Content uploaded by Hilda Hadan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Hilda Hadan on Aug 09, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Computer-based Deceptive Game Design in Commercial Virtual
Reality Games: A Preliminary Investigation
Hilda Hadan
hhadan@uwaterloo.ca
Stratford School of Interaction Design
and Business, University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Canada
Leah Zhang-Kennedy
lzhangke@uwaterloo.ca
Stratford School of Interaction Design
and Business, University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Canada
Lennart E. Nacke
lennart.nacke@acm.org
Stratford School of Interaction Design
and Business, University of Waterloo
Waterloo, Canada
Abstract
As Virtual Reality (VR) games become more popular, it is crucial
to understand how deceptive game design patterns manifest and
impact player experiences in this emerging medium. Our study
sheds light on the presence and eects of manipulative design tech-
niques in commercial VR games compared to a traditional computer
game. We conducted an autoethnography study and developed a
VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide based on a critical
literature review. Using our guide, we compared how deceptive
patterns in a popular computer game are dierent from two com-
mercial VR titles. While VR’s technological constraints, such as
battery life and limited temporal manipulation, VR’s unique sen-
sory immersion amplied the impact of emotional and sensory
deception. Current VR games showed similar but evolved forms
of deceptive design compared to the computer game. We forecast
more sophisticated player manipulation as VR technology advances.
Our ndings contribute to a better understanding of how deceptive
game design persists and escalates in VR. We highlight the urgent
need to develop ethical design guidelines for the rapidly advancing
VR games industry.
CCS Concepts
•Human-centered computing
→
Empirical studies in HCI;
Virtual reality;•Software and its engineering
→
Interactive
games;•Applied computing →Computer games.
Keywords
Deceptive Design, Dark Pattern, Virtual Reality, Player Experience,
Autoethnography
ACM Reference Format:
Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, and Lennart E. Nacke. 2024. Computer-
based Deceptive Game Design in Commercial Virtual Reality Games: A
Preliminary Investigation. In Companion Proceedings of the Annual Sympo-
sium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY Companion ’24),
October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 15 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3665463.3678820
1 Introduction
Deceptive game design has been a growing area of concern for
player researchers. Literature has identied various deceptive game
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-
ShareAlike International 4.0 License.
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
©2024 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).
ACM ISBN 979-8-4007-0692-9/24/10
https://doi.org/10.1145/3665463.3678820
design patterns used in mobile and computer-based games to manip-
ulate player behaviour for the benet of game developers and pub-
lishers (e.g., [
11
,
15
,
29
,
43
]). These practices designed to manipulate
player engagement and monetization through psychological and
emotional tactics can escalate frustration and confusion [
18
,
37
,
59
],
and damage game publisher reputations [
27
]. Deceptive design re-
search has primarily focused on games on traditional 2D interfaces
(e.g., [
15
,
29
,
59
]). However, commercially available Virtual Reality
(VR) technology opens a new frontier for immersive manipulative
tactics. Spatial and realistic displays in VR could amplify the impact
and subtlety of deceptive designs [
25
,
32
], impairing users’ ability
to critically evaluate content [
9
]. As commercial game development
shifts to VR platforms, understanding how deceptive practices adapt
to immersive technology is paramount.
Although recent studies have explored how deceptive design
could work in immersive environments, these explorations have
mainly focused on hypothetical scenarios from literature, experts
predictions, and controlled laboratory experiments (e.g., [
25
,
32
,
54
]). These studies focused broadly on XR technology and neglected
the specic contextual factors of VR games. The impact of deceptive
design on players within immersive VR environments remains
largely unexplored. Our research addresses this gap by investigating
deceptive design patterns in commercially available VR games, and
comparing them to traditional game implementations. We analyze
how these patterns evolve across modalities, with a focus on their
potential impact in VR and on player experience. Our overarching
Research Questions (RQs) are:
RQ1:
What deceptive design patterns are currently implemented
in commercial VR games?
RQ2:
How do deceptive game designs vary in their manifestations
in VR games and PC games?
To address these RQs, we are conducting a series of analyses,
including a literature synthesis to construct a VR Deceptive Game
Design Assessment Guide (referred to as the Assessment Guide) that
comprehensively captures deceptive design patterns in VR games.
We are also conducting autoethnography research to identify these
patterns in various VR games and to compare new manifestations
in VR to those in recent PC games. In this work-in-progress (WIP),
we report the rst stage of our research, which includes an initial
version of the Assessment Guide synthesized from the literature, a
preliminary seven-week autoethnography study, and a comparative
analysis of deceptive design patterns identied in two commercial
VR games (see Figure 1, left and center): Moss: Book II (Moss2), a
VR puzzle adventure game; and Beat Saber, a VR rhythm game.
These games are selected because of their critical acclaim in the VR
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
player community and signicant player bases
1
. We chose a third
cross-platform computer game, Overwatch2 (OW2), a rst-person
team-based shooter (see Figure 1, right) as an exemplar PC game
to compare to VR games because our previous research [
27
] had
identied various deceptive game design mechanisms in OW2 and
critical player reviews
2
. While deceptive design varies across game
types, genres, and mechanics, we have focused on examining and
contrasting these patterns in a select sample of exemplary games in
our preliminary investigation presented in this WIP. This approach
allows us to explore how these patterns uniquely manifest and
impact VR players more than traditional computer games.
The lead researcher—experienced in deceptive design research
and VR gaming applications—extensively played OW2 (20 hours
in 6 days), followed by Moss2 (8 hours in 9 days) then Beat Saber
(18 hours in 9 days) to systematically document detailed diary en-
tries that reect on moments where game mechanics appeared to
use deceptive patterns and produce manipulative experiences. The
length of play between the three games is determined by the princi-
ple of saturation when no new deceptive design patterns emerged
during gameplay. The autoethnographic approach allowed us to ac-
tively engage as players and experience deceptive design rst-hand,
capture player frustrations and excitements, and systematically
document these experiences over time [
51
]. Next, we developed an
initial version of the VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide
across eight themes that consist of 71 distinct deceptive designs
from the literature to deductively analyze diary entries (see Ta-
ble 2). This Assessment Guide was constructed by synthesizing
existing classications (e.g., [
22
,
25
,
30
,
59
]) that comprehensively
captured problematic design practices from the academic and regu-
latory space [
22
], as well as from games [
59
], immersive environ-
ments [25], and player perspectives [30].
Our preliminary research outcomes make three contributions:
First, we present a VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide
that builds on established classications to serve as a foundation
for analyzing deceptive design in VR games, and informing future
researchers, VR designers, and policymakers by providing a stan-
dardized tool for identifying and categorizing deceptive tactics in
VR games. Second, our research uses an autoethnography method to
provide valuable insights into players’ lived experiences from a rst-
person perspective. Third, our preliminary investigation revealed
various manifestations of deceptive designs across modalities. Our
ndings suggest that, although the limitations of VR device battery
life clashed with tactics driving extensive playtime, VR’s unique fea-
tures amplied the impact of emotional and sensory manipulations
and presented a potential for more sophisticated manipulation in
future VR games.
1
As of May 10, 2024, Beat Saber has about 862,000 active players; Moss Book: II has
been played by 33,000 players. See https://playtracker.net/insight/game/5.
2
As of May 4, 2024, OW2 holds the sixth position on the list of worst games on Steam
with 82% of negative reviews, resulted in an overall rating of “overwhelmingly nega-
tive”.Currently, OW2 See: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2357570/Overwatch_2/
and https://steam250.com/bottom100
2 Related Work and How It Informed Our
Research
2.1 Deceptive Design in Games and Immersive
Environment and The Role of Player
Perception
Deceptive design that impairs users’ ability to make informed deci-
sions [
6
,
13
,
21
,
39
], is widely used on websites [
19
,
24
,
38
], mobile
apps [
15
,
24
,
34
], and social networks [
41
,
42
]. In games, deceptive
designs can benet game developers but negatively impact player
experiences [
59
]. The literature has classied deceptive designs
for psychological manipulation [
59
], attention capture [
43
], and
extended playtime and money spending [
11
,
12
,
29
,
59
]. Studies on
3D interaction [
23
,
30
] and Extended Reality (XR)
3
literature [
25
]
indicate that XR’s unique features, such as spatial displays, multi-
modality and realistic experiences, real-world sensory blocking,
and sensor data, create new opportunities for deceptive design that
amplies user manipulation [
25
,
32
]. Gray et al
. [22]
synthesized
a comprehensive ontology of 64 deceptive designs from widely
adopted regulatory and academic taxonomies.
Deceptive designs exploit internal human rationality and cogni-
tive limitations and external social inuence to manipulate human
decision-making [
53
,
56
,
58
]. The eectiveness of deceptive design
varies based on users’ literacy [
11
,
35
,
59
], encounter frequency, per-
ceived trustworthiness, level of frustration, misleading behaviour
and UI appearance [
36
]. Player perceptions also play a role, with
some feeling “interrupted” or questioning game fairness, while oth-
ers might appreciate the guidance [
15
–
17
,
59
] or accept it due to
service dependency [
37
]. Given this complexity, literature suggests
that user-centred approaches are necessary for identifying design
practices that are not straightly unethical [18, 20, 27].
