For most animals (and historically for humans as well) play is form of practice/training for adult life.  Animals pretend to bite and scratch each other for fun, but it is direct training for survival in predatory world.  Children used to go fishing – a skill set that has a pretty direct application in that it is a means of obtaining food.  Likewise, children would play with dolls in part as preparation/familiarization for parenthood.

Sooo… what does that say about the games we play (or create)?

Either developers are either inadvertently training our audiences to solve problems with force, or (what I find to be more accurate and relevant) NOT training our audiences for anything they are more likely face in their lives.

The play that developers are currently offering isn’t relevant to our players’ lives.

Could we make interesting games with more general relevance?  Perhaps there could be some form of economic content that would help folks understand money and debt better in real life. Maybe there could be something that helps people to better understand how to work up the social hierarchy of the corporate ladder.

Could we make a game that prepares people for life in a cubicle?  Would we want to?

On the game that I am currently working on, the core mechanic is all about exploration, which seemed fine to me – as it does not have any particularly negative aspect to it.

But perhaps that is not good enough. The ‘message’ of the game as I intend it, would be the importance of exploration and experimentation. But then I wonder if it’s just an excuse and that I could be offering content that is more directly useful in people’s lives.

In a game there are elements of challenge and reward that drive you towards completing objectives. When a player learns and experiences success, they feel good – and look to repeat the experience with more challenge.

As a result, there is a learning curve in games. If there is nothing new to learn, the game becomes boring and is soon abandoned (examples: Tic Tac Toe, Candyland). Also if the game is too difficult learn, unappealing, or unclear (example: Minesweeper, or Playing Chess against a superior opponent), the game is often deserted in favor of something more accessible.

The games that are the most enjoyable are the ones that are perfectly suited for our ability level. Candyland and Tic Tac Toe are great games for younger children, but not challenging enough for most adults.

Our experiences in life operate in exactly the same manner. An appropriate challenge tends to keep us contented and happy.

When things come to us too easily we tend to get bored and move on. Most people have at some point had a job that was just plain boring. Usually that is a result of not having enough challenge within that atmosphere.

Likewise, when a challenge seems too large (or unappealing or unclear) – it feels inaccessible. We often walk away from the challenge without even trying to accomplish it.

Most people do not attempt to *earn $1,000,000 in one year’s time because it feels inaccessible. People either
Are totally unclear as to how to accomplish this,
Find it a too difficult of a task, or
Find it unappealing for some reason (perhaps citing that “money is the root of all evil”)

Shifting back to the game analogy - If you were playing Chess against someone who kept won every time, you could
1. Give up Chess altogether,
2. Continue to play Chess and find an opponent who is better matched to you, or
3. Learn strategies to becoming a better player.

If you had interest in Chess you would likely opt for BOTH #2 and #3. You would innately understand that you are able to become a better player with more training and experience. You accept that there will lose some games on your road to success. Eventually you may be able to outplay the nitwit who formerly crushed you every game.

Likewise with the $1,000,000 goal, you could:
1. Give up on the goal altogether.
2. Find a goal that is more accessible to your current situation.
3. Learn strategies to earn more income. If you are tenacious, you may find this ambitious goal achievable.

Unlike games, in life most people end up doing #1 and #2. In most cases #3 is also an option, but fear of failure, uncertainty of path or disinterest (like an internal contradiction of believing “money is the root of all evil”) keep us from continuing on the path to success.

When I am faced by a daunting task, I often find myself trying to think of it as a game. If it is too overwhelming to try right away, I read about it and try to understand the problem more clearly. I may try to complete a smaller objective as a learning experience.

So right now I am learning how to become financially independent.

I consider it the miniboss of this level.

*I am only using money because it is clear and easily measurable. The objective could be something far less tangible like: living a healthy lifestyle, keeping a positive attitude, or creating more time to spend with your family.