rope’ recently and ‘Command & Conquer’ in the old days, so why not take a change with ‘Modern Command’ developed by Level Eight and published by Chillingo (Cut the Rope) and EA (C&C and many other titles).
You would expect to have a decent gameplay experience for at least a day without having to buy in-game stuff right? Wrong! Here’s how the game works.

To be able to progress in the game you need to fight off bad guys in different settings with different guns and munitions. Sounds good. In order to keep up with the increasing difficulty you need to do research and produce your guns, sound logical and excellent to keep the flow going. For this you need researchers, time and money. It all makes sense. But you also need STARS… There is only two ways to gain stars. One is by winning battles, but you need to develop your gear in order to be able to win battles. The other one is buying stars. So this is what we call a ‘catch 22’. You neeed to level up from soldier to sergeant to gain (1 start per level) stars, but you need about stars for every single usefull gameplay element. Whether it be ‘repairing your base’ or ‘replenishing your load out of defensive guns’ or to repair quicker, or to do research, even to buy some decent weaponry you need stars. And the only way to progress in the game – eventually – is to buy more stars….

Now this all would not have been a problem to me if I was able to buy stars for a ‘reasonable price’. You would expect that if you invest 30 dollars in a ‘iOs-game’ you probably bought everything you need. But that’s not the case in this game. You need to buy much more if you want to be able to win more battles with decent guns and amunition. Believe me – I don’t mind waiting for researching items, getting my weapons reloaded over-time, but PLEASE Chillingo and Electronic Arts – let the player choose to play for free (and give a decent play-experience in the game) or let me buy the game in full for 9,95 dollars. Instead of trying to rip off kids. I am an adult and I can pay for hundreds of stars, but that’s not going to improve my playing experience. It will only give me a bad taste in my mouth when I am done playing the game through… rethink the payment structure and do us a righteous proposal a.s.a.p. because I will make sure this message will spread throughout the web… Don’t get me wrong I would even be prepared to ‘pay-per-bullit’ as I proposed to Activision and EA in a previous post, but I don’t want to ‘pay-for-progress’…The hardest part is of course to determine a ‘fair price’ for players… but apparently EA has been giving it some thought – although players do not respond in a positive way (see the comments below).

Below some screenshots of the gameplay elements that I think are not right and righteous for players. If you want to know a good example how ‘F2P’ (free to play) works really well in my opinion: Download MMO Justice for iPad or 99Bricks by Weirbeard.

When Tetris meets Jenga… what do you get? Check out this awesome game ’99 Bricks: Wizard Academy’ made by Weirdbeard. Yep the same guys that developed those successful games for BelCompany and the two latest projects we did for Ziggo…

Check out the trailer below and download it soon from the iOs store…