In our preliminary investigation, we built upon Gray et al
. [22]
’s
comprehensive ontology which was grounded in foundational liter-
ature and taxonomies in the eld (e.g., [
5
,
19
,
39
]). We further incor-
porated insights from Zagal et al
. [59]
on game-specic and Hadan
et al
. [25]
on XR-specic deceptive designs, and King et al
. [30]
on player perception in 3D interfaces. While Zagal et al
. [59]
’s
framework lacked empirical data, it remains a “fruitful” starting
point for game-focused deceptive design research [
10
, p. 2]. Our
autoethnography methodology addresses this gap and follows the
recommendations by incorporating player experiences and percep-
tions from a rst-person perspective. We present how these studies
informed our process of developing our VR Deceptive Game Design
Assessment Guide in subsection 3.2.
2.2 Autoethnography as a Methodology in
Games Research
Autoethnography is a common HCI methodology where designers
reect on their extended use of a system to understand its nature
and rene its design directions (e.g., [
2
,
47
,
51
]). In the study of
video games, the autoethnography method has been used to study
game design elements that enhanced player motivation and engage-
ment [
49
,
50
], shaped gendered experiences [
44
], and disrupted play-
ers in an AR game [
33
]. This method situates researchers as both the
3
Extended Reality (XR) describes immersive technologies such as Virtual Reality (VR),
Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR).
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
“protagonist” and observer and enables a rst-person engagement
and understanding of the game environment [
51
]. Other studies
have also used this method to study the cultural and social dynam-
ics, such as in-game as well as out-of-the game love aairs [
55
],
collaborative play [
45
], gameplay learning with peers [
46
], players’
perception of cheating [
4
], and the emergence of toxic in-game
behaviour [
31
]. However, to date, and to our knowledge, only one
autoethnographic study has been conducted to investigate the im-
pact of deceptive game design on players in computer-based games
(i.e., [29]).
Literature suggests that XR technology can employ deceptive
designs that occur frequently or even constantly over extended
periods, making them less noticeable to users [
32
], especially when
XR devices are used constantly throughout people’s daily lives [
25
].
Therefore, we argue that autoethnography methodology can be
an eective tool in analyzing such deceptive designs in VR games.
This method allows researchers to actively engage with the game
as players, gain rst-hand experience with deceptive game designs
players’ frustrations and excitements, and systematically document
their experiences over time [
51
]. In addition, autoethnography en-
courages critical self-reection by requiring researchers to question
their interpretations and challenge their assumptions [1, 51]. This
introspective process enables nuanced examinations of deceptive
game design. The unique combination of subjective player expe-
rience and critical researcher analysis makes autoethnography an
ideal methodology for answering our research questions.
3 Methodology
To investigate and contrast the manifestation of computer decep-
tive game design in commercially available VR games, we used an
autoethnography methodology for data collection and a deductive
reexive thematic data analysis.
3.1 Data Collection and Documentation
The lead researcher with expertise in deceptive design, games, and
VR played and was fully immersed in all three games. Through a
game design mechanics analysis and an analysis of player expe-
rience from online communities [
27
], the researcher played the
games from a player’s perspective and compiled six diary entries
and video-recorded 20 hours of gameplay for OW2 over six days
until no new game design mechanics were observed and no new
thoughts and perceptions emerged. Similarly, Moss2 was played at
length and nished over nine days, totaling eight hours of game-
play and nine diary entries. Beat Saber was played in single-player
mode over 10 days with 18 hours of gameplay total, and generated
nine diary entries. All VR gameplay sessions were recorded using a
Meta Quest3 headset screen-recording function. The 24 systematic
diary entries were maintained on Miro
4
to document the game-
play experience and observations of potentially deceptive designs
encountered, complemented by screenshots from video-recorded
gameplay sessions. The diary entries and video recordings were
then uploaded to Dovetail5for thematic analysis.
4Miro—the Virtual Workspace for Innovation. https://miro.com/
5Dovetail—Thematic Analysis Software.https://dovetail.com/
3.2 VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment
Guide Development
To ensure consistency in our process of identifying deceptive design
in VR games, we developed a VR Deceptive Game Design Assess-
ment Guide, inspired by Gunawan et al
. [24]
’s deductive codebook
method for comparing deceptive design in mobile and web-based
applications. We adopted Gray et al
. [22]
’s ontology of deceptive
designs as our starting point as it is the most recent and com-
prehensive framework at the time of our study grounded in the
foundational literature in the eld (e.g., Brignull
[5]
, Gray et al
.
[19]
, Mathur et al
. [39]
). However, the ontology was not tailored to
deceptive design in the VR context. Therefore, we augmented our
analysis with additional frameworks that focus on VR and games
from Hadan et al
. [25]
, King et al
. [30]
, and Zagal et al
. [59]
due
to their coverage in VR-specic [
25
] and game-specic [
30
,
59
]
deceptive designs, and considerations for player perception in 3D
interfaces [
30
]. To minimize complexity where appropriate, we
merged variances of deceptive designs that shared similarities in
their denition and characteristics. Overall, our Assessment Guide
contained eight synthesized themes and 71 distinct deceptive design
patterns, as summarized in Table 2 in the Appendix.
3.3 Data Analysis
Given the autoethnography nature of the study, the lead researcher
analyzed data using deductive reective thematic analysis method [
8
].
The method preserves the personal and reexive nature of the
research [
14
,
51
,
57
] while enabling a “theoretically-informed ex-
ploration of qualitative data” [
8
, p. 260–263]. Prior studies have
extensively used this method to analyze autoethnographic data
(e.g., [
14
,
33
,
57
]). To oer transparency in our ndings and inter-
pretations [
51
], we provide a Reexivity Statement in Appendix B
that follows the recommendations for qualitative research [
40
,
52
].
In the early exploratory stage of our research, we reviewed our
initial OW2 diary entries. We noticed trends repeatedly centred
around the manifestations of deceptive game design and contexts in
which they presented and the potential impacts on the game experi-
ence. To systematically organize the information hence forward, we
subsequently segmented the diary entries into (1) descriptions of
the lead researcher’s experience, reactions, thoughts, and feelings
upon encountering particular game elements, and (2) reections
on possible presence of deceptive game design and its context. An
example diary entry for Moss2 gameplay is included in Appendix A.
Our main analysis was conducted in three stages. In the rst
stage, the lead researcher reviewed the data based on our VR De-
ceptive Game Design Assessment Guide (see subsection 3.2), with
special attention to potential deceptive designs. In the second stage,
the diary entries and screenshots from video gameplay recordings
were deductively coded based on the Assessment Guide. We used an
iterative coding process in which the analysis was constantly chal-
lenged and rened on the basis of the researcher’s critical thoughts
and expertise in deceptive design to interpret gameplay experiences.
In the third stage, our research team collectively discussed the re-
sults to identify any potentially overlooked aspects of the data. In
this WIP, we discuss the 15 patterns identied in Beat Saber, and
ve patterns identied in Moss2, and contrast them with the 17
deceptive game design patterns identied in OW2 (see Table 1).
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
Table 1: This table presents deceptive design patterns we identied in Overwatch2 (OW2) [
27
], Beat Saber (BS), and Moss Book: II
(Moss2). See Appendix C for specic game mechanics associated with each deceptive pattern and corresponding synthesized
diary entries.
Theme/Subtheme Code Description OW2 BS Moss2
Theme 1: Sneaking
Hiding Information Reference Pricing Include a price-inated item or a poorer-quality item with same price, make a current price seem ideal. ✓- -
Theme 2: Obstruction
Creating Barriers Price Comparison Prevention Hide information or block copying/pasting, make it dicult to compare prices across vendors. - ✓-
Intermediate Currencies Hide the real price behind a virtual currency, make informed purchase decisions dicult. ✓- -
Theme 3: Social Engineering
Social Proof Parasocial Pressure Exploit users’ trust in celebrities or other entities with inauthentic endorsements to inuence decisions. - ✓-
Urgency Countdown Timers Create urgency with fake countdown timers. ✓- -
Limited Time Message Create urgency with fake limited-time oers. - ✓-
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) Exploit anxiety about missing exciting or valuable experiences. ✓- -
Personalization Social Obligation Create a sense of obligation to avoid letting down friends in the game or to return a favor. ✓- -
Competition Foster envy and competitions between players. ✓ ✓ -
Theme 4: Interface Interference
Manipulating Choice Architecture False Hierarchy Prioritize certain options, make it dicult to compare choices. ✓ ✓ -
Visual Prominence Highlight distracting elements, causing users to forget or lose focus on their initial intent. - ✓-
Bundling Group products at a “special” price and hide individual costs. ✓ ✓ -
Emotional or Sensory Manipulation Adorable Design Exploit user preference for adorable and appealing design, foster trust in NPCs* and obscure risks. ✓ ✓ ✓
NPC/Narrative Manipulation Exploit self-satisfaction, sympathy, or reverse psychology to cause unintended actions. - - ✓
Trick Questions Use confusing wording or double negatives to manipulate users’ choices. - ✓-
Hidden Information Obscure crucial details or disguising them as unimportant. - ✓ ✓
Theme 5: Distortion
- - -
Theme 6: Forced Action
Forced Communication or Disclosure Privacy Zuckering Trick users into thinking it’s essential for the service, lead to overshare personal data. - ✓-
Gamication Pay-to-play Restricts core functionalities or progress unless players pay to bypass limitations. ✓ ✓ -
Power Creep Diminish obtained item values over time to drive new purchase. - ✓-
Grinding Force users into repetitive tasks to access features. ✓- -
Can’t Pause or Save Force users to continue playing before they can save progress. - - ✓
Playing by Appointment Force players to adhere to the game’s schedule. ✓- -
Sunk Cost Fallacy Endowed Value Trap users with their previous investment (time, money, eort). ✓ ✓ -
Endowed Progress Exploit users’ aversion to incompleted progression. ✓- -
Waste Aversion Set small dierences between in-game currency and item costs, lead to additional currency purchases. ✓- -
Theme 7: Facilitation
Innite Treadmill Continually expand the game (e.g., new levels, new content) so it never ends. ✓- -
Theme 8: Other
Complete the Collection Exploit users’ desires of completing game item collections. ✓ ✓ ✓
*NPC = Non-Player Character. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
3.4 Ethical Considerations and Limitations
Our research followed the research ethics guidelines throughout our
processes [
7
]. Prior to conducting the autoethnographic diary data
collection, we have consulted our institution’s ethical review board
(REB) and ensure that it is not subject to the ethical review process.
