Hi peeps,

I was wondering if any of you know good examples of gamification where off- and online are blended in a nice way. For instance, when part of a process that you would like to gamify involves paper exercise or maybe just a stand up discussion, how can these things be integrated in a way that it blends with any online solution. And more important, in a way that the player actually wánts to make it online. How can we make crossing the on/off line borders fun? Im curious what you come up with.



Views: 432

Replies to This Discussion

Hi Jeroen,

I think what you are referring to is termed 'Trans-Realistic Experience' as described here by Shokrizade...

An interesting and controversial case is the Klout score - Klout uses data of all your interactions on social networks, mainly twitter, to score you on how well you put yourself forward and interact on social media.  This has controversially become a factor in job interviews and staff appraisal within some companies, particularly ones which rely on all their staff putting out a good image of a brand, or having responsibility for 'customer relationship management' (CRM).  The controversy around this is concerned with people feeling that their skills should be judged by more than simply a single number, especially when employment and job prospects are concerned.  It seems that when a layer of gamification is added to a system, it adds another layer of abstraction between the participant and the real objective of the system.   It raises questions of how to build more robust Trans-realistic experience which better reflects real world circumstances, and also poses the question that, while gamification is great, perhaps there are some mechanisms and interactions in society which are better left alone and not gamified in any way...



Hi Lawrence,

Thanks for your reply and the link to the article! Looks like something I will read on a quiet moment.

And your remarks about Klout does add an interesting aspect. If I interpret you correctly it sounds like am argument for integrating more offline components to gamification efforts in order to make them more realistic, present or come alive. It could indeed function as a check or control system to keep things real so to speak. The more the stuff that we keep count for online is actually linked to stuff in our daily experience, the more the game will feel as part of our reality. 

Another aspect of your remark makes me kind of happy. It seems that the people who really care about gamification tend to know and communicate the limits of gamification better than people who are just out to score with buzzwords or critics. When you value something you handle it with care. So thanks!



I can think of a circumstance in which on and offline interaction is blended in a nice and balanced way, and, it can be stretching the truth a fraction to say that capitalism is a game, which makes business interaction a very dry, real-time strategy game.

Even on Gameful, for example, there are groups, or guilds, which are seeking mercenaries, or programmers, or an audience, etc. But those collaborators that find investers, might hold an online conference laying out the basic details of a meeting online, where they exchange first impressions (profile info, char sheets, resumes) and chat brielfy (Rp a little, heh) then prepare to show up for the game of defining terms, or sign paperwork, or battle to the death, who knows. I'm not very business savy. When the bulk of interaction takes places online though, the medium definitely

Another related, yet almost opposite experience, would be larping. Players may already have most of their char info already online, or may share their char's stats with a coordinating ref or DM online, and have those attributes overlaid atop their natural physical abilities in RL. Players might roleplay a bit with people in their group to gain a better or more in depth feel of each other online to supplement the limited, more restrained reality of RL.

In each way, and most every aspect of gamification(as per our purposes) is supplementing or enhancing, or perhaps even just better defining real life events. These are just a couple example I could think of, and I'm not sure how to cross the borders of online/offline more fluidly, yet, but I'll definitely be following this discussion.

Thanks Kevin. It's nice how you describe two different angles which clarifies the playfield a bit so to speak. I think the on-offline gap will be smaller with future technology enabling more fluid transitions using speech and image recognition. Some easy wins would already be made by clever design. When I'm participating in a real life event which has design too (everything has), it would feel more integrated if I see that same design in the online counterpart, either before, during or after the event. A very easy example would be a business model canvas that is created offline, but is then translated online for further asynchronous collaboration.

A very easy step the other way around would be to make print friendly, game-like representations of the online content, so that it becomes an intuitive step to collaborate in real life again (which should have a clear explicited benefit).


Hi Jeroen,

I am trying to do this at www.worldchanging.me. It's not a good example of off and online blending (and possibly even a bad example of it if you look at the site on a mobile device (we are working on improving that). So I am very interested in this conversation too.

www.worldchanging.me  is a social enterprise that has been online since Feb 2014 so we are very much learning how people use the site. I think making it mobile friendly is our biggest job, but is there anything else we need to do to make the online/off line activities more integrated? I'd really love to hear people's thoughts on this.

I'll be watching this thread with interest and if you find out anything that can help us I'd love it if you could pass it on.

All the best


Hi Morag,

Very nice thanks for sharing. I will look into it and maybe we can brainstorm about the tool a bit more outside here (and maybe feedback our insights here). I'd be happy to share my thoughts.



Great Thanks Jeroen. I look forward to reading your thoughts :)

Hi Morag,

Just some first thoughts:

  • I think the kind of users that will be attracted to worldchanging are typically already intrinsically motivated and also have a high level of reflective cognitive power. To expand beyond this initial user group you could make the onboarding a bit easier:
    • Create a 'wizard' that helps new users to match what they already did in their lives with current quests and areas. This (self) discovery creates a mental and emotional connection between new users and the tool.
    • Help users find out what fuels their current motivation to improve and change the world. Help them give words and images to that intrinsic fuel (core values perhaps). That could help create identity and pride within the tool.
  • Maybe users can be rewarded not just for finishing quests but also coming up with important en relevant quests (that they are unable to perform themselves for some reason) or helping others in their quests (sorry if this is already possible).
  • Organize events where groups can meet and think of interesting quests and help each other make the first steps. You can also use an offline event to test any design of onboarding and identity creation wizards (love to help with that).
  • Look at Sparked (micro volunteering site) that is already very successful in motivating people give time and knowledge to non commercial parties.

Hope this helps en love to get feedback.

Cheers, Jeroen 

Hi Jeroen,

Many thanks for all of that feedback.

I think you are right about some kind of way to make finding those first quests easier. I had a look at sparked (found it at http://www.skillsforchange.com/ in the end?!) you are right they have a nice simple way of showing you the community and tasks that are there and waiting for you to join. Would love to talk more about how you could help with that.

We've got it in the pipeline for people to collaborate to create new quests - so on the same wavelength there.

We were also wondering whether people have time to do research for example a lot of the quest start off "x is an important issue go research it - you could start at this website" do you think people have time to do that?



Hi Morag,

I think people do. For me, the great success of Wikipedia proves that. A basic need for people is to be 'relevant', to contribute something to the world, to be recognised. An initiative where you ask people to volunteer could use a couple of things: a goal that is crystal clear (what is being asked of me), a call-to-action that is clear, easy and relevant to the contributor and it helps to make it personal, e.g. see the face or name of the person who I'm helping (this will trigger more emotional and social motivations).

And I think offline prototyping of what you want to do online can really help to get in touch what kind of elements should be in place to make it work. And it's a great way to create an initial group of enthousiasts.

Hope this helps :)




Welcome Gameful Monster!

Welcome to Gameful, which we are happy to report is officially a partner with Games for Change!

After you signup, here's what you can do to get started:

  • Explore the groups. Find one that interests you? Join it! Want to invite friends and find new allies? Create your own group.
  • Looking for an opportunity? Looking for collaborators? Check out the classifieds. By the way, here is a Gameful opportunity
  • Check the webinars and learn more about what we love the most
  • Invite friends and group members from Gameful 1.0 to join this shiny new one
  • Make a blog post
  • Friend and talk to the Mayor, or chat with anyone online (lower right)
  • Stay tuned for Gameful challenges, where you can design your own social impact game!
  • Take off your shoes and enjoy :)

Thanks everyone!


© 2023   Created by Mod.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service