Cunningham's Law
meta.wikimedia.org
meta.wikimedia.org
The best way to attract a player isn't by showing them someone playing well, it's by showing them someone playing very bad
Because these ads show demo play (usually of puzzles) where the player is making obviously bad decisions, and watching it is sort of like seeing a dozen objects in a row, but one of them is completely askew, and there's an urge to straighten in out a bit.
I only noticed this after seeing a bunch of ads recently for perhaps a dozen different games, and realized that I felt somewhat uneasy when they came on instead of simply impatient, and eventually. I tracked this feeling down to the crappy gameplay phenomenon. And once I realized that was the issue, the unease went away.
Further reflection made me realize I'd been much more tempted to download those games to "do it right" than other random games that didn't seem to use this tactic. It was actually when I broke and was about to download one that I had the realization, basically "this game looks awful and tedious, why am I about to download it?"
[1] You can block ads in mobile games with a proxy that takes less than a minute to set up, at least on Android.
For in-app, there's also the tech hurdle. Now that I know there's a method, I'm tech savvy enough to search it out an implement it, but there's going to be a much higher barrier than a click-to-install browser extension which means the average user (who won't know what a proxy is to begin with) won't really have access to this method.
That's… horrifying.
Why would you want to play a game that treats you like that? I mean, is it fun? I suppose some people must enjoy window-shopping, and I guess this is like that, but… I just can't imagine hoping to see an advert — it feels really manipulative and sinister.
Therefore, including what the parent and the others have already mentioned, I would like to suggest these perspectives:
• maybe not everyone is aware of the ease of setting up ad blocking as you described
• maybe not everyone is on a platform where this is feasible -> you provided an example on Android, which implicitly means it is different or more difficult on other platforms
• maybe someone is using a restricted device provided for work
• maybe experiencing what many others are experiencing is intended. e.g. due to work reasons as creakingstairs suggested, or due to personal fulfillment
• maybe someone values the time spent on writing "a whole post analyzing" the situation more than setting up any modification
• maybe not everyone or no one is exactly Homo economicus [1]
• etc.
Well, now you know.
> maybe not everyone is on a platform where this is feasible -> you provided an example on Android, which implicitly means it is different or more difficult on other platforms
This is just as doable on Iphone, I just Googled it. Though perhaps people aren't aware of the ease of Googling things as I described.
> maybe someone is using a restricted device provided for work
This is in the context of ads seen in mobile games, so...
> maybe experiencing what many others are experiencing is intended. e.g. due to work reasons as creakingstairs suggested, or due to personal fulfillment
You're accusing me of not empathizing with purely hypothetical possibilities which support your worldview, but you're not empathizing with what someone actually said. Does the word "uneasy" or the word "impatient" suggest "personal fulfillment" to you?
> maybe someone values the time spent on writing "a whole post analyzing" the situation more than setting up any modification
I'm not criticizing the choice to write the post--that I get. I'm criticizing the choice to view ads, which is inherently harmful to people's mental health.
> maybe not everyone or no one is exactly Homo economicus
I'd go so far as to say that nobody is Homo economicus--I'm not sure what I said that would lead you to believe I think that. I do believe that with a bit of knowledge, people can take steps to protect themselves from advertising.
In short, advertising has killed a lot more, and a lot better, than it has funded.
For a casual game a model like this would be a good way to get a decent amount of revenue from anyone that likes the game but may not be completionist or get bored with it at some point.
Then, in the rare instance that you have a hit game, you can further supplement it with paid DLC for extra levels that you have to own the base game for.
Not to mention optimal play and speedrunning are orthogonal concepts in general.
I guess the analogy is the old joke/meme about the O'Reilly Javascript book, and the JS The Good Parts book sat next to it.
The story of The Purple Beggar ( http://thecodelesscode.com/case/170 ) is about that phenomenon.
It works half the time to make me disengage - the other half of the time it's on HN or Telegram with friend, and I have a lot to say.
The importance of the content varies.
Cunningham's Law - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7364997 - March 2014 (107 comments)
Also, hasn't Ward disavowed coming up with it? Pretty sure I read that somewhere.
Edit: ah yes!
I never suggested asking questions by posting wrong answers. This is a misquote that disproves itself by propagating through the internet as Cunningham's Law.
(Submitted title was "Someone Is Wrong on the Internet".)
When I was growing up (back in the 1970's) my Dad insisted that my Mom do his shirts for him (back then all men had to wear a white shirt and tie to work). My Mom suggested that he should take them to the cleaners like everyone else does. But my Dad insisted that it would save money if she did them for him. She dutifully complied but "accidentally" put a red sock in the wash with them so they came out pink. Of course, in those days, a man wearing a pink shirt would be considered a "sissy" or whatever.
After that, my Dad did his work shirts himself a few times then realized it was a hassle and used the cleaners ever after that.
If you ask for help, you're usually asking into the void.
If you make an incorrect statement, you get repeatedly bashed with facts and research.
So if I must... I shall.
(Here, hug this big - handing her a koala).
Seems like the linked page and the parent page called “Laws” is misplaced and likely to come down.
I miss those old times when people were honestly wrong because lack of technical knowledge or understanding, instead of today's standards of fake news, misinformation and propaganda.
I suppose the best way to get a discussion of Cunningham's Law on the internet isn't to ask a question, it's to dupe people with misleading clickbait.
Terry Tao once famously published a result with non-mathematicians Denton et al., and was bombarded by responses (including my own first math paper) showing the result previously published in many different ways in several fields of math. Of all that Tao has accomplished as a Fields medalist and espoused “greatest living mathematician”, this became the most famous single moment of his career.
https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2019/08/13/eigenvectors-from-...
Actually I use it frequently. Usually I follow the script:
1) Hear someone saying something I agree with.
2) Walk there and ask: "Well, have you considered..." and present a counter-argument I think is reasonably strong.
3) Listen and learn objections, sometimes asking for clarifications, pointing weaknesses or going back to 2 until I'm convinced position is consistent or the person doesn't know what is talking about.
4) I say: "Thanks, I now understand your point. I actually didn't know or had not thought about it."
Maybe I got so used to talk to and live with people I disagree with that I expect others to be able to handle it just like I do.
In nature, you have an apple appear by the genetic expression of apple DNA. You don't have it by making stuff that claims to be an apple but forgot how to make apples.
https://www.grapplefruits.com/
Yes, I realize the irony of correcting someone in this thread ;-)
If you allow people to troll a help forum or bug tracker with low-grade content, you will soon be overrun with low-quality information, and that will make the search function in your forum useless, leading to a cascade of more low-quality questions.
I know reprimanding people for answering badly phrased questions or clear trolling is not something many people want to do because they want to be beginner friendly, but harsh penalties for deliberate disinformation should be the norm. Punishing people for falling for this would at least starve the trolls of oxygen.