---
author: TechButMakeItReal
date: '2026-03-05'
guest: ''
layout: post.njk
source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfyj1cTZ4_M
speaker: TechButMakeItReal
tags:
  - gamification
  - behavioral-psychology
  - ai-economy
  - user-retention
  - loyalty-mechanics
title: 游戏化应用的兴衰：心理学、科技与AI经济的演变
summary: 本文深入探讨了游戏化（Gamification）的起源、演变及其在现代科技应用中的泛滥。从早期基于心理学原理的忠诚度计划，到互联网时代的积分、徽章和排行榜，游戏化曾被视为提升用户参与度和留存率的有效手段。然而，过度依赖和拙劣的设计导致了用户疲劳，许多应用因此失败。尽管如此，随着AI的发展，游戏化正朝着更深度的个性化和情感化方向演变，预示着其在未来AI经济中的新形态。
insight: ''
draft: true
series: ''
category: tech-trends
area: tech-engineering
project: []
people: []
companies_orgs:
  - Microsoft
  - American Airlines
  - Holiday Inn
  - Gartner
  - Foursquare
  - Farmville
  - Salesforce
  - LinkedIn
  - Duoingo
products_models:
  - Xbox achievements
  - gamer score
  - Green Stamps
  - advantage (frequent flyer program)
  - Tetris
media_books:
  - Hooked
status: evergreen
---
### 未完成的诱惑：游戏化心理的起源

当一个人年仅九岁，却已是晚上十一点，在一个本应乖乖睡觉的学夜，藏在被子底下玩了两个小时的《俄罗斯方块》。这个游戏没有角色，没有情节，完成时也没有奖励。然而，每一次成功地将一块方块放入槽中，使其消失，都会在大脑中激起一阵强烈的满足感。这种难以言喻的愉悦感驱使着玩家持续下去，即使早已失去享受的乐趣，仅仅是为了等待那一块必将到来的、必须契合空隙的特定形状。1984年，那位发明《俄罗斯方块》的苏联工程师，或许并未意识到自己设计出了一个在心理学上最具力量的系统之一。数十年后，研究者们开始深入剖析《俄罗斯方块》，试图理解为何人类大脑如此难以割舍那些未完成的模式。如今，历经四十年，科技公司们则将这种本能，这种对未完成事物所带来的不适感与张力，巧妙地融入了我们手机上的每一个应用。那些为了错过一天而惩罚你的“连胜记录”（Streaks），那个提醒你西班牙语课已逾期的猫头鹰，以及那些奖励你进行“并非真实”之事所获得的“徽章”（Badges）。而这一切之所以奏效，是因为它们确实有效。今天，我们将深入探讨游戏化的崛起，人们为何对此感到厌倦，游戏化应用背后的商业逻辑，以及它在AI经济时代将被何物所取代。让我们一同深入探索。

<details>
<summary>Original English</summary>

You're
 9
 years
 old
 and
 it's
 11:00
 p.m.


on
 a
 school
 night.
 You're
 supposed
 to
 be


asleep,
 but
 under
 the
 covers,
 you've


been
 playing
 Tetris
 for
 2
 hours.
 There's


no
 characters.
 There's
 no
 story
 line.


Nobody's
 giving
 you
 a
 prize
 when
 you're


done.
 But
 every
 time
 you
 drop
 that
 piece


into
 a
 slot
 and
 four
 lines
 vanish,


something
 fires
 in
 your
 brain
 that
 makes


it
 feel
 incredibly
 satisfying.
 So,
 you


keep
 going.
 You're
 not
 even
 enjoying
 it


anymore.
 You're
 just
 waiting
 for
 that


one
 shape
 of
 a
 piece
 that
 has
 to
 fit


into
 the
 gap.
 The
 Soviet
 engineer
 who


invented
 Tetris
 in
 1984


didn't
 know
 he
 was
 designing
 one
 of
 the


most
 psychologically
 powerful
 systems


ever
 built.
 But
 decades
 later,


researchers
 would
 study
 Tetris
 to


understand
 why
 the
 human
 brain
 can't
 let


go
 of
 unfinished
 patterns.
 And
 40
 years


later,
 tech
 companies
 took
 that
 same


instinct.
 The
 discomfort
 of
 almost
 the


tension
 of
 unfinished
 and
 wired
 it
 into


every
 app
 on
 your
 phone.
 Streaks
 that


punish
 you
 for
 missing
 a
 day.
 An
 owl


reminding
 you
 that
 your
 Spanish
 lesson


is
 overdue.
 Badges
 that
 reward
 you
 for


things
 that
 are
 not
 real.
 And
 guess


what?
 They
 do
 it
 because
 it
 works.
 Today


is
 about
 the
 rise
 of
 gamification.
 why


people
 are
 becoming
 sick
 of
 it,
 the


business
 of
 gamified
 apps,
 and
 what
 will


replace
 it
 in
 the
 AI
 economy.
 Let's
 dive


in.

</details>

### 历史的脚步：游戏化原则的萌芽

或许出乎意料，游戏化（Gamification）这一概念的出现，早于其正式命名已有百年历史。其核心原则根植于基础的**人类心理学**与**强化原则**（Reinforcement Principles: 通过奖励驱动特定行为的心理学理论）。若以代币（Tokens）等形式给予人们某种奖励，他们往往会倾向于执行期望中的行为。

历史上，最早的游戏化例子之一便是1896年的“绿色邮票”（Green Stamps）。S&H绿色邮票是一个传奇性的忠诚度计划：顾客通过日常购物获得邮票，这些邮票可以用来兑换S&H目录中的商品。到了20世纪60年代，S&H发行的邮票数量竟然是美国邮政服务的三倍。这些邮票并非毫无价值，因为集满一整本邮票足以换购真实的商品。但更奇特的是，在累积到有意义的价值之前，这些代币本身就已成为情感上的重要之物。人们会根据能获得的邮票数量来选择超市，家庭甚至会专门辟出厨房抽屉来存放这些集邮册。这种行为并非由投资回报所驱动，而是源于对进步的心理（Psychology of Progress）和最终能够兑换一叠积分的期待。