While we decided to study single-player mode in Beat Saber to
avoid involving others without consent, for OW2 that unavoidably
needs the involvement of other players, we concentrated on the
single-player journey and excluded information about other players
in our analysis to maintain their privacy.
Our preliminary analysis did not examine deceptive game de-
signs that rely on social relationships due to privacy and ethical
considerations regarding other players. Although we transparently
provided the lead researcher’s background and its potential inu-
ence on our ndings in our autoethnographic study through a
reexivity statement (see Appendix B), we acknowledge that our
ndings may not represent a broader player population with varied
deceptive design literacy and perceptions [
11
,
17
,
35
,
59
]. Our WIP
results examined two VR games and a PC game, which may not
cover all the deceptive design patterns across the modalities. How-
ever, we are condent that the autoethnographic approach allowed
us to experience a wide variety of deceptive tactics present in VR
games.
4 Findings
This section presents our preliminary ndings of deceptive designs
in Moss2 and Beat Saber, and contrasts their manifestations in VR
with the PC game OW2. For clarity, in the following sections, we
denote game mechanics in monospace font (e.g.,
Song Gallery
), use
italics text for deceptive design (e.g., Bundling) and use quoted italics
text for the in-game descriptions. We present patterns identied
from three games in Table 1 and provide descriptions of specic
game mechanics from VR games in Table 5 and OW2 in Table 4 in
Appendix with synthesized diary entries.
4.1 RQ1: What deceptive design patterns are
currently implemented in commercial VR
games?
We found that Moss2 and Beat Saber shared similarities in decep-
tive design patterns (see Table 1). Both games used emotional and
sensory manipulation (e.g., Adorable Design) with lovable character
designs, eye-catching visuals, and vibrant map environments to
create a strong emotional attachment to the game world, potentially
leading to longer play sessions and in-game purchases that players
may not have otherwise considered. Both games also used Hidden
Information tactics through the fully immersive nature of VR and
intense and deeply engaging gameplay. In Beat Saber, the absence
of a progress bar could be frustrating for players, as they have to
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
VR
VR
Figure 1: Left: sample gameplay moment in Moss2, a VR puzzle adventure game where players guide a tiny mouse character
through a fantastical world. Quill, the main character, gives the player a full-body hug, with her tiny arms wrapped tightly
around the controller pointers. Center: sample gameplay moment in Beat Saber, a VR rhythm-based block-slashing game, when
players are required to physically move left, right or squat down to avoid oncoming obstacles (semi-transparent walls). Right:
sample gameplay moment in OW2, a rst-person team-based shooter game, when players is using ability to heal (restore) the
health of allies at the front by holding down the right-click on mouse.
replay the entire song after failing and cannot locate specic parts
they fail. The intensity of gameplay could lead to players lose track
of time and unintentionally extend the duration of play. In Moss2
a progress indicator (
Stained Glass Windows
) is subtly integrated
into the background map environment. This could cause players to
completely miss its existence. As a result, players can feel lost in the
engaging storyline and interactive gameplay, and continuously play
without a sense of progress. Moreover, Beat Saber and Moss2 use
Complete the Collection to fuel players’ desire for completion. For
instance, in Beat Saber, acquiring all songs in the player’s favourite
music packs could lead to unintentional overspending of money.
Similarly, Moss2 has collectible scrolls and character-enhancing
armors. While the process of discovering these items by repeatedly
revisiting completed maps can produce a sense of achievement
and a thorough game experience, it could also lead to extensive
playtime beyond what is necessary to enjoy the core game.
Beyond game-specic deceptive designs, we found that Beat
Saber’s
Song Purchase System
incorporated Price Comparison Pre-
vention that inhibits players from comparing the prices of songs and
music packs, Limited Time Message and Bundling that encourage
impulse purchases, Visual Prominence that attracts players’ atten-
tion to “buy music pack” entirely instead of buying an individual
song, and Privacy Zuckering that requires players’ payment infor-
mation before displaying songs’ and music packs’ prices. On the
other hand, Moss2 has largely used deceptive game design patterns
that encourage extended playtime and emotional investment from
players, including NPC/Narrative Manipulation that attracts players
with its VR-unique interactive elements, such as allowing players
to “pet,” “hug,” “high-ve” with main characters (see Figure 1) and
protect them in battles. While VR technology’s limitations prevent
a truly tactile experience, the animation of “hugging” the player’s
controller pointers eectively conveys the warmth and gratitude.
The main character’s sign language communication added another
layer of emotional bond and make players feel like they are a part
of the adventure and not just outside observers. Interestingly, while
Moss2 incorporated Can’t Pause or Save tactic to keep players con-
tinuously play until designated save points, this tactic clashed with
the limited VR headset battery life and can frustrate players with
signicant loss of progress due to a dead battery. We include the
detailed descriptions of patterns identied from VR games, with
synthesized diary entries, in Appendix Table 5.
4.2 RQ2: How do deceptive game designs vary
in their manifestations in VR games and PC
games?
As demonstrated in Table 1, while OW2,Beat Saber, and Moss2 all
incorporated Adorable Design and Complete the Collection, these de-
ceptive design patterns in OW2 (e.g., skins with special visual eects,
cute weapon decorations) are restricted to the 2D screen. Players
interact with them using a mouse, keyboard, or controller, resulting
in a clear separation between the player and the game world. On
the other hand, Beat Saber and Moss2 enable a more dynamic and
immersive interaction with VR-unique features. For instance, in
Moss2, the VR controllers provide haptic feedback which, coupled
with spatial 3D visuals, creates a deeper sense of engagement. The
VR environment also allows players to physically lean forward and
peer around corners or behind walls to search for strategic paths
for the characters. The game also oers a more engaging way of
discovering collectibles compared to collecting badges and achieve-
ment messages on OW2’s 2D interfaces. While Beat Saber places
the player in a rst-person perspective similar to OW2, unlike the
static screen of OW2, players in Beat Saber have a full 360-degree
game environment. Players need to not only slash the target blocks
but also physically move their body, arms, and legs to avoid virtual
obstacles and turn around to reach blocks from dierent directions
(see Figure 1). This full body involvement, combined with the rst-
person perspective, creates a deeper sense of presence and engaging
experience that traditional 2D games cannot easily replicate.
However, many deceptive design patterns embedded in the game
mechanics also have no dierence between VR and traditional
PC games. For example, both OW2 and Beat Saber used Limited
Time Message,Countdown Timer,Bundling, and Pay-to-play, and
Competition. The commonalities are because many deceptive design
patterns remain heavily reliant on 2D interfaces even within VR’s
3D environments, and therefore, have no signicant variations
across modalities.
Lastly, while Beat Saber and Moss2 used NPC/Narrative Manip-
ulation,Trick Questions, and Power Creep and Can’t Pause or Save
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
that did not exist in OW2, we believe it is due to dierences in
game genre rather than the game platform. We include a detailed
descriptions of patterns identied from OW2, with synthesized
diary entries, in Appendix Table 4.
5 Discussion and Next Steps
Although our research is ongoing, we made signicant progress in
developing a VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide tailored to
evaluating deceptive design in VR games by synthesizing previous
work [
22
,
25
,
30
,
59
]. Our preliminary Assessment Guide can serve as
a structured foundation for future research and VR design to iden-
tify new deceptive practices, analyze player impact, and develop
ethical VR game design guidelines. Specically, researchers can
use this Assessment Guide to identify new deceptive practices, ana-
lyze their impact on players, and develop ethical design guidelines
for VR games. VR developers can better understand the dierent
categories of deceptive design and impacts on VR players, create
more ethical and player-centric VR experiences, and avoid those
causing player frustration, confusion, and pressure in their design.
The Assessment Guide can also inform regulations or guidelines
that promote responsible VR design practices to ensure VR player
protection from potentially manipulative tactics in games.
