I played the card game Blackjack (creator unknown), which is a classic casino game based on, almost purely, luck. The player starts with two cards (at least in the online version I played – not sure if this is standard procedure). The goal of the game is to get as close to 21 points as possible without going over 21. Each player plays against the dealer. So, after adding up the points of the first two cards (point values are determined by the card, i.e. a 5 is 5 points), the player can choose to “Hit,” meaning they want another card, or “Stay,” meaning they are satisfied with their hand. The only strategy in the game is deciding whether to Hit or Stay. But even this strategy is dictated by luck.
It is a really easy and quick game to play, which I think adds to the addictive quality. The barrier to playing “just one more round” is basically non-existent. This is important because I found that when I was doing well, I wanted to continue my streak with increasingly larger and larger bids until I lost a ton of money (not real money), and then I was compelled to keep playing to make up for my loss. It definitely feeds into this never ending cycle: when you’re doing well, you believe you can keep doing well and when you’re losing, you want to make up for the losses.
More strategy can come into play by calling a split (when you are dealt a pair and want to split them between two hands, requiring another wager) or double down (when you need to take an additional card, even if your current hand is advantageous, so you double your wager and take only 1 additional card). While these moves evoke a sense of strategy and “good game play” for a player, ultimately the outcome of a game is decided by the shuffle of the deck (i.e. what some would call luck). This is another component of the addictive quality of the game. You think that you can greatly improve and raise your chances of winning. In needing to practice, you have to spend more to play more. This further traps you into a cycle of gambling.
I am reminded of the Addiction by Design reading from class whenever I rack up 19-20 points but am one upped by the dealer. It feels as though I almost had victory, that if I was a slightly better player, I could indeed have won that round. The dominant forces of luck get pushed out of the frame. Instead, my near win speaks to my potential as a blackjack player.
The game falls into the zombie category from the Edwin Evans-Thirlwell reading in that the quick, successive gameplay creates a cyclical immersion. There is never an evolution of the game. Rather, it repeats itself until the players decide to quit, which as we’ve learned is quite difficult to do.
I think it’s quite obvious how this game feeds addictive behavior and would be especially enticing to those with gambling tendencies. There is never a reason to stop: either I’m winning and I want to win more or I’m losing and I need to make back my money. Of course, this is predatory and is why gambling is illegal in most states. It’s hard to compare the role of chance in an online game of blackjack to an in person game. With an in person game, the chance seems more “real,” while online it feels more fabricated because, of course, it is. You must engineer what you deem to be “chance” into the game. But, the role of chance is important in these addictive cycles where we believe with just a bit more luck and a bit more skill, we can come out on top.