近一个世纪后，美国航空推出了“Advantage”计划，成为美国首个常旅客计划（Frequent Flyer Program）。该计划用通过预订系统追踪的“里程”（Miles）取代了纸质优惠券。次年，Holiday Inn紧随其后，推出了首个酒店忠诚度计划。短短五年内，积分与里程计划的爆发式增长席卷了航空公司、酒店和租车行业。这些计划证明了，人们不一定需要实物奖励才能注册或购买。即使是那些不可触摸、没有名义价值的非物质化积分（Non-tangible Points），也能驱动用户的忠诚度。这一行为模式随后迁移到了科技领域，最终导致游戏化泛滥的“流行病”，正如你可能已经猜到的，便是**在线游戏**的崛起，以及排行榜（Leaderboards）、连胜记录（Streaks）、积分（Points）、**社会地位**（Social Status）的引入。这也正是我们的游戏化与软件故事的开端。

2005年，微软推出了Xbox成就（Xbox Achievements）和玩家分数（Gamer Score）。此举的意义在于，平台上*每一款游戏*都为其贡献了一个单一的分数，这个分数对所有玩家可见，并能在多款游戏中通用。这一创举将奖励的概念提升到了“元奖励”（Meta Rewards）的层面，它超越了任何单个游戏的范畴。这一创新也改变了游戏行为，因为它激励用户去探索更多内容、完成支线任务、甚至在更难的难度下重玩游戏。可以说，Xbox成就系统是第一个大规模市场验证，即零货币价值的虚拟徽章能够重塑数百万人的行为。进入21世纪10年代，游戏化开始突破游戏的界限，迁移到了社交媒体领域。

<details>
<summary>Original English</summary>

This
 may
 come
 as
 a
 surprise,
 but


gamification
 existed
 for
 a
 century


before
 anyone
 came
 up
 with
 that
 name.


The
 core
 principle
 is
 taken
 from
 basic


human
 psychology
 and
 reinforcement


principles.
 If
 you
 reward
 people
 with


something,
 with
 tokens,
 for
 example,


they
 tend
 to
 perform
 desired
 behavior.


One
 of
 the
 oldest
 examples
 of


gamification
 that
 history
 remembers
 till


this
 day
 is
 the
 green
 stamps
 in
 1896.


SNH
 green
 stamps
 were
 a
 legendary


loyalty
 program.
 Customers
 would
 get


stamps
 for
 everyday
 purchases
 that
 could


be
 redeemed
 for
 products
 from
 an
 SNH


catalog.
 By
 the
 1960s,
 SNH
 were
 issuing


three
 times
 as
 many
 stamps
 as
 the
 US


Postal
 Service.
 The
 stamps
 were
 not


worthless
 because
 a
 full
 book
 of
 stamps


could
 buy
 you
 real
 merchandise.
 The


peculiar
 part
 though
 is
 that
 the
 tokens


themselves
 became
 emotionally
 valuable


long
 before
 they
 added
 up
 to
 anything


meaningful.
 People
 chose
 supermarkets


based
 on
 the
 number
 of
 stamps
 they
 would


get
 and
 families
 devoted
 entire
 kitchen


drawers
 to
 those
 booklets.
 The
 behavior


wasn't
 really
 driven
 by
 the
 return
 on


investment.
 It
 was
 driven
 by
 the


psychology
 of
 progress
 and
 the


anticipation
 of
 eventually
 cashing
 in
 a


stack
 of
 points.
 Almost
 a
 century
 later,


American
 Airlines
 launched
 a
 advantage,


which
 became
 the
 first
 frequent
 flyer


program
 in
 the
 United
 States.
 The


program
 replaced
 paper
 coupons
 with


miles
 that
 were
 tracked
 through
 a


reservation
 system.
 The
 next
 year,


Holiday
 End
 followed
 with
 the
 first


hotel
 loyalty
 program.
 Within
 five


years,
 a
 boom
 in
 points
 and
 miles


programs
 took
 airlines,
 hotels,
 and
 car


rentals
 by
 storm.
 These
 programs
 proved


that
 people
 don't
 necessarily
 need
 a


physical
 reward
 to
 sign
 up
 or
 to
 buy.


The
 motivation
 can
 occur
 with


non-angable
 points,
 points
 that
 can
 be


touched
 or
 don't
 have
 any
 nominal
 value,


but
 still
 drive
 loyalty.
 This
 behavior


migrated
 to
 tech
 and
 the
 last
 step


towards
 the
 epidemic
 of
 gamification


became
 as
 you
 might
 have
 guessed
 the


rise
 of
 online
 gaming
 and
 the


introduction
 of
 leaderboards,
 streaks,


points,
 social
 status
 and
 this
 is
 where


our
 story
 of
 gamification
 and
 software


begins.
 Microsoft
 came
 up
 with
 Xbox


achievements
 and
 gamer
 score
 in
 2005.


When
 they
 did
 that,
 every
 game
 on
 the


platform
 contributed
 to
 a
 single
 score


that
 would
 work
 across
 multiple
 games,


visible
 to
 all
 players.
 This
 single


action
 elevated
 the
 concept
 of
 rewards


to
 meta
 rewards
 that
 would
 exist
 outside


any
 individual
 game.
 This
 introduction


also
 altered
 gaming
 behavior
 because
 it


drove
 users
 to
 explore
 more,
 do
 side


quests,
 replay
 games
 on
 harder


difficulties.
 Xbox
 achievements
 were


arguably
 the
 first
 mass
 market
 proof


that
 imaginary
 badges
 with
 zero
 monetary


value
 could
 reshape
 the
 behavior
 of


millions
 of
 people.
 In
 2010s,


gamification
 started
 leaving
 the
 borders


of
 gaming
 and
 migrated
 into
 social


media.
 Now,
 this
 might
 tell
 you
 how
 old


I
 am,
 but
 I
 remember
 the
 days
 of


Foursquare.
 For
 the
 younger
 demographic


on
 the
 channel,
 Foursquare
 was
 a
 social


media
 app
 where
 you
 could
 earn
 points


for
 checking
 into
 certain
 places,
 gyms,


restaurants,
 cafes,
 coffee
 shops,
 and


you
 would
 be
 labeled
 according
 to
 the


places
 you
 visit.
 For
 example,
 a
 gym
 rat


or
 a
 coffee
 coner.
 Then
 came
 the


legendary
 game
 called
 Farmville.
 And


then
 after
 Farmville,
 the
 Silicon
 Valley


began
 showing
 interest
 in
 gamification


startups.
 The
 gamification
 market
 grew


200%
 in
 2
 years
 between
 2010
 and
 12.