Our results highlight that the negative eects of some VR de-
ceptive game design patterns like Can’t Pause or Save that force
players to engage continuously have only been limited due to hard-
ware constraints of the technology like battery life. VR intensies
player engagement and immersion, and therefore, have the poten-
tial to amplify the impacts of deceptive game designs that capitalize
on players’ emotional and sensory desires (e.g., Adorable Design,
Competition, and Complete the Collection). Their existence cautions
against the potential for more sophisticated player manipulations
in future games. For instance, we can easily foresee that future VR
games with Adorable Design and NPC/Narrative Manipulation could
be extended to NPC conversations that are framed with NPC’s invet-
erate longing [
3
] to pressure players into in-game purchases (like
in [
30
]), longer playtime, or guilt-trip players. Such emotional and
sensory manipulations can cause greater harm to players compared
to those in PC games. Similarly, games like Beat Saber could use
Perception Hacking to trick players restart repetitively by causing
unintentional slash on the wrong blocks, or secretly inating the
price of songs in-game with Price Comparison Prevention by tak-
ing advantage that players may not bother to take o headset to
look up the price on the website (barrier between virtual and real-
ity [
32
]). While we found that many deceptive design patterns, such
as Pay-to-play and Countdown Timer, remain heavily reliant on 2D
interfaces, they have the potential to evolve into 3D formats. For
instance, Pay-to-play in VR games could appear as virtual tollbooths
at level entrances, while Countdown Timer might be represented
through NPCs’ increasingly agitated or aggressive conversations
as time runs out. These problems will arise in the near future with
more games emerge in VR. Our preliminary ndings in this WIP
highlight the critical need for ongoing research in deceptive game
design in VR to keep up with the rapid evolution of VR technology.
Next Steps: Building upon our preliminary ndings, our rst
and the immediate next step is to rene and improve the compre-
hensiveness of the Assessment Guide by incorporating a broader
scope of literature (e.g., [
32
,
48
]) and clearer considerations of VR-
specic properties (e.g., spatiality, perception, and barriers [
32
])
that directly inuence player deception in VR. Second, our research
on deceptive VR game design is still ongoing. As we write this
paper, we are expanding our analysis of VR games from diverse
genres, which allows us to analyze the VR manifestations of decep-
tive designs that were not present in our WIP (e.g., Wait To Play,
Grinding). This will also enable us to contrast and isolate the man-
ifestations of dierent types of deceptive designs in games from
similar genres, or even the same game, across PC and VR, which
will result in more meaningful comparisons. Lastly, to complement
our autoethnographic methodology, we plan to study VR players’
perspectives by analyzing player reviews in online communities
and conducting in-depth interviews. We will contrast these player
experiences with the ndings from our autoethnographic investi-
gation to achieve a comprehensive understanding of how deceptive
designs are perceived and experienced. For example, we will closely
examine the inuence of VR-specic features [
25
,
32
] on player
experiences, the perceived severity of various deceptive designs,
and how dierent manifestations shape player perceptions. We hy-
pothesize that certain VR deceptive designs, when combined with
other game elements or with dierent manifestations, may be per-
ceived positively in one game while being viewed as manipulative
in another.
In summary, our ndings highlighted the critical need for future
research in deceptive game designs in VR. Combining ndings from
our preliminary study and next research steps, our research will
enable an understanding of deceptive design manifestations be-
tween VR and traditional games, identify how VR’s unique features
inuence the eectiveness of these tactics, and reveal VR-specic
deceptions not present in traditional games.
Acknowledgments
This project has been funded by the Oce of the Privacy Commis-
sioner of Canada (OPC); the views expressed herein are those of
the author(s) and do not necessarily reect those of the OPC.
L. Nacke also acknowledge support from the Social Sciences
and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) INSIGHT Grant (#435-
2022-0476), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
of Canada (NSERC) Discovery Grant (#RGPIN-2023-03705), and
Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) John R. Evans Leaders
Fund (#41844) and L. Zhang-Kennedy also acknowledge support
from the NSERC Discovery Grant (#RGPIN-2022-03353)
We also thank the chairs and reviewers for their insightful feed-
back, which helped us to improve the quality of this manuscript.
Thank you to graduate researcher Derrick Wang for his support in
resolving technical issues during our paper formatting. Screenshots
in this manuscript were from the games and fall under fair use.
References
[1]
Tony E Adams, Stacy Holman Jones, and Carolyn Ellis. 2016. Handbook of
autoethnography. Routledge, London, UK.
[2]
Kirsten Boehner, Phoebe Sengers, and Simeon Warner. 2008. Interfaces with the
ineable: Meeting aesthetic experience on its own terms. ACM Transactions on
Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 15, 3 (2008), 1–29.
[3]
I. Bogost. 2010. Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames.
MIT Press, Massachusetts, United States. https://books.google.ca/books?id=
GC7MD17YvJEC
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
[4]
Arianna Boldi and Amon Rapp. 2023. “Is It Legit, To You?”. An Exploration of
Players’ Perceptions of Cheating in a Multiplayer Video Game: Making Sense of
Uncertainty. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 0, 0 (2023),
1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2204276
[5]
Harry Brignull. 2010. Deceptive patterns - user interfaces crafted to trick you.
https://www.deceptive.design/. Last accessed on July 24, 2023.
[6]
Harry Brignull. 2023. Deceptive patterns – exposing the tricks that tech companies
use to control you. Testimonium Ltd, UK.
[7]
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Re-
search Council of Canada, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. 2024.
Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans –
TCPS 2 (2022). https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique_tcps2-eptc2_2022.html.
Last accessed on April 24, 2024.
[8]
Victoria Clarke and Virginia Braun. 2021. Thematic analysis: a practical guide.
SAGE Publications Ltd, California, United States.
[9]
James J Cummings and Alexis Shore. 2022. All too real: A typology of user
vulnerabilities in extended reality. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Novel
Challenges of Safety, Security and Privacy in Extended Reality, Vol. 29. ACM, New
York, USA, 3 pages.
[10]
Christoph Sebastian Deterding, Jaakko Stenros, and Markus Montola. 2020.
Against “Dark Game Design Patterns”. In DiGRA’20-Abstract Proceedings of the
2020 DiGRA International Conference. DiGRA, Finland, 3 pages.
[11]
Linda Di Geronimo, Larissa Braz, Enrico Fregnan, Fabio Palomba, and Alberto
Bacchelli. 2020. UI Dark Patterns and Where to Find Them: A Study on Mobile
Applications and User Perception. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’20). Association
for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/
3313831.3376600
[12] Roberto Dillon. 2020. The digital gaming handbook. CRC Press, Florida, USA.
[13]
European Parliament, Council of the European Union. 2022. Regulation (EU)
2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022
on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC
(Digital Services Act) (Text with EEA relevance). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=celex:32022R2065. Last accessed on December 7, 2023..
[14]
Matthias Fassl and Katharina Krombholz. 2023. Why I Can’t Authenticate — Un-
derstanding the Low Adoption of Authentication Ceremonies with Autoethnog-
raphy. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI ’23). Association for Computing Machinery,
New York,N Y,USA, Article 72, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581508
[15]
Dan Fitton and Janet C. Read. 2019. Creating a Framework to Support the Critical
Consideration of Dark Design Aspects in Free-to-Play Apps. In Proceedings of
the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (Boise,
ID, USA) (IDC ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA,
407–418. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311927.3323136
[16]
Guo Freeman, Karen Wu, Nicholas Nower, and Donghee Yvette Wohn. 2022. Pay
to Win or Pay to Cheat: How Players of Competitive Online Games Perceive
Fairness of In-Game Purchases. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer
Interaction 6, CHI PLAY (2022), 1–24.
[17]
Julian Frommel and Regan L Mandryk. 2022. Daily Quests or Daily Pests? The
Benets and Pitfalls of Engagement Rewards in Games. Proceedings of the ACM
on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CHI PLAY (2022), 1–23.
[18]
Colin M. Gray, Jingle Chen, Shruthi Sai Chivukula, and Liyang Qu. 2021. End User
Accounts of Dark Patterns as Felt Manipulation. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact.
5, CSCW2, Article 372 (oct 2021), 25 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479516
[19]
Colin M Gray, Yubo Kou, Bryan Battles, Joseph Hoggatt, and Austin L Toombs.
2018. The dark (patterns) side of UX design. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI
conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, USA, 1–14.
[20]
Colin M Gray, Lorena Sanchez Chamorro, Ike Obi, and Ja-Nae Duane. 2023.
Mapping the Landscape of Dark Patterns Scholarship: A Systematic Literature
Review. In Companion Publication of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems
Conference. ACM, New York, USA, 188–193.
[21]
Colin M. Gray, Cristiana Santos, and Nataliia Bielova. 2023. Towardsa Preliminary
Ontology of Dark Patterns Knowledge. In Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Hamburg, Germany) (CHI
EA ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 286,
9 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544549.3585676
[22]
Colin M. Gray, Cristiana Teixeira Santos, Nataliia Bielova, and Thomas Mildner.
