Unpleasant Design - When Bad Design is Used to Hide Problems - Extra Credits
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 кві 2018
- Sometimes bad design is created intentionally, to cover up a flaw in the system instead of fixing it. Using cities like Seattle and London as examples, we examine how architecture is designed to remove homeless people from the public eye without actually helping them.
Subscribe to Extra Credits for more episodes every Wednesday! bit.ly/SubToEC
Special thanks to Gem Willy and Ethan Richie for the guest art!
/ gemwilly
** Thanks for participating in this week's discussion! **
Check out our community guidelines so we can have MORE high-quality conversations: www.extracredits.site/extra-c...
** Want to support the people who make this show? **
Become a Patreon Member & Vote on future Extra History episodes! bit.ly/EHPatreon
Or show off your fandom with our merch! extracredits.store/
** Want more Extra Credits? Subscribe and Follow us on Social Media! **
Twitter: bit.ly/ECTweet
Facebook: bit.ly/ECFBPage
Instagram: bit.ly/ECisonInstagram
Twitch: bit.ly/ECtwitch
Website: extracredits.site/
** Interested in sponsoring an episode? Email us: extracredits@standard.tv **
♪ Intro Music: "Penguin Cap" by CarboHydroM - bit.ly/1eIHTDS
♪ Outro Music: “The Oppressed” by Hernán Marandino
materiacollective.bandcamp.co...
#ExtraCredits #Gaming #GameDesign - Ігри
In September of 2017, the city of Seattle placed 18 shiny new bike racks underneath a bridge that was slated for demolition in less than a year. Why? Unpleasant design. What lessons can we take away from this to apply to our games?
There isin't a reason you wouldn't want to deter homeless people from sleeping under a bridge due for demolition?
@ Josh Roberts it's not as if the bridge was being demolished the next day. The homeless people were just shooed away because the rainy season would force them under the bridge and the city didn't wanted to have people look at them. There was absolutely no concern for the safety of these people involved.
There isint work that needs to be done before its demolished that requires unfettered access? I have much sympathy for homeless people, but there is more here than simply meets the eye.
It's funny, if your only source of information was this video you might think Seattle is working hard to crack down on homelessness. In fact it's as far from it as possible. The city takes basically no steps and instead encourages it, you see the homeless en mass going down the highway, you see them on street corners, you find them in parks, you see them on the bus, Seattle is making a break for most homeless in the country. You may wonder why so many people that live here are homeless, and the answer is there aren't. Especially after Denver started cracking down on there problem, homeless people are flocking here and taking advantage of how afraid the city is of "offending them." I was sitting in at a city counsel meeting, (Yes I go to those, Yes they are as engaging as watching paint dry) and they decided not to go in a clean the urine and feces off the public building near the homeless area's because they thought cleaning shit off buildings was too similar to police using fire hoses on civil rights activists. When they instate polices like this it makes me agree with their previous assessment, for all the wrong reasons.
Extra Credits thank you for this video, I actually had no idea and now i know i realise that we should be confronted with such thinks to give us the chance to show we're better than this.
You know it's an uncomfortably real episode when the 'happy ending' is that some homeless people in Seattle get to live under a bridge for a few more months until it gets demolished.
Recursive unpleasant design?
Certainly there should be a demand for better solutions to homelessness - but should we not also hold the government accountable and demand that they stop wasting money for the sole purpose of inconveniencing homeless people?
Kyle Timmons Not every homeless person wants to stay at a shelter
Most homeless people, around 80%, are homeless only for a few months before they find a job and place to live. These people almost always seek out shelters and live, whenever possible, therein. The homeless people sleeping under bridges are largely the other 20%. The ones ravaged by by addiction, disease, and mental disorder, who can't or won't go to shelters for one reason or another.
I don't know enough about Seattle to tell you weather there are enough beds and shelters to cater to this population, but that's not the point. There will never be enough beds to meet the needs of people who won't seek those beds out. And for better or worse, in the most populous cities, there will probably always be people sleeping under bridges. And the absolute minimum we can do is to not get in the way of that.
We have at least 5 shelters within literal walking distance (or actually local free bus that's pretty much for the homeless) distance. Plus it's Belltown, an area known for some of the seedier parts of the homeless population in Seattle.
And before you guys go off, I know this straight from experience.
From someone formerly homeless who wound up in a city with tons of resources aimed at rehabilitation (Baltimore is actually an incredible city as well as a violent, crime- and drug-ravaged city) and was pointed by the courts to a case manager whose only job was to help people like me who came in with offenses like possession, vagrancy, trespassing...instead of fines or jail time, I was ordered to get into treatment. From there, my counselor got me, through the city: healthcare; psychiatric care that addressed my PTSD issues and didn't just give me meds; access to a halfway house; job training (turns out I was way overqualified for what they were offering but they helped me find a job through individual personal contacts); discounted public transportation; a location at which I could shower, do laundry, collect my mail, and come for breakfast and lunch. I'm probably alive today because someone else overdosed and I forgot to take the dope out of my own pocket when the paramedics arrived (with the cops). A lot of those programs were kind of obscure, being privately run and sponsored. Treating the cause, not the visible symptoms. Baltimore also has tons of programs to assist with rehabbing the decaying vacant houses (in which the homeless often live and drug addicts get high, sometimes overdose, and leave bodies which are found long after or never). I always liked that about the city, although it definitely still has a lot of those issues. Today I'm sober. Still treating my issues. Living indoors, with paid bills and rent (no more squatting, no eviction notice!), food in my fridge. Working for myself. Pursuing passions that I had not had time, resources or focus to concentrate on when I was panhandling, looking for a warm safe place to sleep, getting my next fix or shiver-sweating through withdrawal.
I'm alive today because I was arrested in an area where it was possible to get help, after dozens of arrests in areas that gave me fines, jail time, and no healthcare access or homeless shelters. I'm looking at you, NW Arkansas, Myrtle Beach, Las Vegas (!), Alabama, Georgia, etc. etc. etc.
Because of problems being addressed directly.
Seems I can either reply in the absolute simplest way, or I can write an essay. I can't find an in-between. 😐
So I'll just say. Good people who are homeless aren't a problem. Bad people who are homeless are. It's impossible to be rid of the later without hurting the first.
@@FlySwann I know how you feel about simple vs essay.
I always seem to opt for essay since it's so hard to express subtlety in brief replies. That said, this is gonna be long too...
I also know what you mean about "good" vs "bad", but that I think gets into both other social issues (to a degree) and the basic nature of humanity (mostly). Some people suck whether they have money, education, resources, assistance, a good life story, and intelligence. In fact intelligence can be an issue, especially if that intelligence is used selfishly. I can think of two people who fit that description pretty well.
And let me say this: I don't have a whole lot of room to judge anyone for panhandling/begging/scamming money in order to feed an addiction. I panhandled for two solid years myself for drug money, and went on a "socially funded" heroin tour of the U.S. The good things that happened to me took time, and in that time I was still begging, ripping people off, and feeding a crack habit for some time after getting into methadone treatment for the heroin habit. I'm certainly not an angel, but in me there still existed a sense that relying on other people's charity for non-essentials and when I was capable of caring for myself (once I sobered up I could ABSOLUTELY hold a job) was concretely wrong in a way that bothered me even when "wrong" is a concept I've moved around a lot for my own peace of mind.
Here however, allow me to present two character studies. Real people. If they aren't dead, in jail, or changed (the first two likely but the latter... possible, I suppose, but unlikely) you can find both under the bridge where MLL intersects with Franklin or Mulberry. Lonnie, who has an easily treatable goiter that he leaves untreated because it gets him more pity, has a degree in psychology. He is quite intelligent. He has made a conscious decision that he likes smoking crack and living on the charity of others more than he likes working and earning of his own volition. He'll turn down work. He has a mattress on the sidewalk and a whole library of books, a decent if minimal wardrobe (my current roommate has fewer articles of clothing than Lonnie) and a food pantry setup last I saw him. He has "regulars" who bring him fast food, pizzas, he knows when these things will arrive and keeps up with what he wants but will skip out on church PB & J and the like. Lonnie knows about every program in the city and has even worked for some of them. He doesn't give that information out easily or for free, though. He is intelligent, but content with a shit life as long as he can keep smoking crack. I've seen a lot of addicts. It's not often you see an addict who will choose that lifestyle, not out of fear or anxiety or withdrawal but out of a genuine comfort within it and a happiness with his or her situation. Lonnie is one of a rare few who have done exactly that. It's still addiction and it's still sad, but it's definitely not the same kind of sad.