Deote
 cited
 gamification
 as
 one
 of
 its


top
 10
 technology
 trends
 of
 2012.
 Then


came
 the
 first
 university
 level


gamification
 course
 at
 Wharton.
 Numerous


online
 courses
 across
 various
 platforms.


And
 this
 is
 how
 in
 the
 span
 of
 24
 months


gamification
 went
 from
 a
 strange
 word
 to


having
 a
 dedicated
 spot
 in
 Gartner's


hype
 cycle.
 It
 became
 a
 $40
 million


startup
 category
 and
 the
 default


prescription
 by
 consulting
 firms.
 If


your
 product
 was
 struggling,
 add
 points,


add
 streaks,
 and
 add
 leaderboards.
 Now,


as
 a
 product
 manager,
 like
 the
 vast


majority
 of
 product
 managers
 in
 the


field,
 I
 had
 a
 time
 when
 I
 went
 through


a
 classic
 set
 of
 product
 management


books.
 One
 of
 them
 being
 Hooked,
 how
 to


build
 habit
 forming
 products.
 Now,
 this


book
 is
 fairly
 controversial,
 always
 has


been.
 The
 core
 of
 it
 is
 based
 on
 the


concept
 of
 a
 four-step
 loop.
 Trigger,


action,
 variable
 reward,
 and
 investment.


The
 loop
 is
 drawn
 from
 gambling


psychology.
 Variable
 rewards
 create


dopamine-driven
 anticipation.
 And
 the


idea
 is
 that
 you
 apply
 this
 loop
 to


consumer
 software.
 There
 are
 a
 lot
 of


different
 opinions
 around
 the
 ethics
 of


this
 principle.
 Some
 people
 being
 more


pragmatic
 and
 some
 people
 criticizing


it.
 As
 I
 was
 doing
 research
 for
 this


video,
 I
 found
 a
 comment
 on
 Reddit
 that


sums
 up
 the
 opinion
 of
 the
 latter
 group


pretty
 well.
 My
 biggest
 problem
 with
 the


book
 is
 its
 basic
 premise
 that
 hooking


people,
 that
 is
 making
 them
 compulsive


users
 of
 your
 technology
 product,
 is


something
 worth
 doing.
 Now,
 by
 no
 means


am
 I
 moralizing.
 You
 guys
 know
 I
 try
 my


best
 to
 be
 as
 neutral
 as
 possible.
 To
 me


personally,
 the
 shocking
 aspect
 around


the
 popularity
 of
 this
 book
 is
 the


realization
 that
 billions
 of
 people
 get


a
 Pavlovian
 level
 feedback
 from
 a
 fairly


basic
 concept
 and
 the
 fact
 that
 smart


product
 teams
 who
 work
 at
 technology


companies
 figured
 out
 how
 to
 ring
 a


bell.
 This
 is
 the
 reason
 why
 I
 consider


gamification
 phenomenon
 quite


fascinating
 because
 of
 how
 basic
 it
 is


and
 because
 of
 how
 people
 figured
 out


what
 to
 do
 with
 it.

</details>

### 伦理的审视：习惯养成与争议

“我最大的问题在于这本书的基本前提，即‘钩住’人们——也就是说，让人们成为你技术产品的强迫性用户——是值得去做的事情。” 这段来自Reddit的评论，恰如其分地概括了一部分人的批评观点。需要强调的是，我绝非在此进行道德说教；你们知道我一直致力于保持中立。对我个人而言，这本书之所以广受欢迎，令人震惊之处在于，数十亿人竟然能够从一个相当基础的概念中获得**巴甫洛夫式反馈**（Pavlovian Level Feedback: 通过条件反射产生的反应），并且技术公司的顶尖产品团队竟然找到了“摇铃”的方法。这正是我认为游戏化现象引人入胜的原因：因为它如此基础，又因为人们挖掘出了它的潜力并加以运用。

到了2014年，游戏化已经从一个游戏术语，演变成面向企业的全套功能集合。**Gartner**（高德纳咨询公司）在报告中指出，游戏化被用于企业培训，将获得认证的时间缩短了50%。**Salesforce**（销售易）通过成就追踪来游戏化其销售流程。**LinkedIn**（领英）则推出了个人资料完成度和课程徽章系统。然而，这场狂热的顶峰，无疑是一个你我都在耳熟能详的公司所代表的——这个公司体现了游戏化应用的单一最重要案例研究：**Duoingo**（多邻国）。

作为毋庸置疑的明星，Duoingo将游戏化机制推向了新的高度，其中蕴含了许多值得注意的细微之处。许多其他学习应用试图在各种方面复制Duoingo的成功，甚至在营销中提及Duoingo的名字，例如“Duoingo，但用于历史”、“Duoingo，但用于数学”、“Duoingo，但用于科学”。这里的重点在于，Duoingo开发的模式，其核心并非关于学习语言本身，而是一个“恰好能教授语言的游戏”。

这里还有另一条有趣的评论：“我坚持了555天学习中文后退出了Duoingo。我什么都没学会。” 这句话精辟地指出了问题的关键：“游戏化就是当你最终为了分数而奔波，而不是为了知识，并且那只小猫头鹰还会因此责备你。”诚然，我可以学会说“你好”和“你的电话号码是什么？”，但却无法进行一场基本的对话。确实如此。就我个人而言，我从未对Duoingo这类应用产生兴趣，因为它与人类语言习得的机制毫无关联。收集猫头鹰和维持连胜记录，与撰写和说一门语言的认知能力毫无关系。尽管如此，我必须承认，Duoingo是全球使用最广泛的语言学习应用。我敢肯定，在座的许多人会与我持不同意见。

目前，围绕游戏化疲劳（Gamification Fatigue）已形成一股普遍情绪。要理解为何我们会对此感到厌倦，让我们回顾一下它最初是如何以及为何发生的。有三个关键因素使得游戏化的兴起成为必然。