2024. An Ontology of Dark Patterns Knowledge: Foundations, Denitions, and a
Pathway for Shared Knowledge-Building. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI ’24). Association
for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 289, 22 pages. https:
//doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642436
[23]
Saul Greenberg, Sebastian Boring, Jo Vermeulen, and Jakub Dostal. 2014. Dark
Patterns in Proxemic Interactions: A Critical Perspective. In Proceedings of the
2014 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (DIS
’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 523–532. https:
//doi.org/10.1145/2598510.2598541
[24]
Johanna Gunawan, Amogh Pradeep, David Chones, Woodrow Hartzog, and
Christo Wilson. 2021. A Comparative Study of Dark Patterns Across Web and
Mobile Modalities. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 5, CSCW2, Article 377 (oct
2021), 29 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479521
[25]
Hilda Hadan, Lydia Choong, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, and Lennart E. Nacke. 2024.
Deceived by Immersion: A Systematic Analysis of Deceptive Design in Extended
Reality. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 10, Article 250 (may 2024), 25 pages. https:
//doi.org/10.1145/3659945
[26]
Hilda Hadan, Sabrina A. Sgandurra, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, and Lennart E. Nacke.
2024. Culture Clash: When Deceptive Design Meets Diverse Player Expectations.
In Companion Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Inter-
action in Play (Tampere, Finland) (CHI PLAY Companion ’24). Association for
Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/
3665463.3678866
[27]
Hilda Hadan, Sabrina A. Sgandurra, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, and Lennart E. Nacke.
2024. From Motivating to Manipulative: The Use of Deceptive Design in a Game’s
Free-to-Play Transition. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 8, CHI PLAY, Article
309 (oct 2024), 31 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3677074
[28]
IGN Southeast Asia. 2024. Overwatch 2, World of Warcraft, and Hearthstone Shut
Down in China. https://sea.ign.com/activision-blizzard/194620/news/overwatch-
2-world-of-warcraft-and-hearthstone-shut-down-in-china. Last accessed on May
4, 2024..
[29]
Faltin Karlsen. 2019. Exploited or Engaged? Dark Game Design Patterns in Clicker
Heroes, FarmVille 2, and World of Warcraft. In Transgression in Games and
Play. The MIT Press, MA, USA. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11550.003.0019
arXiv:https://direct.mit.edu/book/chapter-pdf/2104393/9780262348706_ceb.pdf
[30]
John King, Dan Fitton, and Brendan Cassidy. 2023. Investigating Players’ Per-
ceptions of Deceptive Design Practices within a 3D Gameplay Context. Proc.
ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 7, CHI PLAY, Article 407 (oct 2023), 17 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3611053
[31]
Bastian Kordyaka, Samuli Laato, Katharina Jahn, Juho Hamari, and Bjoern
Niehaves. 2023. The Cycle of Toxicity: Exploring Relationships between Per-
sonality and Player Roles in Toxic Behavior in Multiplayer Online Battle Arena
Games. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 7, CHI PLAY
(2023), 611–641.
[32]
Veronika Krauss, Pejman Saeghe, Alexander Boden, Mohamed Khamis, Mark
McGill, Jan Gugenheimer, and Michael Nebeling. 2024. What Makes XR Dark?
Examining Emerging Dark Patterns in Augmented and Virtual Reality through
Expert Co-Design. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 0, 0 (apr 2024), 37 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3660340 Just Accepted.
[33]
Samuli Laato, Daniel Fernández Galeote, Ferran Altarriba Bertran, and Juho
Hamari. 2022. Balancing the augmented experience: design tensions in the
location-based game Pikmin Bloom. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. Association for Computing Machinery,
New York, NY, USA, 1–7.
[34]
Chris Lewis. 2014. Irresistible Apps: Motivational design patterns for apps, games,
and web-based communities. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
[35]
Jamie Luguri and Lior Jacob Strahilevitz. 2021. Shining a light on dark patterns.
Journal of Legal Analysis 13, 1 (2021), 43–109.
[36]
Aditi M. Bhoot, Mayuri A. Shinde, and Wricha P. Mishra. 2021. Towards the
Identication of Dark Patterns: An Analysis Based on End-User Reactions. In
Proceedings of the 11th Indian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Online,
India) (IndiaHCI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA,
24–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3429290.3429293
[37] Maximilian Maier. 2019. Dark patterns–An end user perspective.
[38]
Arunesh Mathur, Gunes Acar, Michael J Friedman, Eli Lucherini, Jonathan Mayer,
Marshini Chetty, and Arvind Narayanan. 2019. Dark patterns at scale: Findings
from a crawl of 11K shopping websites. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-
Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (2019), 1–32.
[39]
Arunesh Mathur, Mihir Kshirsagar, and Jonathan Mayer.2021. What makes a dark
pattern... dark? Design attributes, normative considerations, and measurement
methods. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing
systems. ACM, New York, USA, 1–18.
[40]
Tim May, Beth Perry, et al
.
2014. Reexivity and the practice of qualitative
research. The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis 109 (2014), 109–122.
[41]
Thomas Mildner, Merle Freye, Gian-Luca Savino, Philip R. Doyle, Benjamin R.
Cowan, and Rainer Malaka. 2023. Defending Against the Dark Arts: Recognising
Dark Patterns in Social Media. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive
Systems Conference (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) (DIS ’23). Association for Computing
Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2362–2374. https://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.
3595964
[42]
Thomas Mildner, Gian-Luca Savino, Philip R. Doyle, Benjamin R. Cowan, and
Rainer Malaka. 2023. About Engaging and Governing Strategies: A Thematic
Analysis of Dark Patterns in Social Networking Services. In Proceedings of
the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (<conf-loc>,
<city>Hamburg</city>, <country>Germany</country>, </conf-loc>) (CHI ’23).
Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 192, 15 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580695
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
[43]
Alberto Monge Roarello, Kai Luko, and Luigi De Russis. 2023. Dening and
Identifying Attention Capture Deceptive Designs in Digital Interfaces. In Proceed-
ings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (<conf-
loc>, <city>Hamburg</city>, <country>Germany</country>, </conf-loc>) (CHI
’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 194,
19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580729
[44]
Bonnie Nardi. 2010. My life as a night elf priest: An anthropological account of
World of Warcraft. University of Michigan Press, MI, USA.
[45]
Bonnie Nardi and Justin Harris. 2006. Strangers and friends: collaborative play
in world of warcraft. In Proceedings of the 2006 20th Anniversary Conference
on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Ban, Alberta, Canada) (CSCW ’06).
Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 149–158. https:
//doi.org/10.1145/1180875.1180898
[46]
Bonnie A Nardi, Stella Ly, and Justin Harris. 2007. Learning conversations in
World of Warcraft. In 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (HICSS’07). IEEE, New Jersey, United States, 79–79.
[47]
Carman Neustaedter and Phoebe Sengers. 2012. Autobiographical design: what
you can learn from designing for yourself. interactions 19, 6 (2012), 28–33.
[48]
Elena Petrovskaya and David Zendle. 2021. Predatory monetisation? A categorisa-
tion of unfair, misleading and aggressive monetisation techniques in digital games
from the player perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 181 (2021), 1065—-1081.
[49]
Amon Rapp. 2017. Designing interactive systems through a game lens: An
ethnographic approach. Computers in human behavior 71 (2017), 455–468.
[50]
Amon Rapp. 2017. From games to gamication: A classication of rewards in
World of Warcraft for the design of gamied systems. Simulation & Gaming 48,
3 (2017), 381–401.
[51]
Amon Rapp. 2018. Autoethnography in Human-Computer Interaction: Theory and
Practice. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 25–42. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3- 319-73374- 6_3
[52]
Johnny Saldaña. 2021. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
[53]
Herbert Alexander Simon. 1997. Models of bounded rationality: Empirically
grounded economic reason. Vol. 3. MIT press, MA, USA.
[54]
Zihao Su, Faysal Hossain Shezan, Yuan Tian, David Evans, and Seongkook Heo.
2022. Perception Hacking for 2D Cursorjacking in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings
of the 1st Workshop on Novel Challenges of Safety, Security and Privacy in Extended
Reality. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages.
[55]
Jenny Sundén. 2012. Desires at play: On closeness and epistemological uncer-
tainty. Games and Culture 7, 2 (2012), 164–184.
[56]
Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving decisions about
health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin, London, United Kingdom.
[57]
Sarah Turner, Jason RC Nurse, and Shujun Li. 2022. “It was hard to nd the
words”: Using an Autoethnographic Diary Study to Understand the Diculties
of Smart Home Cyber Security Practices. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–8.
[58]
Ari Ezra Waldman. 2020. Cognitive biases, dark patterns, and the ‘privacy
paradox’. Current opinion in psychology 31 (2020), 105–109.
[59]
José P Zagal, Staan Björk, and Chris Lewis. 2013. Dark patterns in the design of
games. In Foundations of Digital Games 2013. ACM, Crete, Greece, 8 pages.
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
Table 2: This table presents our VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide and the source literature of themes and codes [
22
,
25
,
30
,
59
]. This Assessment Guide served as the foundation of our identication of deceptive designs in the selected VR-based
and computer-based games.