Easy tell, I've always thought: if someone turns down food, they're probably not as desperate as they'd like to appear.
Peaches is another girl at the same place. Peaches is a crack whore. Her mother lives under the same bridge and they share the same vocation. Horrible life. She has a seriously tragic back story. She isn't someone who's consciously choosing the lifestyle with a good knowledge of the options available: she was essentially born addicted to crack and will likely die that way, even with the available ways out. What makes Peaches particularly despicable in my eyes is the fact that she sees pregnancy as a "moneymaker". She will not stop smoking crack. She delivered two babies in the year I lived and begged nearby. Both died almost immediately. One died in a trashcan. Both times she delayed going to the hospital to smoke just a little more crack. And then a little more. I've known plenty of women who used while pregnant. Addiction is an ugly, ugly thing. Peaches was the only woman I've ever met who saw a pregnancy as a way to get more money begging, and not only didn't want the child--*could* have aborted the child--but counted on it not surviving. When you can make choices like that, it's not a matter of history, circumstances, desperation. Especially not with all the help that was available. Social Services tried hard to take care of her, to track her down. Plenty of concerned people tried to help her with doctors, rehab, she had court orders, she used the systems available for assistance as resources to keep her lifestyle as it was, not change it. When you can make the choice to use your pregnancy for sympathy money to fund the addiction that you are counting on to kill your unborn child (which isn't guaranteed, mind you!), you're a truly shitty person. somewhere deep inside.
When I was younger I lived in the Baltimore area
How did you get to so many different cities while homeless? Hitchhiking?
@@evientually, I hope you are doing better now and got your addiction cured. I cannot even imagine what you must have gone through.
Congratulations on getting out of there, obtaining a roof above your head, and a job. I'm glad for you.
Stories like these make me emotional.
But I think something threatens to crack inside of me when I read about the Peaches. This is something new. I have experienced disgust and horror and was saddened before. But not in such a way. I feel like my mind would not allow me to imagine a picture of this, for my mental health's sake.
I only hope one day we will not have to face such problems and be stuck in such bad situations. And no innocent lives be ruined anymore.
* hugs, if appropriate *
2:57 that means someone had to figure out the exact wall angle at which you achieve maximum back splash.....That is hilarious!
they never do that in russia because that would stop exactly no one
@@tsartomato you'd just have a bunch of people smelling like piss.
just ask a company, who makes potty-pottery - they have done this research a long time ago
People rapidly discovered that with an angle to the wall you don't get splashed 😂
With all that tax money they could've hired a enginner to calculate the angle on paper, altough i believe that doing thos in russia would result in people pissing on cars and randomly on the sidewalk if drunk enough
Designers: "Haha! My genius design will surely thwart those pesky skateboarders for sure!"
Actual skateboarders: "Bet"
xD yep
actual skateboarders: looks like we found a -hard- hyper epic mode
*dude I bet you 5 bucks If you skate across*
@Dalton Jones what, you mean the yellow bits with the bumps on? the ones that help visually impaired people know where the road crossing is?
@@amyshaw893 the bumps also help specifically in winter. The bumps add additional texture to a slopes surface that would otherwise be very easy to slip on with even a small amount of snow.
Unnecessary grind in games with microtransactions? Unpleasant design.
unpleasant yea, but not with the same meaning as in this video.
unpleasant design is things like making all chat emoticons because you want to hide your playerbase's toxicity, can't think of many other examples of the top of my head but i'm sure they exist, unpleasant design is there to hide problems and the super grinds are hardly hiding anything.
Uh hem clash royale much?
Actually, I don't think it's that different. The video mentioned how airports would sometimes deliberately have less seats than needed in order to drive people toward restaurants where they'd have to buy something in order to be able to sit down. I'd say it's essentially the same principle: you frustrate people into spending money they never intended to spend.
A big beef with mobage games I have.
What problem is that meant to cover up? It’s just rotten design. A game that forces you to pay just to have a decent experience isn’t Unpleasant Design by the definition they gave. It’s just unpleasant.
As someone who has experienced homelessness, _thank you_ for drawing attention to this. Tho it's also worth noting a lot of these designs have the _additional_ cruelty of being inaccessible for disabled ppl.
It's worth noting that a lot of these "hostile design" elements are MAJOR violations of disability access rights
they are. definitely the benches (all variants). Or the anti-shopping-cart-theft poles--they keep out people with mobility devices.
are they? a bench for example is property of the City and I don't think any law prohibits uncomfortable benches. peeing in public and on buildings is in many countrys forbidden, less seating doesn't violate any rights, finding your vain for drugs is definitely no basic right and bad music isnt a problem too. The only violation I see is the high pitched noise and the bike rags, but even the bike rags.
@@tashkiira7838 How do the polls on shopping carts stop people with mobility issues from using them?
@@SilentBudgie because the same poles that are too narrow to let a shopping cart out are also too narrow to let a "granny-scooter" in.
Cole Smith wow it’s almost like people make mistakes. Yes I know what you’re thinking “what, people don’t preform tasks with absolute percision” but it’s sad but true so stop harassing people who make typos. Nobody cares
Not to mention a lot of these bad designs hurt disabled people too even if they're targeted at homeless people
And those high-pitched "mosquito" things drive me nuts even though I'm way older than the target demographic
@@MatthijsvanDuin I have major sensory issues and before I went through occupational therapy they would cause full on shut downs.
Yeah but the joker's running the city do not think about that.Nor do they care.☹️
@@MatthijsvanDuin im10
@@firstnamelastname-rf8lt r/youngpeopleyoutube
Bet this could make some really weird ethical choices in games, like imagine a city building game where some choices you make can improve your city's image but at the cost of people's joy
Anno series have it. You may drive homeless away from your city for a reasonable price
Also, Civ5 does this, but not in regards to homelessness, you simply must make a choice whether you want to war/annex at the cost of happiness or currency.
Indigo Azai
Remind me of Stronghold Crusader,
Putting chopping blocks and gallows in front of the cathredal XD
Good times.... Good times....
In cities skylines one of the district policies you can put in is lessened regulation for industry. This boosts the productivity of the factories. But as you play from god' s perspective of the city as a whole, it doesn't affect you.
This would actually be a great way to make more people aware of this phenomenon.
From what I've heard, some games were deliberately designed to be more difficult than necessary so as to discourage rentals and encourage full purchases, as a harder game might take longer to beat than the time allotted for a rental. That's one way that this topic may relate to video games.
if you're talking abot old games, wasn't that just a remnant of the arcade days? those games were indeed harder so you can spand more money to get to the next level.
no, hard games sell less
the right example are easy games which hide bad mechanics. when you play harder games, it need polished mechanics because it feels unfair otherwise
It was a generally accepted rule in the Atari offices that a quarter should buy you no more than three minutes of gameplay. Also, as a reference to the recent math episode, Double Dragon 3 allowed you to pump in more quarters to buy things at a shop (microtransactions in an arcade game! In the 80's!), but the upgrades actually became less useful as you bought more of them, so even if you were spending more it wouldn't become so easy you could walk through without dying.
Not necesairily more dificult, but tedious as well. Why else are there microtransactions aimed at skipping parts of the game? Sure, you could play the same piece over and over again, grinding for that item or level up required to progress the game. Or you could pay a few bucks and get all of that trouble free in order to progress.
You PAY so you don't have to play so much. A piece of the game was designed to become boring and unapealing so you'd want to rush through that and get back to the stuff that was good enough to get you to buy the game in the first place.
Wait so that high pitched noise in malls isn't normal? I'm Autistic and super lucky that that type of sound isn't a trigger, but seriously. That mosquito system is a danger to a lot of neurodivergents. I always assumed I was hearing the lights (yes that's a thing some Autistic people notice).
@@ccox7198 Nope, not everyone.
@@MsLilly200 yeah deaf people can't
@@ccox7198 True, but there's a difference between "I can hear the lights buzzing" and "I can't focus on a single thing because I'm overloaded by the sound of the lights buzzing", or "I can't hear anything EXCEPT the lights buzzing".
A lot of autistic traits get shrugged off by neurotypical people because they hear a simplified version of the issue and go "I deal with that too", not realizing that people with autism experience these things with FAR greater intensity.
@@DylanB89
I describe it as "I can't filter out background noise, I'll hear it whether I'm focusing on it or not, and it's distracting"
So I'm from Seattle, so when he started I was like "oh yay, he's talking about us!", two seconds later: "oh shit, we're bad."