第一，**智能手机**。在智能手机出现之前，游戏机制需要一台游戏机或电脑。无论游戏引擎设计得多么精妙，它们都要求你必须身处电脑桌前。而智能手机，则使这种奖励行为（Reward Behavior）得以全天候可用。

第二，**数据基础设施**。现代应用能够衡量一切：会话时长、用户留存率（Retention）、流失率（Churn）、生命周期价值（Lifetime Value）。游戏化为产品团队和科技公司提供了可供操纵的具体杠杆，以影响这些关键指标。

第三，**注意力经济**（Attention Economy）。随着应用数量的激增，以及智能手机在我们手中日益根深蒂固，用户留存变得愈发困难。游戏化成为了维持用户注意力的最廉价方式，而无需研发需要大量研究和工程资源的新功能。

游戏化在游戏行业中之所以能够奏效，是因为在游戏中，努力与回报之间的关系非常透明且可预测。不像老虎机，玩家知道玩得越多，收集到的分数或金币就越多。你为什么要这些分数？比如，是为了升级角色。当你升级角色后会发生什么？你在游戏中的地位会提高。这在现实生活中意味着什么吗？不，毫无意义。但它在游戏中拥有意义。

现在，将其应用于健身应用。例如，你坚持了30天打卡一份膳食计划，累积了大量积分，可以解锁为期5天的会员版本，然后在月底获得一枚可以挂在成就墙上的徽章。心理学和神经科学数十年的研究已经证实了一个现象：在奖励的预期阶段，多巴胺的分泌最为旺盛。早在60年代，在这些心理机制拥有正式名称之前，“绿色邮票”就已证明，累积奖励、累积预期、收集幻象以及悬而未决的张力，改变了80%美国家庭的购买行为。此后，从常旅客计划到Duoingo的连胜记录，每一个游戏化系统，都是那一本“手册”的后代。

<details>
<summary>Original English</summary>

My
 biggest
 problem
 with
 the


book
 is
 its
 basic
 premise
 that
 hooking


people,
 that
 is
 making
 them
 compulsive


users
 of
 your
 technology
 product,
 is


something
 worth
 doing.
 Now,
 by
 no
 means


am
 I
 moralizing.
 You
 guys
 know
 I
 try
 my


best
 to
 be
 as
 neutral
 as
 possible.
 To
 me


personally,
 the
 shocking
 aspect
 around


the
 popularity
 of
 this
 book
 is
 the


realization
 that
 billions
 of
 people
 get


a
 Pavlovian
 level
 feedback
 from
 a
 fairly


basic
 concept
 and
 the
 fact
 that
 smart


product
 teams
 who
 work
 at
 technology


companies
 figured
 out
 how
 to
 ring
 a


bell.
 This
 is
 the
 reason
 why
 I
 consider


gamification
 phenomenon
 quite


fascinating
 because
 of
 how
 basic
 it
 is


and
 because
 of
 how
 people
 figured
 out


what
 to
 do
 with
 it.
 By
 2014,


gamification
 had
 evolved
 from
 a
 gaming


term
 into
 a
 full-blown
 bucket
 of


features
 for
 enterprises.
 Deote
 used


badges
 to
 gamify
 executive
 training
 and


time
 to
 certification
 dropped
 50%.


Salesforce
 gamified
 sales
 pipelines
 with


achievement
 tracking.
 LinkedIn


introduced
 profile
 completion
 and
 badges


for
 completing
 courses.
 But
 the
 pinnacle


of
 this
 mania
 is
 the
 company
 that


everybody
 has
 definitely
 heard
 of.
 The


company
 that
 embodies
 the
 single
 most


important
 case
 study
 for
 gamification


use.
 Dualingo.


The
 undeniable
 star,
 Dualingo,
 that
 took


gamification
 mechanics
 to
 the
 next


level,
 has
 a
 lot
 of
 interesting
 nuances


that
 are
 very
 much
 worth
 noting.
 Many


other
 learning
 apps
 try
 to
 repeat
 the


success
 of
 Dolingo
 in
 many
 ways,


including
 using
 Dolingo's
 name
 and
 their


marketing
 campaigns.
 Dualingo,
 but
 for


history.
 Dualingo
 but
 for
 math.
 Dualingo


but
 for
 science.
 Point
 is,
 Dolingo


developed
 a
 model
 that
 isn't
 about


learning
 a
 language.
 It's
 a
 game
 that


just
 happens
 to
 teach
 a
 language.
 Now,


here's
 another
 interesting
 comment
 that


I
 came
 across.
 I
 quit
 Dolingo
 after
 555


days
 of
 learning
 Chinese.
 Didn't
 learn
 a


damn
 thing.
 Gamification
 is
 when
 you
 end


up
 farming
 points
 instead
 of
 knowledge


and
 the
 little
 owl
 bullies
 you
 about
 it.


I
 can
 say
 things
 like
 nihow
 and
 what's


your
 phone
 number?
 But
 I
 can't
 hold
 a


basic
 conversation.
 True.
 On
 a
 personal


level,
 I
 was
 never
 into
 apps
 like


Dualingo
 simply
 because
 it
 has
 nothing


to
 do
 with
 the
 mechanism
 of
 language


acquisition
 in
 humans.
 Collecting
 owls


and
 maintaining
 a
 streak
 has
 nothing
 to


do
 with
 the
 cognitive
 ability
 to
 write


and
 speak
 a
 language.
 Nevertheless,
 I


got
 to
 give
 it
 to
 Dolingo.
 They
 are
 the


most
 frequently
 used
 language
 app
 on
 the


planet.
 And
 I'm
 sure
 lots
 of
 you
 would


disagree
 with
 me.
 Now,
 there
 has
 been
 a


wave
 of
 general
 sentiment
 around
 fatigue


from
 gamification
 across
 various
 apps.


And
 to
 understand
 how
 we
 got
 to
 the


point
 when
 we're
 sick
 of
 it,
 let's
 go


back
 to
 how
 and
 why
 it
 happened
 in
 the


first
 place.
 There
 are
 three
 factors


that
 made
 the
 rise
 of
 gamification


inevitable.
 Number
 one,
 smartphones.


