This week’s reading got me thinking about some other games, or, more generally, mediums that I’ve played or used, for which the social aspect made them attractive in the first place. Therefore, I would like to focus my discussion on Principle 7.6: Value Participation (and design for it), as well as related aspects such as anonymity and judgment.
I got my first touchscreen phone at some point in 2012, on which I installed WeChat and had my first interactive experience through a module called “漂流瓶” (message in a bottle). It’s a feature where one can "pack" a short text or voice message into a bottle and "throw" it into the ocean, to be picked up by other users who choose to "pick up a bottle" at the same time, allowing a chat to start between them. With its animation and interactive features, message in a bottle attracted a large number of WeChat users, including curious 11-year-old me. I remember texting out some nonsense (something like "gugugaga" or "aaahahgeaygakwefyg," but in Chinese), reciting poems I learned at school, and even singing meme songs into the bottles and tossing them into the ocean of the unknown. Thinking back, it was quite amazing because, singing-wise, I was a perfectionist and usually wouldn’t sing unless I was in a choir, but the anonymity of this feature convinced me it was a safe enough place for me to sing on my own.
The example of Zephyr brought back this memory that had been buried for years. This feature is apparently no longer available on WeChat due to “suspicious” activities that arose from its anonymity – it wasn’t even that anonymous, given that you could see the user’s name and profile picture when picking up their bottle or starting a chat. Luckily, as a child, my common sense told me not to interact with replies that seemed suspicious, and most people were nice and patient with me.
My overall experience with the message in a bottle was positive, but I agree that platforms like this need careful regulation, especially when potentially involving non-adult users. It gave me, and perhaps many others at the time, an initial peek into connecting through a simple game-like interface.
The example of the Leaf Trombone reminded me of an interior design game I became addicted to three years ago, for which I believe the social aspect played a significant role.
It was a game called “置物少女” (The Designer Girl), where the player becomes a designer and selects the right furniture for quests to decorate a given space based on themes (e.g., minimalist, tropical, luxury). What made this game stand out from similar single-player games was its “daily challenge” given to all players. Instead of being graded by the game’s algorithm, the quality of these daily challenges was decided purely by popular votes – from real users!
The voting mechanism was surprisingly simple – we were shown two works at a time and clicked on the one that we thought best fit the theme, earning rewards for the first 100 votes each day. This system created a sustainable ecosystem, and I must admit it felt really good to see my design become one of the top-voted entries a few times – knowing that the appreciation came from real people on the other side of the screen!
Reflecting on these experiences, I came to believe that the value of participation, not just in games but in almost everything, is magical. This week’s reading reinforced the importance of considering social factors in my future projects, a consideration I hadn’t given serious thought to before.