@RogerwilcoFoxtrot That's pretty damn harsh. Sure they fucked up on the past, but they're still humans. Don't they deserve at least some compassion? Not to mention a lot of them were started on prescription pain killers pushed by greedy pharmaceutical companies.
@RogerwilcoFoxtrot me too
That's how I felt learning about modern (40's to 80's) U.S. history this past year.
That's how I feel whenever anywhere I've lived or been to gets mentioned...
@@aidansilber2028 rehabilitation
I think I remember going into a shop with my mum as a kid and hearing this really irritating, high pitched noise that she couldn't hear. Hmmm...
There's some degree of parallelism between this type of design and anti-piracy measures in video games. Often, they cause a hassle for everyone, not just pirates, and they sap funding that could be used to improve the game itself.
Or designing a game to shoo away players less willing to sink money into DLC or in-game loot.
Made worse by the fact that pirates often don't have to worry about the DRM because they use a crack that goes around it, while paying users have to put up with being always online (or other inconveniences) to play the game.
I think a comparable parallel would be anti-theft measures for real-life items, like keeping expensive or often stolen items in locked boxes you need to ask an employee to open, or to put the little plastic things on clothes that need to be removed by a special machine.
It's an inconvenience to the consumer, sure, but it's very minor and has a big effect of preventing theft. Trying to make sure people pay for your product isn't comparable to preventing homeless people from having shelter so that other people don't need to see them.
It’s funny because today I JUST watch LGR’s video on anti-piracy measures on PC gaming. Lol
SalamiSteve That is what you see, it gets worse. Many stores, such as supermarkets, increase the price so that honest customers pay for what they estimate will be stolen.
“Designing should be about solving problems, not hiding them.”
(Tom Howard begins to sweat and look nervous)
Determinism is Freedom 🤙 🤙
Or creating them
My grandmother lives in the nw and when it snows (like the last storm) my grandma usually when she can parks her car outside and lets people in bad situations sleep in the garage, and provides hot water and a few snacks bless her heart
Your grandma's a freaking hero.
Ur grandma is awesome man u and ur family should never make her sad
One of them is going to murder her and steal her valuables one day
@@Limestone_Wolf Wow, what is wrong with you?
@@Anas-ux9vi I don't live in a gated neighborhood Karen. I know homeless people too well in my line of work
Removing the headphone jack
are you seriosly comparing the gravity of the removal of the headphone jack with design made with the purpose of being "homelessproof"? get your priorities straight bro
I saw this as an example of unpleasant design--we've been highlighting a lot of these in our comments section to further the discussion around design. --Belinda
@Leo De Crescenzo To be honest. He is right though, Apple choice to remove the audio jack did nothing but exclude alot of cheaper headphone jacks. So if people wanted a headphone they *had* to buy an Apple headphone. Apple got away with it because they are quite famous.
Leo De Crescenzo ; It's not meant to be a comparison, just an example of intentionally unpleasant design to force a desired behavior. Stop manufacturing outrage.
The real question is, how do you wear wireless earbuds without them falling out of your ears within minutes?
I don’t like the term “Unpleasant Design.” It sounds like corporate speak compared to other terms like “Asshole Architecture” or “Hostile Design”
Usually I see it called "hostile architecture".
I like a hole architecture
Asshole Design
What is this? Asshole pong?
I like "Hostile Design."
I grew up in a retirement town... since me and my school friends had nowhere to go and nothing to do we used hang out at the town square, there was a fountain there, a library, a coffee shop and some benches. After a few months the city put up one of those 'mosquitoes.' A high pitched noise that only the young could hear... so that only the elderly people were comfortable in that space.
wait wait wait at 0:57 the cops badge says
"powice owo"
I commend their bravery
Its spreading
Determinism is Freedom 🤙 🤙 🤙
@@joule400 there's nothing you can do!
I would argue that unpleasant design absolutely has a place in modern discussions of game design. I think one of the most prominent recent examples might be Star Wars Battlefront 2. Now, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with microtransactions or with a company trying to make a profit off of their game, but many of the game systems are designed to make the game unpleasant to play without having purchased microtransactions. In my opinion, these kinds of design choices are almost certainly unpleasant design.
It's almost as if you're also watched their episodes on F2P economies and human design!
Activision did almost EXACTLY the thing that airport did with the seating, but in Call of Duty it was public loot boxes and that patent they have for a system where it puts you in matches it knows you'll lose, to get you to buy loot boxes. "Wow, check out that shiny new weapon that player got! Better get one too! You want people to come see the sweet new item you got too, don't you? Oh, man, that guy just killed you! What weapon did he have? Wow, you could get one of those if you had a loot box!"
Cole McBroom That is the whole point of microtransactions, if you are going to spend the time and resources to add them, then you also need to alter the design to deliver a longer or more frustrating experience, to make the player as uncomfortable as possible to drive them towards them. Its why the "its just a way to reward the devs" argument falls apart, because that revenue source is much less dependable than one achieved by giving players a Pavlovian conditioning.
The progression system has been fixed already though. You level up just by playing the game now. Cosmetics are the only thing you can spend money on now.
KaiserAfini They don't "have to" that's kind of the problem, companies have lost touch with their player base, they see them as something to be conned, milked or maniuplated, rather than people that they should and could build good will with and earn the respect of. Humans would far rather reward a company whose game they enjoy than be forced to pay to enjoy the game. Warframe is a good example of this. I've never once thought I had to pay for things in Warframe to enjoy it. I have however bought extra colors for fashion frame because I wanted to, or a Warframe, Nercos, because I thought he looked cool but I could and did enjoy the game itself the actual core gameplay loop just as much before as after.
If you make a fun core gameplay loop and then offer microtransactions as well players are more than willing to buy things that they want as and when they want them rather than designing the core gameplay loop to lose enjoyment the longer you go without spending money.
2:56 It takes a nine year old to figure out, that you just have to angle yourself a little to the right/left and to avoid getting splashed. In fact, I was nine years old when I figured it out.
And before you judge me: I was nine years old and had a full bladder, so cut me some slack. It wasn't even in public.
Just pee on the floor
@@zhurs-mom 👆
@@zhurs-mom your username is making our replies funny
I expected better from Sokrates.
pissing on private property is praxis.
Country: has homeless people
People: shouldn’t we try help them?
Country: *Nah pump all our money into fancy traps*
More like
Country: Does our politicians have any solution?
Jigsaw: Yes, I do.
Determinism is Freedom 🤙
Why? Just why would you use the Philippine flag?
'Help them'
Yeah, how? Do you even comprehend WHY someone is homeless? Most of the time it's because they've made choices that have put them in that situation, and don't change.
So how are you gonna help someone who doesn't want to help themselves?
Homeless in America is more of a life style choice than an actual problem.
In the city I live in (In the UK), the poshest department store (who's doors are regularly used by homeless at night) refused the Council permission to fit anti-sleeping devices around it's property. When this was made public, sales went up by 15%.
What's that? Taking philanthropic approaches to problems improves your brand image thus attracting more customers? Wow, that wouldn't have ever occurred ME.
Quite often hostile architecture is also hostile towards a lot of people who should be theoretically and legally welcome in the areas where such contraptions are installed. For example, those leaning rails make it very difficult for people with disabilities(particularly "invisible" ones like Ehlers-Danlos that can make standing in place painful) to exist at say, transit stops. It took a coordinated effort to get my city to install even those lumpy benches at the new bus stops because they didn't want anybody waiting there, let alone sleeping. Prior to their installation, I had found the bus stops to be largely unusable because of my own personal disability status as my hips and knees regularly give out resulting in nasty falls.
Additionally with the blue light example, they can mess with people with certain medical conditions that cause light sensitivies(Lupus, Autism Spectrum Disorder, Dyslexia, migraines, certain forms of epilepsy...).
Like you said, a lot of these "aesthetic choices" are unquestionably evil.
The mosquito noises are extremely unpleasant for anyone with auditory sensitivities, for another example. Plus small children in general.
@@ettinakitten5047 Yeah imagine your a small child being brought to one of those places against your will by a parent who does not believe you when you say there is a loud noise.
"because they didn't want anybody waiting there" - What the eff is wrong with the people in your city's city hall? I mean, seriously, what do they think people *do* at a bus stop...
@@awesomeness1122 oh my that breaks my heart
Exactly. Even without disability of such magnitude such rails and other benches of the sort especially slanting are terrible. Seeing like going from the airport waiting on train to take me home after sitting in a busy flight for some time, hauling a dog over my shoulder and my bag over many stairs, dodging many people and all that. All you just want to do at that moment of waiting is sit comfortably, they even take that away. If the floors were a little more clean I'll gladly just sit on the ground.. but yeah hostile design to disabled people and healthy ish alike.