Theme/Subtheme Code Denition Correspondence to Taxonomies from Literature
Theme 1: Sneaking
Bait and Switch Disguised Ads Disguise ads as genuine content, trick users into clicking on it. Disguised Ads [22]
Hiding Information Sneak into Basket Sneak items into a user’s cart, lead to unintended purchases. Sneak into Basket [22]
Drip Pricing, Hidden Costs, or Partitioned Pricing Gradually reveal additional costs, delaying the full price until Drip Pricing, Hidden Costs, or Partitioned
after eort is invested in the purchase process. Pricing [22]
Reference Pricing Include a price-inated item or a poorer-quality item with same Reference Pricing [22], Cheap Item Placed Next to
price, making a current price seem like a better deal. Expensive Item [30], Physical Placement of Items [30],
Anchoring Tricks (Anchoring, Decoy Eect) [59]
Perception Hacking -Alter visuals or display out-of-sight ads, causing unwanted Perception Hacking [25], Obscuring Reality [25]
and unintentional interaction with objects (e.g., ads)
(De)contextualizing Cues Conicting Information Confuse users by presenting contradictory details, making Conicting Information [22]
them unsure and likely to accept potentially unfavorable defaults.
Information without context Hide relevant information or controls, making it dicult for Information without context [22]
users to nd what they need.
Theme 2: Obstruction
Roach Motel Immortal Accounts Trap users by making account deletion dicult or impossible. Immortal Accounts [22]
Dead Ends Frustrate users by hiding information behind broken links or Dead Ends [22]
redirects, preventing them from nding desired information.
Creating Barriers Price Comparison Prevention Hide information or block copying/pasting, making it dicult Price Comparison Prevention [22]
to compare prices across vendors.
Intermediate Currencies Hide the real price behind a virtual currency, making informed Intermediate Currencies [22], Use of Multiple
purchase decisions dicult. Currencies [30], Premium Currency [59]
Adding Steps Privacy Mazes Bury privacy controls under layers of confusing menus, Privacy Mazes [22]
hindering users from making informed choices.
Reality Distortion -Conceal parts of reality with digital objects, through Reality Distortion [25], Obscuring Reality [25],
daily wear and photorealistic graphics, leading to false perception Persistent Exposure to Manipulation [25]
and change of behaviours.
Theme 3: Social Engineering
Scarcity or Popularity Claims High Demand Create a false sense of urgency by exaggerating product Anchoring Tricks (item popularity) [59]
popularity, tricking users into rushed purchases. High Demand [22]
Social Proof Low Stock Pressure users into impulsive purchases by falsely indicating Low Stock [22],Articial Scarcity (only a certain
limited product availability. number of items available) [59]
Endorsements and Testimonials Portray biased or fabricated testimonials as genuine to Endorsements and Testimonials [22], Friend Spam /
inuence users’ purchase decisions. Impersonation (friends follow your endorsement) [59]
Parasocial Pressure Exploit users’ trust in celebrities or other entities with Parasocial Pressure [22], Anchoring Tricks (friends’
inauthentic endorsements to inuence users’ decisions. purchase activities) [59], NPC Asks or Suggests a
Purchase [30], Hyperpersonalization (recreations of
their trusted people) [25], Instructed/Told
to Do [30]
Urgency Activity Messages Create urgency with fake activity notications of others. Activity Messages [22]
Countdown Timers create urgency with fake countdown timers. Countdown Timers [22], Articial Scarcity [59]
Limited Time Messages Create urgency with fake limited-time oers. Limited Time Messages [22], Articial Scarcity [59]
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) Exploit anxiety about missing exciting or valuable experiences. Fear of Missing Out [30, 59]
Personalization Conrmshaming Guilt-trip users with manipulative language. Conrmshaming [22]
Social Obligation Create a sense of obligation to avoid letting down friends in the Aesthetic Manipulations (feel bad for not helping
game or to return a favor. team) [59], Social Obligation / Guilds [59], Players
Feels Ashamed/Guilty [30], Reciprocity [59]
Competition Foster envy and competitions between players. Competition [59]
Encourage Anti-Social Behavior -Incentivize users’ dishonest or harmful actions to gain benets. Encourages Anti-Social Behavior [59]
Note. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
Table 2 Continued. This table presents our VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide and the source literature of themes and
codes [
22
,
25
,
30
,
59
]. This Assessment Guide served as the foundation of our identication of deceptive designs in the selected
VR-based and computer-based games.
Theme/Subtheme Code Denition Correspondence to Taxonomies from Literature
Theme 4: Interface Interference
Manipulating Choice Architecture False Hierarchy Prioritize certain options, making it dicult to compare choices False Hierarchy [22], Anchoring Tricks (False
and potentially leading to unintended selections. Hierarchy) [59], Aesthetic Manipulations (bigger
checkbox) [59], “Premium Value” or “Rare” Items [30]
Visual Prominence Highlight distracting elements, causing users to forget or lose Visual Prominence [22], Exciting Sound Eect [30],
focus on their initial intent. Aesthetic Manipulations (red “yes” button) [59],
UI Colours/Animation [30]
Bundling Group products at a “special” price, potentially hiding individual Anchoring Tricks (Discount Bundles) [59]
costs and leading to uninformed purchases. Bundling [22], Bulk-buy Discount [30]
Pressured Selling Highlight or pre-select expensive options, potentially leading Pressured Selling [22]
users to overlook more aordable choices.
Bad Defaults -Set default options that benet the company, forcing users to Bad Defaults [22], Accidental Purchase (expensive
manually change settings to avoid privacy risks. ones selected by default) [59], Aesthetic Manipulations
(checkbox opt-in by default) [59]
Misclick -Exploit strategic button placement and absence of conrmation Obscuring Reality [25], Perception Hacking (oset
screen, leading to accidental actions. visual cue in cursor-jacking) [25], Accidental Purchase
(accidental stray tap of the screen) [59]
Emotional or Sensory Manipulation Adorable design Exploit user preference for adorable design to make the game Cuteness [22], NPC is cute or very likeable [30],
appealing, fostering trust in characters, and obscuring risks. Hyperpersonalization (content tailored to preference
of an individual) [25], Aesthetic Manipulations
(Subconscious Associations) [59]
Positive or Negative Framing Hide or downplaying crucial information through visual cues, Positive or Negative Framing [22], Users Images
leading to biased or distracted decisions. Associated with Wealth [30], Aesthetic Manipulations
(Toy with Emotions) [59]
NPC/Narrative Manipulation* Exploit self-satisfaction, sympathy, or reverse psychology to Players Feel Good for Helping NPC [30], Sympathy/
cause unintended actions. pity for NPC [30], Want to Prove NPC Wrong (to
counter NPC’s taunt) [30], Hyperpersonalization
(idealized interaction partners) [25], Articial
Prosthetic Memory/Empathy-Based Manipulation [25]
General Emotional Manipulation Non-specic descriptions of emotional manipulation. General Emotional Manipulation [30]
Trick Questions - Use confusing wording or double negatives to manipulate users’ Trick Questions [22]
choices.
Choice Overload - Overwhelm users with too many options, hindering comparison Choice Overload [22]
and potentially causing them to miss important information.
Hidden Information - Obscure crucial details or disguising them as unimportant. Hidden Information [22]
Language Inaccessibility Wrong Language Display crucial information in a foreign language, making it Wrong Language [22]
inaccessible to users.
Complex Language Use hard-to-understand words and sentence structures, Complex Language [22]
hindering users’ informed decisions.
Feedforward Ambiguity - Create a gap between users’ predicted result from the available Feedforward Ambiguity [22]
information and the actual outcome of their actions.
Theme 5: Distortion
Cognitive Bias Illusion of Mastery Deceive players about their skill level, making them feel better Illusion of Control (e.g., manipulated matchups,
than they actually are and encouraging more gameplay. undisclosed random win chance) [59]
Optimism and Frequency Biases Exploit optimism bias, frequency bias, and clustering illusion to Optimism and Frequency Biases [59]
make players feel luckier and skilled, encouraging continued play.
False Memory Implantation Exploit users’ memory aw and source confusing to induce false False Memory Implantation [25]
memory and inuence their behaviour.
The illusion of objectivity First-person experiences inherently biased by creator inuence, The illusion of objectivity in XR experience [25]
creating a false sense of objectivity.
Note. *NPC = Non-Player Character. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
Table 2 Continued. This table presents our VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide and the source literature of themes and
codes [
22
,
25
,
30
,
59
]. This Assessment Guide served as the foundation of our identication of deceptive designs in the selected
VR-based and computer-based games.
Theme/Subtheme Code Denition Correspondence to Taxonomies from Literature
Theme 6: Forced Action
Nagging -Disrupt user focus with repeatedly unwanted interruptions to Nagging [22], Badges / Endowed Progress (red dot
push actions they would rather avoid. reminder of left o progress) [59], Prompted to Buy
Robux [30], Aesthetic Manipulations (Over-the-top
Feedback) [59]
Forced Continuity - Continuity traps users in unwanted subscriptions by making Forced Continuity [22]
cancellation dicult and auto-renewal opaque.
Forced Registration - Require account creation for tasks that shouldn’t need it, Forced Registration [22]
potentially extracting unnecessary personal data.
