I played Luigi’s Picture Poker, which was developed by Nintendo and is a minigame in Super Mario 64 DS and in New Super Mario Bros. The platforms of these games include the DS, Wii U, and Nintendo Switch. I played a version adapted for the browser but I also played the game before on my DS! The target audience of the game is claimed to be everyone since its ESRB rating is E. However, I think the potentially addictive nature of poker and the notion of betting coins should make the target audience a bit older, and maybe inadvertently does because young children will probably not be able to understand the game enough to enjoy it (I know 5-year old me didn’t).
This game may put people at risk for addiction by using simple mechanics that shift attention to the output randomness and false agency to create enchanting uncertainty that leaves players wanting more. I think this game is different from other games that use chance/probability because its target audience is everyone, including young kids, which makes its mechanics of chance potentially more harmful. I think it is morally permissible to use chance in games when it is age-appropriate and does not have real world allusions.
[immediate transition from YOU WIN or YOU LOSE to next round]
Luigi’s Picture Poker uses simple traditional game mechanics to create a greater emphasis on the output randomness of poker. This is classified as output randomness because the user initiates some event (playing hand) that the system randomizes (their/Luigi’s cards). The game consists of multiple short rounds as a part of its procedure. An interesting design choice that the game employs is the automatic transition between the results of the round (win/lose) and the next round. There is no user-input intermediary between the rounds, which makes it easy for the user to lose autonomy and become completely engulfed in the game. This mechanic creates a fast paced dynamic that gives the illusion that the player is not spending as much time on the game as they really are. This exploits the user’s competitive nature, creating a type of fun that can be addicting. The user is looped into competing with the system, which from the Addiction by Design article, we know is a random number generator (RNG) in reality, but the game creates a space where the player feels they have some agency by giving the player a “retry” round rapidly. Similar to how TikTok exploits user’s lazy tendencies to make it more difficult (e.g. require more taps) to leave the app than to continue scrolling (same repetitive motion), the cycling of rounds in this game makes it easier to continue rather than quit. This simple mechanic may put people at risk for addiction and could be mediated by a feature such as TikTok’s “take a break from scrolling”.
I think the target audience of this game distinguishes it from other games, and this makes its design decisions hold greater impact. Because children can play this game, it begs the question of whether or not this might prime them to develop a gambling addiction in the future. A particularly problematic point I find is that this is a minigame that parents may not know is a part of a larger game when they are purchasing it for their children. According to this article in UConn Health, parents should maintain an open dialogue with their children about gambling and its risks when exposing them to it. However, because Luigi’s Picture Poker is deemphasized in the larger Super Mario game, it might go unnoticed by parents and expose children regardless. I think it is morally permissible to use chance in games that target an older age range (e.g. maybe teens and up) or make parents and guardians aware of the potential addictive features of the game.