2:34 oh yeah, that thing
the Mosquito has caused severe hearing loss for many people and countries refuse to make it illegal despite it producing a sound that goes way over the normally allowed limit
The hell
I have seen something like that in a hardware store here in the UK. I always hated going their with my dad because of the high pitched sound hear the entrance. Now we don’t go there.
@@waity5856 I like your pfp 😉
@@nothingnoone8752 Thanks!
Ugh those things are especially awful because I have very sensitive ears, every adult ive known has just said that it’s the doors and cameras making those sounds but I’m pretty sure it’s just the noise machine thing (forgot what they were called)
This shows what is perhaps the biggest flaw in democracy: The skills needed to get elected to office have nothing to do with the skills needed to be an effective and compassionate leader.
Maybe being compassionate has nothing to do with being effective leader ?
@@MrJigssaw1989 Bingo.
@@MrJigssaw1989 Maybe not from a standpoint of a bureaucrat, but having compassion is the hallmark of an effective leader. Because people who lead their nations effectively but cruelly are not worthy of praise.
I wouldn't say 'biggest' flaw, but pretty far up on the list.
TECHNOCRACY NOW
homeless people: yay the bike racks are gone-
politicians- *oh yeah well the bridge is too*
Goood
Typical politicians. Only care about themselves. What we want are leaders and heroes of the people not some politic parties
@@ammarpratama1207 political parties are dumb. They only serve to isolate and dehumanize people. George Washington said not to separate into parties and he was right.
$1200 tiny houses.
I’ve seen strategically placed poles so people in wheelchairs or motorised scooters have to go around a public area and can’t make it inside.
Tatiana Addison a lot of those are to prevent shopping cart theft
Philip Szeremeta However, you can design systems that work better to not allow for that theft, but also to allow wheelchairs and scooters to still go inside a building.
Which is actually illegal.
@@endjentneeringclub The designers and engineers don't go for the cheapest, they would love nothing more than to have huge budgets. They just have to work within the budgets they are granted..
You are probably seeing the poles meant to keep cars and trucks from running people down in public places.
Because design should be about solving problems, not hiding them.
THIS EPISODE IS SPONSORED TO YOU BY BRILLIANT.
*brought to you*
speaking of solving problems, this video is sponsored by brilliant
When I heard about this, me and a friend of mine started working on this small project; you know how people cut up plastic bags, make it into string for crocheting? Well, she and I started crocheting mats out of them, so homeless people can lay down on benches or the ground more comfortably. Two birds, one stone. Highly recommend. (I’m not saying this for clout, just to lampshade real fast. I’m saying this so people can have an idea on what they can do themselves to help)
That's a wonderful idea! I'll definitely have to start doing this, there's far too many homeless people in my area and I absolutely despise the fact that there's so little I can do thanks to my own shitty economic situation. This, however, I can do!
Homelessness isn't the same everywhere. My hometown has plenty of room and resources in the shelters, but many of the homeless refuse to go to them due to the rules put on them by the shelters. Many would prefer to sleep on a bench, then subject themselves the shelters' required counciling and treatment. The city makes benches uncomfortable in order pressure the homeless into the shelters.
@@badluck5647 ...because a handful or reasonable rules that help put homeless people on track to reintegrate into society are bad?
@@AaronCMounts because some homeless shelters do really bad stuff to the people there
@@wt_9026 So you investigate and address those particular shelters and those particular issues. Those individual issues have nothing to do with the (baseless) complaints offered by @C D.
New york took the benches out of the subway so the homless couldnt sleep there. Lets ignore all the pregnant and disabled people that also need to sit there.
*logic 100*
Its not only hurting the pregnant people, its just bad for everyone.
Game design is also culture design, as Don Daglow said in his 2017 GDC talk on business leadership for indie devs.
IkomaTanomori even so, we (developers) use game design in the same way, not consciously but sometimes conciosolusy too. Look at the MicroTransactions and Multiplayer only gaming model, look at exclusives and region restricted gaming, look at how we depict whose stories we tell in our games and their purpose - more often than not, we ignore most gamers and fulfill the need of those luck and applicable to our design, sure we can't build to please everyone, but a nod here and there is a nice gesture developers and publishers can use.
Unpleasant Design Episode 2: How It Manifests in Games?
Unpleasant design in games is super easy to detect. Just looks at any Freemium games really.
This video was really good but, I gotta admit I was really dissapointed with a HUGE oversight which was: Unpleasant Design harms more targets than the ones it was intended for.
One of the main (I expect) accidental victims of this is the disabled and the elderly. I'm disabled myself, I have connective tissue problems so I do need to sit down to ease my back, legs, hips and to recover my breath that I lose very easily. But these types of designs reaaaally fuck you up. Leaning rails/bars are practically useless for me and most folk with health issues, they don't make you properly rest, they still put tons of weight and pressure on your legs and hips. Sometimes I have a low pressure drop and need to sit down but hey, fuck me, this place has no spots to sit, gotta have to risk fainting again.
Yes! While the issues raised in the video are of course legitimate and very much worth addressing, this really needs more attention, too. The knock-on effects on unintended targets.
My best friend has MS and sometimes she just needs a place to sit. Her husband and his mother are Narcoleptic. My father has early-onset Parkinson's. Some of these things are a major issue in terms of causing excessive harm if someone who is elderly or disabled falls, on top of the issues you already mentioned with preventing even momentary safe rest for those most in need of it.
Huh. Interesting outlook on the situation
I get those pressure drops too! Sometimes, when there is simply no good places to collapse sitting, I will either sit down or lie down on the ground, usually in a dramatic fashion as I am losing body control during my episodes, and I figure it's better to lie down than to fall all the way from standing position.
You're right about these designs being meant as a deterrent. It's important to remember that there are some situations where everyone's health can be put at risk by camping in urban public spaces. Hepatitis is one example of a contagion that can spread in urban outdoor spaces. You're so right that we mustn't hide people who need housing. The challenge is to respond to these problems as wisely and humanely as possible.
Just hearing about it make me so angry...it's like:
"Hey! Why don't we wast more money on stuff to keep homeless away rather than trying to get the homeless somewhere to stay!"
People be stupid. U_U
ŕhýmé
If I had to guess, its because 200 dollars is easier to spare than 200,000.
@@CameronSMoore but you see, that’s 200 you don’t get back, have to pay repeatedly, and will ultimately be wasted, whereas that 200,000 will allow more people to be able to pay taxes, contribute to the economy, *won’t* be an illegal violation of several disability protections, and will improve the condition of the city overall.
@@lordfelidae4505 but why do that when you can fund the homeless industrial complex and get sweet sweet tax money and right offs to keep people down?
I got shit-talked and downvotted to hell, on a reddit thread, on a news piece about somewhere in the UK where they put these types of things on benches, and I was trying to point out that this is not solving any problem, except the public confort. I'm so glad you made this video, I didn't know this was such a common deal in the USA
The people who can't see the injustice of it have no real part to play anyhow. We may never play a part in this either, but if we do we'll make a difference. We'll do better.
Why wouldn't the U.K. have a similar issue, as the U.S.A.? American society, originated from Great Britain, so it seems like a societal issued shared by both countries, is a no-brainer.
It's one of the first things you start getting taught as a politician in the US, even if you somehow get started above the city level, the people below you will start appealing to get help doing this exact thing. Literally every city in the US does this to varying degrees. I grew up in the US city that the original London bridge resides in. They tried putting in the spikes and the racks, at different times under the bridge, and both times it became a rare instance of both the locals and the snowbirds(people who live there during the winter and go back North for the summer) agreeing on something, so they fought back. They didn't fight back because they wanted to protect homeless people, hell half the snowbirds have been lobbying for more of this type of design around the city. They fought back because they didn't want the public landmark to be defaced and less pretty.
So you got a taste of the hospitality comming from people that can't see their own privileges.
Have my condolences for your innocence's death
@badreality & dLzzz
The US has more homeless people, so there's more need to deal with them. Part of it is due to the US being a mess in various ways, and part of it is just that they have the people they have and that's something they just have to deal with.
As a hypothetical: given that you are going to have homeless people no matter what you do, would you rather have them in spaces that could otherwise be nice, or in spaces that people are going to avoid anyway? Would you rather have your downtown look more like Detroit or St. Louis, or more like Copenhagen?