Before
 the
 rise
 of
 smartphones,
 game


mechanics
 required
 a
 console
 or
 a


computer.
 The
 games,
 no
 matter
 how
 well


engineered,
 required
 you
 to
 be


physically
 present
 at
 your
 desk.


Smartphones,
 on
 the
 other
 hand,
 made
 the


reward
 behavior
 available
 24/7.
 Number


two,
 data
 infrastructure.
 Modern
 apps


can
 measure
 everything.
 session
 length,


retention,
 churn,
 lifetime
 value,
 and


gamification
 gave
 product
 teams
 and


technology
 companies
 specific
 levers
 to


pull
 against
 those
 metrics.
 And
 number


three,
 the
 attention
 economy.
 As
 apps


multiplied,
 as
 smartphones
 became
 more


ingrained
 into
 our
 hands,
 retention


became
 harder.
 Gamification
 was
 the


cheapest
 possible
 way
 to
 hold
 your


attention
 without
 building
 new
 expensive


features
 that
 would
 require
 lots
 of


research
 and
 engineering
 resources.
 The


reason
 why
 the
 reward
 behavior
 worked
 in


the
 gaming
 industry
 is
 because
 in
 a
 game


the
 relationship
 between
 effort
 and


reward
 is
 very
 transparent
 and


predictable.
 Unlike
 a
 slot
 machine,
 for


example,
 a
 gamer
 knows
 that
 the
 more


they
 play,
 the
 more
 points
 or
 coins
 they


will
 collect.
 What
 do
 you
 need
 the


points
 for?
 To
 upgrade
 a
 character,
 for


example.
 What's
 going
 to
 happen
 when
 you


upgrade
 a
 character?
 You
 get
 a
 better


status
 in
 the
 game.
 Does
 it
 mean


anything
 in
 real
 life?
 No,
 it
 doesn't.


But
 it
 has
 a
 meaning
 in
 the
 game.
 Now,


apply
 this
 to
 fitness
 apps.
 For example,


you
 stick
 to
 a
 meal
 plan
 for
 30
 days
 in


a
 row.
 You
 collect
 a
 bunch
 of
 points
 to


unlock
 premium
 version
 for
 5
 days,
 let's


say,
 and
 then
 you
 get
 a
 badge
 at
 the
 end


of
 the
 month
 that
 you
 can
 put
 up
 on
 a


wall
 of
 achievements.
 And
 the
 phenomenon


that's
 been
 confirmed
 across
 decades
 of


research
 in
 psychology
 and
 neuroscience


is
 that
 the
 largest
 dopamine
 surge


occurs
 during
 the
 anticipation
 of
 a


reward.
 Green
 stamps
 proved
 back
 in
 the


60s
 before
 any
 of
 these
 psychological


mechanisms
 had
 formal
 names
 that


stacking
 rewards,
 stacking
 anticipation,


collecting
 illusions
 and
 unresolved


tension
 changed
 the
 purchasing
 behavior


of
 80%
 of
 American
 households.
 Every


gamification
 system
 ever
 since,
 from


frequent
 flyers
 to
 dual
 lingo
 streaks,


is
 a
 descendant
 of
 that
 standbook.


So
 why
 did
 it
 collapse?
 The


psychological
 tricks
 that
 sparked
 the


initial
 excitement
 became
 the
 very
 thing


that
 burned
 users
 out.
 Gamification
 that


was
 supposed
 to
 be
 a
 fun
 element
 that


would
 make
 the
 product
 less
 boring
 and


more
 organic
 to
 use
 and
 help
 you
 learn


things
 by
 playing
 became
 a
 commodity.


During
 the
 wave
 of
 fascination
 and
 wild


growth
 of
 gamified
 apps,
 Gartner
 made
 a


prediction
 in
 late
 2012
 that
 80%
 of


gamified
 apps
 would
 fail
 by
 2014.
 And


the
 reason
 for
 it
 was
 poor
 application


design.
 This
 is
 very
 similar
 to
 the
 AI


bubble
 that
 we're
 witnessing
 right
 now


and
 the
 video
 we
 made
 on
 why
 most
 AI


startups
 are
 bad
 businesses.
 Because
 you


can
 only
 get
 so
 far
 when
 pursuing
 trends


and
 not
 having
 a
 solid
 product.
 Remember


how
 I
 said
 that
 gamification
 was


inevitable?
 Smartphones,
 data,
 and


attention
 economy.
 These
 three


conditions
 that
 made
 it
 inevitable
 are


the
 very
 conditions
 that
 also
 made
 it


unsustainable.
 When
 the
 iPhone
 came
 out


in
 2007,
 the
 App
 Store
 had
 about
 500


apps.
 By
 2015,
 Apple
 and
 Google
 each


hosted
 around
 1.7
 million,
 but
 the


number
 of
 apps
 people
 actually
 used
 was


around
 27.
 And
 that
 number
 plateaued


even
 as
 time
 spent
 on
 phones
 kept


climbing.
 Which
 means
 that
 apps
 were


competing
 for
 27
 slots
 on
 a
 person's


iPhone.
 This
 environment
 made


gamification
 the
 cheapest
 available
 tool


for
 retaining
 users.
 Points,
 badges,


leaderboards,
 streaks
 cost
 next
 to


nothing
 to
 implement
 compared
 to


building
 genuine
 product


differentiation.