Forced Communication or Disclosure Privacy Zuckering Trick users into thinking it’s essential for the service, Privacy Zuckering [22]
leading to overshare personal data.
Friend Spam Exploit social connections by sending spam to users’ contact Friend Spam [22], Friend Spam/Impersonation [59],
lists and resulting in unwanted contact to other users. Hyperpersonalization (recreate trusted people) [25]
Address Book Leeching Steal users’ contact information under their false impression Address Book Leeching [22]
that only vital information will be collected.
Social Pyramid Push users into recruiting others by tying it to desired features. Social Pyramid [22], Social Pyramid Scheme [59]
Gamication Pay-to-Play Initially advertised as free, later restricts core functionalities or Pay-to-Play [22], Pay Wall [59], Pay to Skip [59],
progress unless players pay to bypass limitations (limited actions, Recurring Fee [59], Real Money Spend Expected [30],
timers, ads). Purchase Feels Part of Narrative [30]
Pay to Win Real-money purchases grant signicant in-game advantages. Pay to Win [59]
Power Creep Diminish obtained item values over time to drive new purchase. Power Creep [59]
Grinding Force users into repetitive tasks to access features. Grinding [22], Grinding [59]
Random Rewards Encourage users to spend money on chance-based rewards. Variable Rewards [59], Gambling/LootBoxes [59],
Gacha/lootbox/random [30], “Gambling” [30]
Can’t Pause or Save Force users to continue playing before they can save progress. Can’t Pause or Save [59]
Daily Challenges Encourage players to revisit the game daily. Daily Challenges [59]
Playing by Appointment Force players to adhere to the game’s schedule. Playing by Appointment [59]
Wait To Play Impose arbitrary wait times on players through in-game timers. Wait To Play [59]
Sunk Cost Fallacy Endowed Value Trap users with their previous investment (time, money, eort). Invested / Endowed Value [59]
Endowed Progress Exploit users’ aversion to incompleted progression. Badges / Endowed Progress [59]
Waste Aversion Set small dierences between in-game currency and item costs, Must Buy More Robux (currency) Than
prompting additional currency purchases. Needed [30], Waste Aversion [59]
Attention Capture Auto-Play Auto-start videos, causing excessive or unwanted views. Auto-Play [22]
Interest Exploitation Leverage users’ interests to capture their attention. Hyperpersonalization (idealized partners) [25]
Theme 7: Facilitation
Low Barrier Low Barrier Purchase Minimize steps, and complexity during spending actions, Purchasing Is Too Easy [30],
encouraging impulsive purchases. Purchase Prompt is Immediate [30]
Innite Treadmill -Continually expanding the game (e.g., new levels, new content). Innite Treadmill [59]
Theme 8: Other
Complete the Collection -Exploit users’ desires of completing game item collections. Complete the Collection [59]
Data Fueled Manipulation -Capture extensive user data (movement, behavior, surroundings) Data Fuels Privacy Risks and Manipulation [25],
enabling potential deanonymization and tailored manipulation. Undesired Access and Data Use [25], Insecurity
Worsen Manipulation [25]
Blurry Boundary -Photorealistic visual designs blur the lines between reality and Extreme Realism blurs the boundary between
ads, potentially misleading users about product quality. virtual and reality [25], Obscuring Reality [25],
Persistent Exposure to Manipulation [25]
Note.denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
A Sample Diary Entry Structure
Table 3: Structural outline of a sample diary entry from a Moss2 gameplay session on February 1, 2024. The diary was
documented in Miro given its feasibility in linking videos, screenshots, and diary texts. From left to right: (1) description of the
lead researcher’s experience, reactions, thoughts, and feelings complemented by corresponding screenshots of game design
elements, and (2) post-gameplay reection on possible presence of deceptive game design and its context.
Date: February 1, 2024
Estimated Time: ∼3.5 hours including diary writing
[Imported Video Gameplay Recording]
[Diary] [Reection Note:]
Today’s session with Moss Book II produced a strong emotional moment
that further made me more emotionally invested in Quill, the brave mouse
protagonist. She had to ght a scary owl (a winged tyrant) that threw her
and her uncle o a cli. I was on the edge of my seat as Quill went after
her uncle. The game then showed a really touching scene where Quill
found her uncle Argus died. The moment that she holds Argus’ body and
looks at my direction for help made me feel like I was right there with
Quill on her suering.
I really love how Quill interacts with me directly - it makes the game so
much more engaging. Her reactions to my moves are spot on and she
reacts to my every move and gives me a high-ve when I do something
right. Even when I mess up, she’s still there showing she cares about
me and bears with me while I try to solve the puzzles. It’s like she’s a
real character to me, not just some avatar. This feeling motivates me to
keep going and solve all the puzzles and guide her through the story.
[Screenshots]
As I and Sahima found Quill under the cli, she surprised me with a
hug. While the limitations of VR technology prevented a fully tactile
experience, the animation of “hugging” my controller pointers with her
whole body eectively conveyed the warmth and gratitude in her embrace.
This simple gesture touched deeply and reminded me of the bond we had
built throughout our shared adventure. It was no longer just about guiding
Quill through puzzles anymore; it was about protecting a close friend.
The emotional weight of the hug was further amplied when we found
what happened to Quill’s uncle. His death made the story of Moss even
more meaningful and gave me a stronger sense of purpose. I became
even more determined to keep Quill safe and avenge her uncle’s loss
because I knew she was counting only on me now.
[Screenshots] [Next Session:]
The way the game implemented it for Quill’s hug was cool, but imagine
if we could feel every detail – like the warmth of her fur or the gentle
squeeze of her tiny paws. That would be so immersive and emotional. I
bet it would change the way we feel about the characters we’re playing
with.
In my next session, I’ll be looking for other methods that the game
uses to enhance player immersion and emotional connection. It will
be interesting to see how Moss Book II continues to use storytelling
and VR technology to create a truly impactful experience.
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
B Reexivity Statement
To ensure the rigour of our qualitative research, we follow the
recommendations by May et al
. [40]
and Saldaña
[52]
by provid-
ing a Reexivity Statement. In this statement, we acknowledge the
potential biases that may arise during the data coding and theme
development process due to the lead researcher’s cultural, educa-
tion, and gaming background. The reexive thematic analysis was
performed by the lead researcher, who has a strong research back-
ground in deceptive design and has previously published on the
topic in both Extended Reality (including VR) and traditional PC-
based games [
25
–
27
]. The lead researcher also has several years of
experience researching privacy and security issues from the user’s
perspective. This interdisciplinary background and experience align
well with this reexive method, as it identifying deceptive game de-
signs and potential concerns from players’ perspectives. In addition,
our research team also oers diverse expertise such as interaction
design, user experience, privacy and cybersecurity, and games user
research. This collective expertise strengthens the comprehensive-
ness and quality of our research.
Our autoethnography methodology puts the lead researcher into
a player perspective. While the lead researcher’s expertise and
extensive experience in deceptive design ensured a rich identica-
tion of these patterns in the game, we still note that her personality
might have inuenced the focus and the interpretation of autoethno-
graphic data. The lead researcher, as a player, identied herself as
empathetic and sensitive and tend to be caring and compassionate.
This personality allowed for picking up on subtle emotional manip-
ulation and patterns that exploit players’ attachment to in-game
characters. In addition, the lead researcher has a strong focus on
observable facts and more straightforward outcomes based on con-
crete evidence. While this personality might have limited the lead
researcher’s interpretation of hypothetical future consequences of
deceptive design, her expertise enabled a thorough understanding
of player manipulation currently in the games.
We also note that the lead researcher’s personal experience with
video games has inuenced this research. The lead researcher was
introduced to video games at a young age. This early experience
includes a wide range of North American and Asian titles across
dierent genres, played on both computer and PlayStation plat-
forms. In 2017, the lead researcher was introduced to Overwatch,
which enabled a reunion between her family members during the
COVID-19 pandemic, until Blizzard shut down the server in China
in 2023 [
28
]. To date, the lead researcher has played Overwatch
(both OW1 and OW2) for about 7 years, more than 3,000 hours of
gameplay in dierent game modes and characters. This experience,
combined with the lead researcher’s extensive exposure and expe-
rience with other games, fosters a deep understanding of player
perspectives and various game design patterns.
In summary, the lead researcher’s background presents a valu-
able resource to our autoethnographic research, as it allows us to
have a nuanced documentation and analysis of potential deceptive
game elements. While we acknowledge that the lead researcher’s
personality and personal connection to OW2 could inuence our
research ndings, we see this as a strength. This deep familiarity
with the game equips the lead researcher with a nuanced under-
standing of its strengths and weaknesses, which enabled a more
comprehensive analysis.
CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland Hilda Hadan, Leah Zhang-Kennedy, & Lennart E. Nacke
C Deceptive Game Design Patterns Identied from Overwatch2 and VR Games
Table 4: Using our VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide in Table 2, this table presents deceptive design patterns we
identied within Overwatch 2 (OW2) based on our previous research on this game [27].
Theme/Subtheme Code OW2 Game Mechanics Synthesized Diary Entries𝑎
Theme 1: Sneaking
Hiding Information Reference Pricing In-Game Shop I feel discounted/cheaper items are better deals compared to
full-priced/expensive ones displayed alongside.