Because that hypothetical is not so far removed from actuality. Implying that unpleasant design puts a dent in spending on the poor is a typical case of scale insensitivity - the two are not even remotely comparable in cost, and doing one does not significantly impair your ability to do the other.
The holes in benches also help with keeping water from building up on the bench
the bench could also be designed with a very slight incline or water-resistant paint for a similar effect
You're right about the incline, though it'd need to be a noticeable incline to have most water roll off (surface tension yo).
Paint would be expensive, because it chips and degrades, so you'd need to reapply it. Public Benches are made as cheap as they can be, because it's not a particularly high-demand application and it's going to get the hell beaten out of it no matter what you make it out of, so why spend any more than the minimum on it? Punching holes is real cheap, and saves a bit of material too.
Just a reminder that more or less everything involves money considerations at some point along the way. And money considerations carry more weight than most things.
And keep my ass cold in hot summer days 10/10 perfect design.
I thought they were there so you could fart
Agreed. Except for the material savings bit. Drilling holes in prefabricated non-recyclable surfaces wastes some source material (thus money). That's one of the main reasons hobby engineers get hard for 3D printers.
Everyone: YAY the evil bike racks are gone!
That one guy that actually used them for his bicycle:
There were probably some nearby that were more convenient.
Where should I park my bike? Ah, under a bridge seems good. No way that would be inconvenient to get my bike out of
Id imagine the bike racks were somewhere they weren't needed, hence why people took notice. Like, why put a bike rack where there likely are no stores?
OMG THAT’S WHAT BUZZES AT THE TRAIN STATION! I THOUGHT I WAS CRAZY
malls too, unpleasant but not deterring
@@aonodensetsu dettering for me though.
we have them along the beach...Its the fucking beach my man like where else should young folks go?
@@MysShadowdragon Why put them at the beach? What do they think kids will do there? Skateboard and do heroin? Write to your city council to get those removed
I love the EC episodes that delve into real world design and how the common sense skills we’ve acquired making and playing games can help improve the world as a whole for gamers and non-gamers alike.
We've actually been talking about politics since season 1! Here's a playlist of the videos we've done over the years about where real-world political issues we care about. ua-cam.com/play/PLhyKYa0YJ_5AAbhb9A_CxOEGsdORotH48.html
History, sci-fi, and gaming are also quite different even from each other; it's not like they've focused on exactly one thing and have suddenly shifted to the political scene
Casual_Crossfire
History, Sci-Fi and Gaming are all political.
by that definition literally everything is political
Tom Jackal
Isn't it though
One example of this was in Copenhagen to resolve the issue of people digging in trashcans for bottles. They made these tall trashcans that you couldn't reach down into so no trash digging. This seems logical until you realize how another city in Denmark namely Aarhus handled the same situation. Instead of making it impossible to reach into the trashcans, they made a rim around the trashcan for people to place bottles on, so that homeless people didn't have to dig in the trashcans, solving the problem and as a plus being more environmentally friendly.
copenhagen now also has these rims, atleast in some parts.
Andras Petersen +
City : *adds bike racks*
Someone : *learns what’s its meant for and tells everyone*
Everyone: *megalovania starts playing*
Government: Why do i hear boss music?
Yeah basically.
Never mind I do maybe.
@@teleportedbread2377 Public: Were going to do a pro gamer move
I thought the holes were for preventing pooling of water...well learned another depressing fact today
Maybe we could cover them with one-side sticky plastic foil
Why is wrench-chan so handsome in this video
Maybe it's time to get off of the internet son
Because every well-designed villain is always a little bit hot, and a little bit queer.
A bottle of Auqafina left out in the sun Nice username there
He's taken a vaction from Amagi Brilliant Park and worked on some sick gains
OBSCURE REFERENCE FROM 4/10 ANIME
Having worked in retail, one reason for the loud music is to make the shop feel more busy and frantic so the customers get their stuff and pay much quicker.
As a Seattleite I can confirm that Seattle is super guilt of hostile design damn near impossible to go anywhere downtown without noticing it.
Most North American cities are.
why are you a satellite?
@@urhsusnikvrecic1478 'Seattlite'. Blorb's from the city of Seattle.
Spray foam + cardboard?
I come from the Future, I can confirm that Seattle is full of idiots who burn down their own city and small business.
I think this design can be seen in video games too, although more for hiding bugs and lazy code than else (like, a bridge is broken for now so you give the player a boat to cross, but that's because you put triggers when walking on the bridge and that's supposed to happen way later). Nice to see you showed it with much more concrete examples.
the night hAunter war/russian/aidan/doctor/doyle GODDMANIT YOU BEAT ME TO IT
(wow your username is a mouthful!)
I remember one where a character couldn't hold a gun properly in a cutscene, so they just made the screen shake.
They do that with semi trucks, to get rid of semi truck parking they will paint the red curb dashed so it's enough for a car but not a semi truck. Because there is a federal law that says the truck driver has to sleep 10 hours (hours of service regulation) truck drivers have a problem with places to park legally. There is a shortage of places to park as the demands of goods go higher, and instead of the city (It's usually always a city) accommodating the truck drivers, they will go AGAINST them and put giant rocks and lots of no parking signs instead of just making it a place for them to park. Rest area and truck stops are always full, it was sad watching truck after truck try to find a place to park for the night and the sun wasn't even down!
Oh, and let's not forget the cop pounding on your door on the middle of the night when you are in deep slumber telling you to drive tired because you can't park there. Glad you are looking out for their safely, officer
I wasn't a truck driver, I was just a passenger but it's real sad to see
Mysterious K +
As a truck driver i can say this is 100% accurate. Ive never had a police come and bang on my door, but it gets super hard to find parking spaces to the point where you hav e to make your own space. Be it legal or not. I work for a dedicated walmart route. And i cant tell you how bad it is in walmarts most of them dont want trucks there ever. And make everything as small as possible, rocks, islands, signs hell even some of the docks arw BS. Just so much negative actiaoms.
DamaOscuraDeTodos you would think. But RV's show a happy traveling customer and usually arnt loud. Semi's show hard commerce and truckers. Plus thery are very loud, cant have that now disturbs the customers to much. Or some bullshit like that.
Don't worry; they'll all be replaced soon with autonomous drivers. (Imagine I say this with bitter irony.)
I vote for a protest. (hopefully it remains peaceful.)
There is absolutely nothing wrong with you straying away from your usual topics. This is important stuff and the people need to know. I wish more channels would do it, honestly.
Don't address the problem but just make it look better. Sounds like the government alright.
The brainstorming session probably went this way: "How much for social housing?" "500 millions, plus 25 millions a year for maintenance because these hobos won't clean after themselves." "How about a couple bike racks for 10 thousands?" "Deal."
@@yudithcaron8053 Makes me wonder where other 9.500 dollars went
_Elected_ govt though; you _could_ get them out of office
In most cases the government doing something will make the problem much worse, the closing the the mental institutions lead to a dramatic increase in chronic homelessness prior to this the people where more drifters who didn't stay in one place for long and got by on day labor.
@@evanjohnson1299 & the government not doing anything also makes the problem far worse. Funny, that.
Funny thing, I walked into some place last year and there was this unpleasant high pitched whine permeating the place. Guess what: mosquito system. Guess what: I'm 46, and not spending the $2500 I was going to spend here. Oddly I have tinnitus which is in the upper range of normal hearing for my age, but I remember taking a hearing test and the doctor saying "how did you hear that" repeatedly as he went down from the top of the range.
Our local theater talked to the tech company I worked for about 10 years ago about installing a cell phone jammer. I told them if it's not illegal already, the FCC will make it so very quickly (and they did). This was mainly focused at 'teens bringing in their cell phones and talking during the movie'.
Seriously. A few outliers who are older can hear that crap, too. I'm 35 and can still just barely hear them as well. There was an older TV in one building of my high school which made this absolutely horrendous high pitched buzzing sound which I could hear throughout the (small) building when it was in use and made me want to slam my head into a wall. Even other kids in my classes could not hear it, I asked, and they thought I was nuts. And I know now that there's basically no way any of the adults in the building could. But I could always tell when the damned thing was in use and it was just torture to sit there and try to focus. Thankfully it was never used IN one of my classes; I'm pretty sure I'd have just walked out (in tears), consequences be damned. Like you I tended to have outlier results on hearing tests as well.
And it's a really crappy thing to do to the young and those accompanying them, regardless.
And yeah, cellphone jammers in public spaces are an absolutely horrendous idea. Too many potential emergency situations.
That's 15,734 hz, all CRT TV's make it (in the US), but some are louder than others. It's the refresh rate (29.97) times the number of screen lines (525).
