First, read this post about a really educational survey on understanding digital natives.
I personally got my first computer around the age of 9, and I’ve been leveraging communication technology in different forms ever since, often in manner of combinatory gameplay. I probably fit in somewhere in between the digital natives and the digital immigrants, but I can really relate to the lack of faith in the establishment and the societal elite and the notion that life is a game in wich you are trying to level up constantly.
If you read Swedish, read this post by me about why digital social networks are creating meaning and a framework for interpreting the world, and then read what psychography expert Mattias Östmar has to say about my article and his theory of different levels.
Being a former communications advisor to The Pirate Party in Sweden, I don’t see it as strange at all, that this techy anarcho integrity-loving sub-culture surfaced at this particular time in history amongst game players and geeks. Life is a game, and the game could be about beating the system for a greater good.
Or maybe a worthy cause just because it’s challenging and barely possible. War games, anyone?
Is this type of stimuli at all strange?
Anyone familiar with the concept of flow, won’t have a hard time grasping this. Games create perfect artificial environments for real flow; challenges not too big too overcome, not too small to be too easily overcomed.
Take this into account when watching Jane McGonigal discussing how game stimuli acctually can be turned into making this world into a better place:
And this goes beyond multiplayer online platform games as World of warcraft and social in-Facebook games like Farmville. Enterprises all over need to take these new realities into account: The era of the passive consumer is coming to an end, and it does so very quickly.
If you read Swedish, you can read Dagens Media recently on digital natives passing on traditional media, for one of thousands of examples on how the digital shift are affecting business and marketing. Because games have advantages over our analogue lives. They challenges us. Social is great, but social isn’t just hugging and conversations. Social is tribal hierarchy. And we are very consciuos about these things - we are rather heroes and adventurers in fake worlda than being bored in some real one.
But how close are the games to break into our reality? Listen to Jesse Schell discussing this:
Every generation has shaken their heads at the ideas of the younger generation. “Will everything turn into one big game now? Will we gather points at the breakfast table, really? How silly!”
Please don’t do that. Please - don’t be your parents.
If a gamer spend just as much time mastering games as he or she spends in school (watch the Jesse Schell talk at 19.30 min), then why not take the best from each world and combine it? Because the gamers are scary bulls-eye on one crucial point: Fun is better than boring. Now, let’s play.
Updated: Wisdom from Ogilvy - Why I’m frustrated with mainstream coverage of social games
Similar posts:
Bli medlem i PR of Sweden!