Theme 2: Obstruction
Creating Barriers Intermediate Currencies OW Coins I feel overwhelmed by ve distinct currencies (OW Coins,
Legacy Credits, Competitive Coins, Overwatch League Tokens,
Mythic Prisms), each has dierent exchange rates to real money
and restricted to specic item purchases.
Theme 3: Social Engineering
Urgency Countdown Timers Battle Pass I feel pressured to complete the Battle Pass due to a countdown
timer indicating its end at each season’s close.
Daily/Weekly/Seasonal Challenges I feel pressured to complete challenges as they refresh daily,
weekly, and seasonally, indicated by a countdown timer.
In-Game Shop I feel pressured to buy bundles and discounted items as they
refresh weekly, indicated by a countdown timer.
Fear of Missing Out (FOMO) Battle Pass I fear not completing the Battle Pass before the season ends, as
it means losing the chance to earn its rewards and potentially
wasting the premium fee.
Daily/Weekly/Seasonal Challenges I fear not completing the challenges within the time limit, as it
means losing the chance to earn the XPs and currencies.
New Character I fear not unlocking the new character from the Battle Pass this
season, as it means missing the easiest path and quick access.
Personalization Social Obligation New Character I feel obligated to quickly unlock the new character to help
my team in games.
Competition Competitive Ranks I feel jealous of higher-ranked players, which drives me to play
competitive games repeatedly to practice and improve my rank.
Theme 4: Interface Interference
Manipulating Choice Architecture False Hierarchy Battle Pass I feel buying premium is worthwhile, as nearly all rewards are
premium-only.
Character Item Gallery I feel more easily nd and click on legendary and epic items, as
they are always at the top of the gallery.
Bundling Battle Pass I feel buying a Battle Pass with 80+ rewards cheaper than
buying them individually, even they are items I don’t want.
In-Game Shop I feel buying bundled items at a discounted price is cheaper
than buying them individually, even there are items I don’t want.
Emotional or Sensory Manipulation Adorable design Battle Pass I feel tempted to buy the unique mythic skin at the last level, as
it has custom sound and visual eects.
In-Game Shop I feel tempted to buy cute items. Being able to use them make
gameplay more attractive.
Theme 6: Forced Action
Gamication Pay-to-Play Battle Pass I feel pressured to pay a premium fee every season for rewards.
I feel pressured to purchase levels to unlock reward instantly
when I lack time for XP grinding.
New character I feel pressured to buy the premium Battle Pass as I want to
unlock new character immediately.
Grinding Daily/Weekly/Seasonal Challenges I feel pressured to play the game everyday to grind the 3 (daily),
11 (weekly), and 40+ (seasonal) repetitive tasks like “earn 10
eliminations/assists without dying.”
Battle Pass I feel pressured to grind for XPs to complete levels (10,000 XP)
each from gameplay and completing daily/weekly challenges.
New Character I feel pressured to grind for unlocking the new character
to avoid grinding character-specic challenges in future seasons.
Playing by Appointment Double XP Weekend I feel an urgency to participate in this weekend event from
March 10 to 12, 2023 to grind XPs faster.
Sunk Cost Fallacy Endowed Progress Battle Pass Once I have made progress, it is hard for me to abandon an
incomplete level and an incomplete Battle Pass.
Daily/Weekly/Seasonal Challenges Once I have made progress, it is hard for me to abandon an
incomplete challenge or stop before completing all daily, weekly,
and seasonal challenges.
Endowed Value Competitive Ranks I feel pressured to play daily to maintain my gained skills
and character mastery.
Waste Aversion In-Game Shop I feel pressured to buy additional currency packs to use up my
remaining coins from previous items and bundles purchases.
Theme 7: Facilitation
Innite Treadmill - Battle Pass I feel pressured to complete a new Battle Pass each season.
Daily/Weekly/Seasonal Challenges I feel pressured to complete new challenges daily, weekly, and
seasonally.
Theme 8: Other
Complete the Collection - Character Item Gallery I feel the urge to complete character item collections due to a
progress bar indicating the proportion of missing items.
Note.𝑎. Contents in quotes are descriptions directly from the game.
denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
Deceptive Design in VR Games CHI PLAY Companion ’24, October 14–17, 2024, Tampere, Finland
Table 5: Based on our VR Deceptive Game Design Assessment Guide in Table 2, this table presents deceptive design patterns we
identied within Moss2 and Beat Saber.
Theme/Subtheme Code VR Game Me chanics𝑎Synthesized Diary Entries𝑏
Theme 2: Obstruction
Creating Barriers Price Comparison Prevention Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel frustrated because comparing individual song and
song pack prices in-game is impossible, as no clear prices
provided in game.
Theme 3: Social Engineering
Social Proof Parasocial Pressure Beat Saber: Song Gallery I feel attracted to songs and music packs from my favorite
singers, games, or anime.
Urgency Limited Time Messages Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel tempted to buy songs and music packs during the
time-limited sale.
Personalization Competition Beat Sab er: Leaderboard While my skills may not compete with global or local
players and my friends, I feel pressured to perform better to
beat my old scores to avoid losing gained skills.
Theme 4: Interface Interference
Manipulating Choice Architecture False Hierarchy Beat Saber: Main Menu I feel tempted to tap on the music pack beside game
mode options on the main menu because it seems special
compared to those within each game mode.
Visual Prominence Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel distracted by the notication that purchasing the
entire music pack is cheaper, and the visually prominent
“buy music pack” option on top of the “buy level (song)”
option that I intend to select.
Bundling Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel buying whole music packs because an in-game
notication claims they are cheaper, despite no clear prices
listed for individual songs or packs.
Emotional/Sensory Manipulation Adorable design Beat Saber: Song Gallery I feel attracted to play the game repeatedly because of its
beautiful and visually striking block and lightsaber designs.
I feel attracted to the BTS music pack𝑐because each song
has the singers’ avatars dancing with me in the game.
I feel attracted to songs and music packs with cute covers.
I feel attracted to songs with strong beats as they help
me catch the rhythm and perform better in the game.
Moss: Book II: Character Design I feel attracted to play the game by the cute character
designs, and colorful and vibrant map environments.
I feel attracted to interact with the characters because
she actively “talk” to me using sign language.
NPC/Narrative Manipulation Moss: Book II: Game Narrative I lose track of time spent in game due to deep connection
to the story and characters from the unexpected twists in
the storyline.
Moss: Book II: 3D Interaction and Immersion I lose track of time spent in game as I feel being part
of the story because of the interactive 3D feedback that
allow me to ip pages of the story book, move objects in
the environment, and “pet,” “hug,” and “high-ve” with the
characters.
Trick Questions - Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel confused by the option for purchasing individual
songs (“ buy level”) as it might refer to purchasing a diculty
level rather than a song. Whereas the “buy music pack”
option is more straightforward.
Hidden Information - Beat Saber: 3D Interaction and Immersion I lose track of time due to deep engagement of gameplay
and the absence of an in-game clock.
Moss: Book II: 3D Interaction and Immersion I lose track of time due to deep engagement of gameplay
and the absence of an in-game clock.
Beat Saber: Gameplay I feel frustrated by the lack of an option or progress bar
to mark specic parts of a song where I struggle. As a result,
when I fail a game, I must repeatedly practice the entire
song.
Moss: Book II: Progress Indicator I feel confused about my storyline progress because the
progress indicator is too subtle and blends into the library
environment seamlessly.
Theme 6: Forced Action
Forced Communication/Disclosure Privacy Zuckering Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel vulnerable b ecause purchasing songs or music
packs requires entering payment information before seeing
clear prices.
Gamication Pay-to-Play Beat Saber: Song Purchase System I feel annoyed by the fact that even though I bought the
game I have to consistently buy new songs and music packs.
I lose track of money spent on songs and music packs
since each costs only around $2 to $4 USD.
Power Creep Beat Saber: Gameplay Over time, I feel bored by playing the same songs
repeatedly, which drives me to buy new ones.
Can’t Pause or Save Moss: Book II: Saving Options I feel pressured to play continuously and stop less, as the
game solely on automatic saves. I cannot save my progress
manually even when my battery is dying.
Sunk Cost Fallacy Endowed Value Beat Saber: Gameplay I feel pressured to play daily to maintain my gained skills
and song mastery.
Theme 8: Other
Complete the Collection - Beat Saber: Song Gallery I feel the urge to own all songs in a music pack due to
my positive experiences with some songs.
Moss: Book II: Scrolls and Armors I feel the urge to collect all scrolls and armors, even
revisiting maps, though they don’t aect the storyline.
Note.𝑎. Mechanics from a same game are grouped by color. We used pink for game mechanics from Moss2 and blue for those from Beat Saber.
𝑏. Contents in quotes are descriptions directly from the game. 𝑐. BTS Music Pack. Beat Saber Wiki. https://beatsaber.fandom.com/wiki/BTS_Music_Pack. Last accessed on May 4, 2024.
denotes deceptive designs mentioned in the game-related literature [30, 59]. denotes deceptive designs mentioned in VR-related literature [25].