Then there's foils like me, a teen who can't hear all too well.
Copper Hamster 29 year old here. I have similar hearing, and I detest mosquito systems. They're atrocious.
And do you know why those teens were on their phones in a movie theater?
Places to "hang out", such as public squares, have largely been replaced with malls. Malls are privately owned and therefore can kick anyone out for no reason at all, and are designed to funnel you towards spending as much money as possible as fast as possible.
Compared to that, a movie theater is refreshingly simple: if you have a ticket, you can be in there for the time period of that showing, you get nice padded chairs instead of terrible benches, and nobody hassles you to get out of there or to spend more money once you are inside.
Are there any arguably positive examples of unpleasant design? Perhaps something that keeps people from lingering in an area that reasonably needs people to move through. You should ask why people aren't moving through quickly, but you shouldn't incentivise it. You wouldn't put a comfy bench in an elevator (if put one at all) since that's a space that people really shouldn't linger. If for some odd reason people started sleeping in elevators I'd probably replace the carpet with something less pleasant while working on solutions to the root cause (people are prone to sticking to routines).
Design that hinders skateboarders is not exactly mustache twirling evil, for example, especially if in places where it could pose a danger to others who use the space and if there are designated areas for such activities nearby. Of course one should attempt to make public spaces for skateboarding if practical, but something to disincentivize it in inappropriate settings seems somewhat reasonable.
There are spiked and slopes on the roof of the train station to keep pegons from building nests. And some design that keep racoon away. Also some really expensive train doors subway station you see in Korea and such that's intended to make suicide hard to acomplish.
Also, skateboarders lay down wax on surfaces so they don't damage their boards. Since they rarely, if ever, remove the wax, this negatively affects other users of the space.
Yes, it is used all the time in prisons. One example is using red lights for cell checks during the night as red lights are less likely to wake people up. Additionally, using grass instead of concrete is common in prison yards and cell phone blockers/signal jammers to stop unauthorized communicatiopns
Some places have pillars near fire exits that you have to walk around. This makes it so people slow down before they get to the small funnel. This prevents people from jamming up the doors.
speedbumps
Keeping people from shooting up in public bathrooms with a blue light seems like a good idea to me. People who are high or want to become high make poor choices that effect the safety and rights of others. That sort of behavior does not belong in public, if anywhere at all.
I agree
But the blue light hurt those with sensitive eyes, let people know it's a bad neighborhood, and drug addicts can still feel where the veins are so it's still a waste
This is literally a textbook example of a Karen
But blue light won't stop that everywhere, you need to take care of their mental state to bring people out of drug addiction
@@Morgan_of_the_Maxilla i mean do you want them doing drugs or not?
Politicians: *installs anti-homeless architecture*
Homeless person one: Why must this architectural design prevent us from sleeping here!?
Homeless person two: Because they do not want us to try to sleep here...
Homeless person three: There is only do there is try...
Homeless person three: *Manages to sleep under the bench*
@Stale Bagelz probably to miraculously disappear or to die somewhere away from the public eye. As far as I know, the officials would be very happy.
Determinism is Freedom 🤙 🤙 🤙 🤙
This seems like my landlord's "design" philosophy too haha.
How exactly doe you landlord handle this?
As a fellow Renter, my guess: A lightswitch has a mark on it? PAINT OVER IT! The tiles in the bathroom are looking old and there's mildew in the grout? PAINT OVER THEM! The letterbox is broken and leaks, making sure that your mail is wet and disgusting? PAINT THAT MAILBOX! Cracks in the walls? Paint. Cornice coming away from the walls? Paint them. Skirting all falling apart? PAINT AGAIN!
You get the idea...
"A lightswitch has a mark on it? PAINT OVER IT!" yeah that how you fix a mark on a lightswitch what did you want them to do?
"The tiles in the bathroom are looking old and there's mildew in the grout? PAINT OVER THEM!" That sounds like you don't know how to keep your home clean, but yeah paint is definitely not the solution there.
Also where do you live the kind of home that has cornices is also run by a slum lord too cheap to replace a mail box or put plaster in the cracks in the walls?
J B old places in Australia almost universally have cornice, and most places are terribly kept. The landlords paint over everything before you get there, so a good tenant that moves into a place will have to deal with the fact that landlords just paint over stuff whenever bad tenants move out, instead of actually cleaning or fixing the issues. Another great one is that they do all the painting without actually masking anything so paint is just brushed onto everything in a lot of these places. It's awful.
Weird that they bother enough with the upkeep to keep the cornice up. In the US, or at least where I've lived, slum lords just pulled them out when they needed any maintenance so none of the old homes in poor areas have them anymore.
I've actually noticed unpleasant design in my day to day life before this, and pretty quickly realized why it was there even though I had no idea it had an actual name.
Another favourite of mine I could add to the list are the bus stops that theoretically have rain shelters despite these being designed in such a way that despite having three walls and a ceiling, they do little to protect you from even the slightest breeze or any amount of rain above a drizzle. These things are awful for EVERYONE and it's very easy to realize why they exist.
I want some fucking shelter from the rain when I am waiting for the bus damn it, I want to be able to relax on a bench from time to time damn it.
Edgewalker001 i especially noticed the sharp bumps in between stairway escalators (no idea how those are called in english) to stop people from slinding down there (i guess thats protecting them from themselves aswell though^^)
What’s wrong with the rain shelters?
I know they don’t work like they’re supposed to, but what are they really for?
they're there so the bus companies can make it look like they care about their customers
100% comfortable with seeing homelessness. And Im also 0% confortable with modern architectre including hostile design.
But alas I know that you would not people like me to solve the homeless problem.
I just wanna see homelessness not be an issue anymore
@@theoverseer393 key word "see" laymen like us have that kind of perspective on things which certain organizations take advantage of, so why not let's work together to uproot the problem?
what's funny, is, that i've seen similar places, with comfortable versus uncomfortable, windproof versus windy bus/train shelters, locked versus free electrical outlets, benches versus no benches, spikes versus flat surfaces... and even with comfortable places, i don't really see this mass abuse of those things, looks like this is largely invented problem?
or just build homeless centers instead of wasting money on architecture that keeps homeless people away
Or give jobs to those people!
For many people experiencing homelessness, centers don't keep them from sleeping on the streets, unfortunately. Neither does "giving them jobs". No one has found an effective way to truly "fix" chronic homelessness, that I've been able to find. I think the most effective approach would be around addressing the root cause: mental health.
@@franvdf addressing mental health and drug addiction. I think there should be more rehab centers and less "safe" places the city created for them to shoot up. Seriously. The worst idea ever. Make people responsible for themselves not excuse their bad behavior.
@@sleepyt941 without those places, there would be no less homeless doing drugs, just more risk for them.. but yeah, creating safe places to get high without anywhere to cure their addictions is kind of absurd
There is a totally foolproof solution to the problem. Make not having a permanent address punishable by death. Problem gone.
The fact that it's not about games is ok. Thanks for using your platform to spread some awareness of this issue 😁
Ceilings, so many goddamn types of ceilings to “hide imperfections”
Spackle is cheap. ripping out all the drywall on a ceiling because there's a low spot at the middle of a 16-foot-wide room is expensive. and most contractors are cheap.
To be fair, most places that have the typical office style ceilings (square panels) actually serve quite a few purposes. They reduce the noise level by absorbtion, hide unsightly installations, such as hvac, electrics and plumbing, and are much cheaper long term than other types of ceilings
It is important to remember that not every homeless person is an addict or alcoholic. Even those that are still people. Compassion is never a bad thing.
"B-b-but they STINKYYY"
Unpleasant design to me just sounds like "design for discouraging a certain behavior."
You could say that the "avoid as teammate" feature recently added to Overwatch can be a positive version of unpleasant design against uncooperative players, especially ones in very high or low ranks, and/or players who play during odd hours, as this will affect how long it would take to find a match.
LimeGreenTeknii Im pretty sure they will also warn you when too many people have avoided them, to try to tell them to not be toxic or whatever.
Quite the opposite. Before Avoid (and still now to some extent), many players abused the report system, which led to innocent "uncooperative" players being outright banned. The current Avoid system exists in part to discourage this. It may lead to longer queue times but that's a (much milder) side-effect, not the goal.
As I recall, it had to be axed because skilled players (especially mains of certain characters) found they were having trouble finding games because people were blocking them to avoid losing.
The new system only blocks people from being on your team, so it can't be so abused.