And
 the
 problem
 is
 it
 works
 in
 the
 short


term,
 but
 still
 it
 works.
 Introducing


gamification
 as
 a
 patch
 fix
 was
 rational


for
 businesses.
 Speaking
 from


experience,
 after
 building
 a
 career
 in


product
 management,
 sometimes
 you
 have


to
 find
 the
 cheapest
 possible
 way
 to
 fix


a
 problem.
 But
 this
 approach
 comes
 at
 a


cost.
 for
 gamification.
 It
 got
 bolted


onto
 apps
 as
 a
 retention
 hack
 rather


than
 building
 a
 business
 with
 a


defensible
 value
 that
 won't
 be
 wiped


away
 by
 hype
 cycles.
 And
 what's
 even


worse
 is
 that
 it
 disfigured
 the
 notion


of
 games
 because
 games
 are
 not
 about


points
 or
 coins
 or
 badges.
 These
 things


are
 as
 far
 from
 games
 as
 they
 are
 from


fitness
 or
 language
 learning.
 Streaks


are
 the
 most
 effective
 retention


mechanic
 in
 modern
 gamification.
 And


they
 also
 have
 a
 destructive
 second


order
 effect.
 They
 convert
 genuine


interest
 into
 anxiety.
 Even
 Dualingo


admits
 this.
 Long
 streaks
 motivate


through
 loss
 aversion
 rather
 than


positive
 anticipation.
 What
 this
 means


in
 playing
 English
 is
 that
 the
 streak


doesn't
 make
 users
 want
 to
 learn
 more.


It
 means
 that
 they're
 afraid
 to
 stop
 and


therefore
 they
 end
 up
 doing
 the
 absolute


minimum
 to
 simply
 preserve
 the
 streak.


But
 preserving
 the
 streak
 has
 nothing
 to


do
 with
 learning.
 The
 streak
 is
 there,


but
 you're
 learning
 essentially
 nothing.


The
 gamification
 of
 learning
 in
 mobile


apps
 has
 replaced
 the
 product's
 actual


value.
 Forsquare
 is
 the
 clearest


business
 case
 of
 gamification
 fatigue.


The
 app
 had
 45
 million
 users
 in
 2013,


and
 all
 of
 that
 audience
 was
 built
 on


check-in
 badges
 and
 mayorship


competitions.
 But
 by
 2013,
 the
 novelty


of
 checking
 in
 wore
 off,
 and
 the


gamification
 could
 not
 sustain
 the


interest
 because
 the
 value
 of
 the


product
 outside
 of
 gamification
 simply


wasn't
 there.
 So,
 how
 come
 Dolingo


didn't
 follow
 the
 same
 path?


Dolingo
 is
 a
 notable
 exception
 because


they
 invested
 over
 600
 experiments
 to


get
 gamification
 mechanics
 to
 perfection


and
 essentially
 outrun
 the
 trademill.
 I


can
 have
 whatever
 opinions
 I
 want
 about


Dolingo's
 learning
 mechanics,
 but
 I
 got


to
 give
 it
 to
 them.
 They
 managed
 to


build
 a
 stellar
 system
 for
 discovering


and
 testing
 behavioral
 signals
 faster


than
 any
 other
 competitor.
 In
 behavioral


economics
 and
 psychology,
 there
 is
 a


term
 called
 hedonic
 adaptation.
 And


Dolingo
 manages
 it
 beautifully.
 It


constantly
 refreshes
 visuals,
 rules,


rewards,
 streak
 freezes
 so
 that
 the


brain
 never
 fully
 habituates
 to
 the
 game


mechanic.
 They
 make
 their
 app
 a
 living


system.
 On
 top
 of
 it,
 they
 built
 a
 very


defensible
 technical
 infrastructure.


They
 tracked
 micro
 behaviors
 across


hundreds
 of
 millions
 of
 users.
 Most


gabified
 products
 back
 in
 2010s
 never


invested
 at
 this
 depth.
 And
 even
 now,


compared
 to
 today's
 market,
 Dolingo's


product
 culture
 is
 rare.
 Yes,
 they
 built


their
 business
 on
 points
 and
 badges,
 but


they
 also
 built
 the
 data
 science
 and


experimentation
 plumbing
 to
 understand


why
 it
 worked
 or
 failed.
 Now,
 from
 the


language
 learning
 app
 standpoint,
 and


some
 of
 you
 may
 disagree,
 but
 I


personally
 do
 not
 see
 them
 as
 a
 product


that
 has
 anything
 to
 do
 with


linguistics,
 but
 that
 is
 a
 subjective


opinion.
 Nevertheless,
 Dolingo
 is
 a


notable
 exception.
 Most
 companies
 don't


have
 the
 resources
 or
 the
 culture
 to


sustain
 that
 level
 of
 experimentation,


which
 is
 why
 the
 Gartner
 80%
 failure


rate
 proved
 accurate
 for
 the
 broader


market,
 but
 not
 for
 them.
 Now,
 where
 is


gamification
 headed
 in
 the
 AI
 economy?


Despite
 all
 odds,
 the
 gamification


market
 is
 projected
 to
 grow
 from
 $20


billion
 to
 $190
 billion
 by
 2034.
 But
 the


term
 called
 gamification
 eight
 years


from
 now
 will
 bear
 no
 resemblance
 to
 the


points
 and
 badges
 system
 that
 we
 see


today.
 AI
 will
 personalize
 the
 hell
 out


of
 it
 to
 the
 point
 when
 there
 is
 going


to
 be
 a
 built-in
 behavioral
 layer
 inside


each
 app.
 So
 what
 exactly
 will
 happen?


Number
 one,
 personalization
 is
 going
 to


be
 on
 the
 user
 level.
 Social
 media,


gaming,
 e-commerce
 will
 be
 reading


behavioral
 signals
 and
 know
 exactly
 what


motivates
 each
 individual
 user.
 When


they're
 about
 to
 disengage,
 how
 to


change
 the
 experience
 on
 the
 spot,
 what


to
 put
 in
 your
 notifications,
 how
 to


adapt
 lesson
 difficulty,
 how
 to
 change


your
 training
 plan
 depending
 on
 how


you're
 feeling
 today.
 What
 AI
 will
 do
 is


mimic
 the
 system
 that
 Dolingo
 pioneered.


AI
 will
 turn
 lots
 of
 products
 into


living
 systems
 that
 will
 constantly


change
 and
 adapt.
 Number
 two,
 listen


closely.
 The
 definition
 of
 loyalty
 will


be
 reframed.
 Latest
 research
 and


predictions
 around
 transactional


loyalty.
 Transactional
 loyalty
 being


discounts,
 points,
 and
 cash
 back
 show


that
 there
 is
 going
 to
 be
 a
 strong
 trend


towards
 emotional
 loyalty.
 Things
 like


recognition,
 relevance,
 and
 relationship


with
 the
 product.
 So
 to
 all
 founders,


techies,
 and
 users,
 of
 course,


gamification
 isn't
 dead.
 Yes,
 we're


absolutely
 bored
 of
 it
 at
 this
 point,


but
 it's
 about
 to
 change
 fundamentally.


