Draft talk:Ludic loop

= Merger with Compulsion loop =

User:Zxcvbnm, thanks for the review. I agree ludic and compulsion loop should be merged. Given the preponderance and quality of sources for ludic loop, I propose the following:


 * Edit Compulsion Loop for concision and improve its sourcing to include its origination, which appears to be.
 * Incorporate this as a section of Ludic Loop, and otherwise differentiate the terms.
 * Redirect compulsion loop to ludic loop.

-Reagle (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)


 * I prefer the term "compulsion loop" as it is more descriptive than "ludic loop" which is really just a fancy way of saying "game loop". In my opinion, the article does not need to be moved, although the term can be added to the lede as an alternate word e.g. "A compulsion loop (also known as a core loop or ludic loop)".ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:07, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , we agree merging will have to happen. On the naming, I also agree "compulsion" is a more commonplace and accessible term. However, "ludic" has dozens of high quality usages, as documented via the sources. It is also much more theoretically developed. "Compulsion loop" appears to have been from a blog post---which is not even cited in the live article. So whatever the title ends up (I think the quality of the sources favor ludic) I think the focus of the article should follow the draft for ludic. That is, focus on its theoretical definition and describe how it has been used in context. -Reagle (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * All right, how about we do this. You create a requested move to move compulsion loop to ludic loop, using your argument. If everyone agrees, then it will be moved to the new name and you can merge the content of this draft into it.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)