Well, that's mostly on EC's presentation slant. The video opens introducing the topic in a way that will essentially poison the well over the entire concept, but in reality it's just a tool in the designer's toolset, and much like any other tool it can be used to funnel user behaviour towards the design's desired outcome. I really wish they were less subjective in the way they portray these topics, it removes a lot of nuance.
@jav
Yeah, using homeless as an example opens a very large can of worms.
This design concept isn't ideal but it's necessary.
Circling back to games...I have a personal favorite example of something ridiculous being implemented to fix a ridiculous problem. Jurassic Park: Trespasser had an issue where melee weapons would intersect the player's model when sheathed, causing continuous damage. Their solution was to nerf the damage of melee weapons to the point that they were useless.
That desn't even fix the problem, infact this would incourage people to intersect weapons into the moadel of whatever they are attacking as this "fix" makes that the only viable way to use melee
I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for this kind of stuff, and point it out whenever I see it.
i pictured myself ripping out one of those handles on benches in the middle of a crowd
but then i realized that im too introverted to draw that attention to myself
@@wlll1235 Get a nice ol balaclava
@@wlll1235 then you get arrested for destroying public property.. you are in jail and miss a day of work and get fired...the landlord evictes you for not paying.. you remember the arm you ripped of the bench and decide to sleep there..The city repaired the bench.. Congratulations William Miles .
@@wlll1235
The best way to avoid drawing attention is, funnily enough, to wear a high visibility vest while doing this. People will just assume that you're a construction worker and continue on
Many of these designs do in fact solve problems within the domain of their design. E.g. a bus stop needs temporary seating, not a bed or a lounge chair, which would only make the bus stop less effective at serving its own purpose.
That problem is ‘homeless people being able to sleep or be sheltered.’
Having come from designing for the playground industry, those small holes in benches are for water drainage so that water doesn't collect on the sitting surface. Regardless, this was a really fascinating topic to address, and I'd love to see more videos like it.
My Local Theatre has a portikus where a bunch of dudes (nearby drinks and liquor store) would chill out. Now there is non stop classical music recordings from the local orchestra playing from boxes, I kinda like it but apparently ppl on meth cant stand it..
Business owners aren't responsible for tackling social problems. There basically saying "get off my lawn" in architectural language.
That's arguable in the case of spikes, etc
In the case of the mosquito it's not his lawn, but public domain that they are telling young ppl to get off.
@@trueriver1950 the spikes will often interfere with or impede the ability of people with disabilities to pass. Which is illegal.
2:43 our old tv does that whenever it turns on. It didn't used to bother me and it doesn't bother my younger brother or his friends. My parents can't hear it. But I am unlucky enough that it's at the very edge of my hearing - just where you can hear it fine but it feels like it should hurt. I would totally believe this happens on purpose as well.
That's not on purpose. That's the PSU doing its PSU thing.
Edit: Wow, surprisingly few comments saying "where's the game design talk". I'm pleasantly surprised!
To anyone going "I wanted game design talk": ..You can easily apply this to game design. Why do you think the Spelunky Ghost appears in each level instead of letting you 100% levels at your leisure? Why do you think Xcom 2 added turn timers? To make "inch across the map and spam overwatch" no longer doable. They were quick fix band-aids plastered across a design problem to make the player uncomfortable/unable to participate in behaviour that the developers felt went against their intended design.
There, you got your game design talk.
Hopefully now you have the time to give the real-life applications of hostile design a solid think.
Aegix Drakan
Yeah... Oh my god, that fucking ghost.
Of course it is generally a bit tougher to apply to game design, since - for the most part - what's on the line is less serious. So it's harder to draw a line between a legitimate choice by the designer to incentivize a certain type of play, and a piece of hostile design to paper over a problem. And of course games can sort of have it both ways - you can make the mechanic optional, or make the game moddable.
Plus, *usually* the game designer's intent is less malevolent - they generally believe that they are pushing players towards a *better* experience, even if they fail in that goal, as opposed to a city council actively deciding "we just want to sweep homelessness under the rug". The game designer believes "players will have more fun if I block off this option for them" - the city council certainly doesn't believe "homeless people will be better off if we stop them sleeping on this bench".
On the other hand, there's definitely an intersection between this idea and the issues of skinner boxes and inhumane game design. A game that not only fails to add good rest/break points, but actually actively includes mechanics to punish the player for stopping playing or not returning to the game often enough, is definitely guilty of hostile design.
Someone has been watching Mark Brown ;)
I was going to post something very similar and thought "someone HAS to have beaten me to it, this is blatantly applied to games across the board!"
This came from Game Makers Toolbox, didn't it?
“There is a system called the Mosquito that lets out a high pitch noise that no one above 25 can hear.” ... So that’s what it’s called. My town has (had?) one outside the front doors. When you got there you couldn’t wait to get inside because it was so awful.
3:49 Just like Elsa said, "The cold never bothered me anyway"
human version of pigeon spikes that usually end up cutting the toes off of the birds cause they still have nowhere else to perch.
I was homeless at 14 it is fucking hard to find a place to sleep yes this shit is real
I think that, the same way, certain institutions are intentionally made to be somewhat drafty. And it gets very insiduous. I have seen not just designers, but actual players argue for unpleasant design in order to ward off some kind of 'other'. Such as arguing that players who didn't join the game because of the unpleasant design must be lazy.
Sometimes, bad design can insidiously be made into unpleasant design by consensus.
I come out of a mental institution, btw and I'm currently living in social housing. I can't help shake the feeling that the only reason that these houses are pleasant are because social housing is alloted to 30% of apartments in our city, so they can't intentionally make a bad design become an unpleasant design as a means of making hard lives more unpleasant to get people to move out more quickly.
There is a counterside to this, though; you can use unpleasant design beneficially. I use it myself; I have a standing desk for my gaming. I can stand at it for about an hour before my legs start hurting a little bit and I get restless. Playing for too long there is unpleasant. When I need to sit, I have my business computer, which forces me to actually do something beneficial for my business. I also have my sports equipment on the floor in the gaming room so I can always do exercises if my legs are getting tired.
The Pretender +
I remember that I had to read a book for school called Scratch Beginnings which handles homelessness a great deal. The author mentions that the shelters were uncomfortable and unclean, with the intention of encouraging people to leave the shelter in pursuit of a better place to sleep. Do you think this is an example of uncomfortable design being used for good, or just cruel?
cruel. people don't need to be encouraged to find a better place, they need to be given a chance to GET that place.
The idea that homeless people need encouragement to want to not be homeless anymore is absolutely ridiculous. Like suggesting we need to lock dumpsters to discourage people from eating dumpster food. No sane person chooses to eat dumpster food, or to live life on the streets. And those who end up there for mental health reasons need access to care.
In programming, we call these types of solutions hacks.
They "fix" the immediate visible problem, but not the underlying problem which causes this and will cause far more than just this one issue if left unaddressed.
However, I will argue that unpleasant design is not always bad. For example, difficult-to-remove lids on alcohol and medicine. Or complex build processes to try out unfinished beta software, which isn't meant for people who don't have technical expertise. If you drive an automatic car, I bet you won't ever accidentally shift from Drive to Reverse, because the car stops you. In some manual cars, it's possible to do this by accident, and you'll be sorry to the tune of several thousand dollars in repairs.
I did an essay on Hostile Architecture for University- you did the topic justice
Hey, curious if 3:49 or so is accurate. I mean, outdoor seating also has to contain with other weather elements, like rain.
"Unpleasant Design" is often a good thing, because it deters undesired and detrimental behavior. Wikipedia, for example, is designed to make reverting changes easier than making them, so that it is harder to vandalize pages. In the case of public urination mentioned above, the availability of impromptu urination spots masked the actual problem of too few public restrooms. Child-proof designs are used to keep children out of danger, locks and alarms deter theft, rumble-strips along highways help keep drivers on the road, the list goes on. Even unpleasant design targeted at homeless and vagrants move them out of the shadows and incentivize them to seek actual help and shelters.
In other words, unpleasant design done right does not mask problems, it removes masks.
This covers my view on the subject. Is the "Unpleasant Design" masking the problem of homelessness by shooing it away? Or is allowing the homeless to sleep on benches masking the problem of these people not having (or wanting to use the correct) places to go? These things tend to be more complicated than people give them credit for and I guarantee that guy designing the bench has no say over whether the city builds/renovates a homeless shelter for these people to go to or not. He's just making a bench and trying to make sure people actually use it as a bench and not an impromptu bed where they can get drunk or shoot up drugs.