So,
 say
 what
 you
 will
 about
 Gen
 Z


trends,
 but
 vibes
 are
 becoming
 the


factor
 when
 it
 comes
 to
 loyalty.
 As


always,
 we
 hope
 this
 was
 helpful.
 Till


next
 time.
 Bye.

</details>

### 衰落的原因：游戏化的崩溃

那么，为何它会走向衰败？那些最初激发兴奋感的心理诡计，最终成为了用户感到倦怠的根源。原本旨在让产品更有趣、使用起来更自然、并通过玩耍来帮助学习的**游戏化**（Gamification），最终沦为了商品化（Commodity）。

在游戏化应用盛行和野蛮生长的浪潮中，**Gartner**在2012年末曾做出预测：到2014年，80%的游戏化应用将以失败告终。其失败的原因在于糟糕的应用设计。这与我们当前目睹的AI泡沫，以及我们之前制作的关于“为何大多数AI初创公司不是好生意”的视频有着惊人的相似之处。因为，当缺乏扎实的产品作为支撑，仅仅追逐趋势是走不远的。

还记得我说过游戏化是不可避免的吗？智能手机、数据和注意力经济。这三个促成其必然性的条件，恰恰也是使其变得不可持续的因素。当iPhone于2007年问世时，App Store大约有500款应用。到了2015年，苹果和谷歌各自托管的应用数量已接近170万款，但人们实际使用的应用数量却仅维持在27款左右。而且，即便手机使用时长不断攀升，这一数字也趋于平稳。这意味着应用们在争夺一个人iPhone上的27个宝贵位置。在这样的环境下，游戏化成为了最廉价的用户**留存**（Retention）工具。积分、徽章、排行榜、连胜记录的实施成本几乎为零，相比之下，开发真正具有产品差异化的功能则需要巨大的投入。

问题在于，游戏化在短期内确实有效，但它依然有效。对企业而言，引入游戏化作为一种“打补丁”的修复方案是合乎逻辑的。以我多年的产品管理经验来看，有时你必须找到最经济的方式来解决问题。但这种方法是有代价的。对游戏化而言，它被轻易地“铆接”到应用上，成为一种**留存**手段（Retention Hack），而非构建一个拥有可防御价值、能抵御周期性炒作（Hype Cycles）的业务。

更糟糕的是，它还扭曲了“游戏”的本质，因为游戏并非关乎积分、金币或徽章。这些元素与游戏的距离，正如它们与健身或语言学习的距离一样遥远。连胜记录（Streaks）是现代游戏化中最有效的留存机制，但它们也带来了一个破坏性的次级效应：将真诚的兴趣转化为焦虑。即便是**Duoingo**也承认这一点。长期的连胜记录通过**损失规避**（Loss Aversion: 避免损失的心理偏好）来激励用户，而非积极的期待。这意味着，在学习一门语言时，连胜记录并不能让用户想要学得更多，反而让他们害怕停止，因此他们只会做最基本的事情来维持连胜。然而，维持连胜记录与学习本身毫无关联——连胜记录存在了，但你却几乎一无所获。

移动应用中学习的“游戏化”已经取代了产品的实际价值。**Foursquare**是游戏化疲劳最明显的商业案例。该应用在2013年拥有4500万用户，所有用户基础都建立在签到徽章和“市长”头衔的竞争之上。但到了2013年，签到的新奇感逐渐消退，游戏化无法维持用户的兴趣，因为该产品在游戏化之外的价值本身就不够充分。

那么，**Duoingo**为何没有走上同样的道路？

<details>
<summary>Original English</summary>

So
 why
 did
 it
 collapse?
 The


psychological
 tricks
 that
 sparked
 the


initial
 excitement
 became
 the
 very
 thing


that
 burned
 users
 out.
 Gamification
 that


was
 supposed
 to
 be
 a
 fun
 element
 that


would
 make
 the
 product
 less
 boring
 and


more
 organic
 to
 use
 and
 help
 you
 learn


things
 by
 playing
 became
 a
 commodity.


During
 the
 wave
 of
 fascination
 and
 wild


growth
 of
 gamified
 apps,
 Gartner
 made
 a


prediction
 in
 late
 2012
 that
 80%
 of


gamified
 apps
 would
 fail
 by
 2014.
 And


the
 reason
 for
 it
 was
 poor
 application


design.
 This
 is
 very
 similar
 to
 the
 AI


bubble
 that
 we're
 witnessing
 right
 now


and
 the
 video
 we
 made
 on
 why
 most
 AI


startups
 are
 bad
 businesses.
 Because
 you


can
 only
 get
 so
 far
 when
 pursuing
 trends


and
 not
 having
 a
 solid
 product.
 Remember


how
 I
 said
 that
 gamification
 was


inevitable?
 Smartphones,
 data,
 and


attention
 economy.
 These
 three


conditions
 that
 made
 it
 inevitable
 are


the
 very
 conditions
 that
 also
 made
 it


unsustainable.
 When
 the
 iPhone
 came
 out


in
 2007,
 the
 App
 Store
 had
 about
 500


apps.
 By
 2015,
 Apple
 and
 Google
 each


hosted
 around
 1.7
 million,
 but
 the


number
 of
 apps
 people
 actually
 used
 was


around
 27.
 And
 that
 number
 plateaued


even
 as
 time
 spent
 on
 phones
 kept


climbing.
 Which
 means
 that
 apps
 were


competing
 for
 27
 slots
 on
 a
 person's


iPhone.
 This
 environment
 made


gamification
 the
 cheapest
 available
 tool


for
 retaining
 users.
 Points,
 badges,


leaderboards,
 streaks
 cost
 next
 to


nothing
 to
 implement
 compared
 to


building
 genuine
 product


differentiation.