Now can we get some unpleasant design that gets bankers to stop using supercomputers and arcane derivitive schemes to raid our pension funds, or multinationals from offshoring their profits, ultimatly paying less taxes than the guy who installs the anti-homeless spikes
however, there is a problem when unpleasant design is the only thing getting funding, and funding isn’t being used to help people
I've heard of some of the stuff done to get rid of homeless people, like the spikes, but I didn't know it had a name and it was so common. It sounds like a dystopian thing where the populace is ignorant of the problems, but it was nice to know that once they were informed of what was really going on they weren't going to be passive.
I swear this is my favorite Extra Credits video
Scientific name: Rail thing
Those hole in bench makes them less disgusting by hot summer days. I means, it makes then colder, and sweat tend to be able to breath off and dry faster, quite nice in those hot and humid day. And when it rained not to long ago... But in winter, it is colder. Has a normal user, I don't care, I stand and walk in winter, instead of sitting down.
Yeah I like those
It’s reassuring to know that good people can triumph over negative things like this, really restores a bit of hope in humanity.
This is better than the regular game content, do more of this please!
Agreed! Never crossed my mind before that a lot of those examples were actually implemented for that nasty reason... sigh..
The harder life is for the homeless the more likely people won’t abuse social services, I live in Washington born and raise and in my 30 years of life here (and being a social worker)you learn that their is a culture of people deciding they would rather abuse social services and waist tax dollars just so they don’t have to work either from laziness, drug abuse or alcoholism. So I support hostile architecture.
yeah, I get it.. in my country things are like that too.. I'd say in most of places where there are homeless people things are like that. But it still is a generalization, because some of those homeless people just won't have other choices and they'll have to do with even worse options.
Sure, "it's their fault because they don't get a job". We can say that, but we never know the day of tomorrow. I've known cases about good working people that in a couple of days had their life turned upside down, fell in depression and when they know it they're living in the streets. And it's kind of like in the army, you begin living in a bubble inside of society, where you adopt a whole different mindset from the rest of society. And their's one of nihilism and doubt and fear form the rest of society. I won't lie and say I like most of them, but there are some homeless people that really have it hard and don't want to harm or bother anyone else. And that's thinking about them that I start having doubts about options like these.
The bunny man+ Hostile architecture either way loses its support from people because second chances to homeless people will always exist forever :) because NO ONE has to see homeless suicide rates go up, so you shouldn’t deny them, because they all still might be different than just your average homeless drug user who you think represents them all but absolutely isn’t true.
I think you may have the wrong end of the stick, bud. In most countries, social services include housing benefits, so it does nothing to deal abuse of social services. If anything, making it harder to be homeless would drive more people to give up the ghost (of pride) and go to social services sooner due to shitty conditions. But I think that's beside the point, as it really is more about government covering up a problem than solving it, which I find distasteful. Also, were'd you get that sourcing there, as unless you work with social services I'm not sure I can accept you as a trusted source.
The Bunny Man you should go back to elementary school and learn spelling.
I'm completely okay with making it more difficult for drug users to take drugs in an unclean and unsafe environment.
BUT, to start with, why do drug users even want to take drugs in such places? Because the country doesn't properly regulate drugs and provide support for the addicts. Instead they are being criminalized. So yeah, the problem is not being solved. But it's a good step if it's part of a broader move towards a solution.
Same goes for the rest of the examples. Deny homeless people places to sleep? That better be part of a campaign to get the homeless a real alternative to the homeless life. Deny skateboarders some public places? Make other public places skateboard-friendly. And et cetera. But it's always easier to do only the denial part, and hope the problem will go away by itself.
It is like a cluster fuck of both intentional and consequential unpleasant design. Modern global society and its negative/demonizing opinions on drug users were designed (yes, designed) to make it unpleasant for people who fit in a category to just be and thus hard for them to thrive (for the purpose of keeping lower and working classes fragmented), and everything goes downhill from there like a snowball down the hill in a cartoon.
@@louisvictor3473 Actually, they were originally designed to keep the populace addicted to the local production of addictive stuff. This then turned into a profitable business that kept funding the bans. Most politicians and security agencies have a drug business to the side.
What you're talking about is true specifically for the USA, and then again specifically for the war on drugs from the 60s/70s onwards. Not exactly "global". You should have figured out that something is wrong in your assessment when you said "KEEPING the lower classes fragmented". USA's situation with the fragmentation of the lower classes is quite unique in the Western world; and other countries with such fragmentation (like India) don't use drugs to keep it in place.
To further degrade the population of blacks and browns, specifically during the Nixon and Reagan administration's so that they could be reelected.
one juicy thing you can look at for drug regulation is portugal. they legalised all drugs, and not only did deaths and health complications fall, but drug usage itself plummeted. but politicians of course will always look for ways to be selfish, ignorant and lazy
Its like they want to solve the problem at a later time but time is inevitable.
Random city-dweller: Hi it is awful that I see people are sleeping in the open on benches when they should at least have some kind of shelter. Do something.
City gov't: Here, I have made all the benches shitty and uncomfortable so you won't see people sleep there! You're welcome
Like the eco-y thing that happens with your mic!
It's there to give us headake so we actually go to sleep instead of staying up till 4am watching youtube
Thanks Extra Credits
The blue light in bathrooms sounds like a great thing.
it sounds good but it doesn't really solve the problem, its not preventing them from doing drugs its just going to either, make them do drugs someplace else, or make them do drugs there anyway but inject it in the wrong place increasing the likelihood of them hurting themselves(more then regular drugs)
You ma'am missed the point of the video....
Just moves users somewhere else.
What kind of Capital-H Heartless are you! You know how many Visually Impaired People het effed over from Blue Lights! Hell, one already replied to you.
Don't worry about all the negative feedback man, they still have adrenaline rushing from having watched the video.
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread. -Anatole France.
Having been homeless in the past, without the help I received and being in a city quite friendly to homeless people, I would have been fucking screwed. I got super lucky. Thank you for calling attention to stuff like this.
But you had a desire to not sleep under bridges, do drugs and drink alcohol and remain homeless. You had an active desire to no longer be homeless. That's not always the case, you'd think you'd know that, you've probably been around and talked to homeless people if you were actually homeless for a time.
Yes, I was homeless, and around homeless people quite a lot. I was part of a homeless youth continuum that helped me get back on my feet and surrounded by the unlucky and unfortunate. Queer kids like me who'd had to run away from their homes or been thrown out, people who were trying to recover from having made mistakes with their schooling or with drug use, people who were trying to get away from domestic abuse, people who had just been living paycheck to paycheck and had bad luck, mentally ill people who were incapable of holding a job, but had nowhere else to go. I have been homeless. I have been around homeless people. And I resent the implication that I was not. There are very few people who don't deserve at least the opportunity to have a better life, no matter the circumstances that brought them there.
You and the homeless people around you in the (I'm assuming) nonprofit organization that assisted you had an active desire not to be homeless any longer. You didn't want to sleep on benches and under bridges, so you sought help, and you found help. And good on you, I respect that. My grievance is with the large number of homeless, especially in my city, who have no desire to stop being homeless. They're dangerous, they're unpleasant, and they're extremely hostile to the people around them. They don't want shelter, they don't want help. They want your money, or worse. That's what Hostile Design is for. It's not to oppress or shoo shoo homeless out of public eye because the public are a bunch of whiney babies who don't like seeing Hobo Henry, it's to make the public space safer, because the people like you aren't the people who are going to be looking for a bench to nap on. People like you are seeking shelters and help, which you should, you did, and I'm assuming since you're at a computer, you're better. And good on you.
In the train station in malmö the benches were sloped so much that nobody could sit there, everyone just slipped off, so they had to adjust them
Lol they expect me to leave a place because they're playing classical music? Joke's on you, I'm a nerd!
There's a software engineer where I work (in the games industry) who, when asked for a feature he sees as unusual or obfuscated, frequently asks, "What's the problem you are trying to solve with this feature?" There's your gamedev link to this topic. Feature requests should be to address a problem or fulfill a desire in the game, whether or not the player realizes the problem or desire. The problem can be something as straightforward as, "I'd like to be able to eat tomorrow, so this game needs to make money." It can also be addressing problems, such as, "Combat feels too slow." The important thing is to be aware of the problem or desire. If you just want a feature that "would be cool", you may be unintentionally hiding a problem instead of solving it. Make sure you know why something should be done. At least then, if you're hiding a problem, you're sensitive to it if players complain later.
"It's impossible to sleep on those benches"
You don't know me dude...
2:14 This specific example is pretty understandable, you don't want people to uso drugs in public spaces.
"you foolish mortal you have entered my domain"