And
 the
 problem
 is
 it
 works
 in
 the
 short


term,
 but
 still
 it
 works.
 Introducing


gamification
 as
 a
 patch
 fix
 was
 rational


for
 businesses.
 Speaking
 from


experience,
 after
 building
 a
 career
 in


product
 management,
 sometimes
 you
 have


to
 find
 the
 cheapest
 possible
 way
 to
 fix


a
 problem.
 But
 this
 approach
 comes
 at
 a


cost.
 for
 gamification.
 It
 got
 bolted


onto
 apps
 as
 a
 retention
 hack
 rather


than
 building
 a
 business
 with
 a


defensible
 value
 that
 won't
 be
 wiped


away
 by
 hype
 cycles.
 And
 what's
 even


worse
 is
 that
 it
 disfigured
 the
 notion


of
 games
 because
 games
 are
 not
 about


points
 or
 coins
 or
 badges.
 These
 things


are
 as
 far
 from
 games
 as
 they
 are
 from


fitness
 or
 language
 learning.
 Streaks


are
 the
 most
 effective
 retention


mechanic
 in
 modern
 gamification.
 And


they
 also
 have
 a
 destructive
 second


order
 effect.
 They
 convert
 genuine


interest
 into
 anxiety.
 Even
 Dualingo


admits
 this.
 Long
 streaks
 motivate


through
 loss
 aversion
 rather
 than


positive
 anticipation.
 What
 this
 means


in
 playing
 English
 is
 that
 the
 streak


doesn't
 make
 users
 want
 to
 learn
 more.


It
 means
 that
 they're
 afraid
 to
 stop
 and


therefore
 they
 end
 up
 doing
 the
 absolute


minimum
 to
 simply
 preserve
 the
 streak.


But
 preserving
 the
 streak
 has
 nothing
 to


do
 with
 learning.
 The
 streak
 is
 there,


but
 you're
 learning
 essentially
 nothing.


The
 gamification
 of
 learning
 in
 mobile


apps
 has
 replaced
 the
 product's
 actual


value.
 Forsquare
 is
 the
 clearest


business
 case
 of
 gamification
 fatigue.


The
 app
 had
 45
 million
 users
 in
 2013,


and
 all
 of
 that
 audience
 was
 built
 on


check-in
 badges
 and
 mayorship


competitions.
 But
 by
 2013,
 the
 novelty


of
 checking
 in
 wore
 off,
 and
 the


gamification
 could
 not
 sustain
 the


interest
 because
 the
 value
 of
 the


product
 outside
 of
 gamification
 simply


wasn't
 there.

</details>

### Duoingo的例外：精细化与数据驱动

Duoingo之所以成为一个值得称道的例外，是因为它投入了超过600项实验来精炼其游戏化机制，并最终“跑赢了跑步机”（outrun the treadmill）。无论我对Duoingo的学习机制持有何种看法，我都必须承认，他们成功构建了一个在发现和测试**行为信号**（Behavioral Signals）方面比任何竞争对手都更快速的系统。

在**行为经济学**（Behavioral Economics）和心理学中，有一个术语叫做**享乐适应**（Hedonic Adaptation: 人类适应新刺激，快乐或不快乐感随时间减弱的现象）。Duoingo巧妙地管理着这一过程，它不断刷新视觉元素、规则、奖励以及“连胜冻结”（Streak Freezes）功能，以确保用户的大脑不会完全习惯于游戏机制。它们将应用程序打造成一个“鲜活的系统”（Living System）。

更重要的是，Duoingo构建了极其稳固且具有防御性的技术基础设施。他们追踪了数亿用户的微行为数据。在2010年代，大多数游戏化产品从未在如此深度上进行投入。即便放眼今天的市场，Duoingo的产品文化也属罕见。是的，它们确实是建立在积分和徽章之上，但它们同时也搭建了数据科学和实验的底层架构，用以深刻理解这些机制为何有效或失败。

从语言学习应用的角度来看——尽管可能有人会 disagree——我个人认为Duoingo的产品与语言学本身关联不大，但这仅仅是一个主观观点。然而，Duoingo无疑是一个值得关注的例外。大多数公司缺乏持续进行如此高强度实验所需的资源或文化，这也是Gartner预测的80%失败率在更广阔的市场中得到验证，但Duoingo却成功规避的原因。

### AI经济下的未来：个性化与情感忠诚

那么，游戏化在AI经济时代将走向何方？尽管困难重重，游戏化市场预计将从200亿美元增长至2034年的1900亿美元。然而，八年后，所谓的“游戏化”将与其今天我们所见的积分和徽章系统截然不同。AI将对其进行极致的个性化处理，以至于每个应用程序内部都将内置一个“行为层”（Behavioral Layer）。

那么，具体会发生什么呢？

首先，**个性化**将达到用户级别。社交媒体、游戏、电子商务将能够读取用户的行为信号，精准地了解每个用户的动机。当用户即将流失时，AI知道如何即时调整体验，知道如何在通知中加入什么内容，如何调整课程难度，如何根据你今天的情绪状态改变你的训练计划。AI所做的，就是模仿Duoingo所开创的系统。AI会将许多产品转变为“鲜活的系统”，这些系统会不断变化和适应。

其次，请仔细聆听：**忠诚度**（Loyalty）的定义将被重塑。关于交易性忠诚（Transactional Loyalty）——即折扣、积分和现金返还——的最新研究和预测表明，一种强烈的趋势正指向**情感忠诚**（Emotional Loyalty）。这包括与产品相关的**认可**（Recognition）、**相关性**（Relevance）以及**关系**（Relationship）。

因此，对于所有创始人、技术人员以及用户来说，游戏化当然并未消亡。是的，我们此刻对此可能深感厌倦，但它即将发生根本性的变革。所以，无论你对Z世代的潮流有何看法，当谈及忠诚度时，“氛围感”（Vibes）正逐渐成为关键因素。

一如既往，希望本期内容对您有所帮助。下次再见。

<details>
<summary>Original English</summary>

Now,
 where
 is


gamification
 headed
 in
 the
 AI
 economy?


Despite
 all
 odds,
 the
 gamification


market
 is
 projected
 to
 grow
 from
 $20


billion
 to
 $190
 billion
 by
 2034.
 But
 the


term
 called
 gamification
 eight
 years


from
 now
 will
 bear
 no
 resemblance
 to
 the


points
 and
 badges
 system
 that
 we
 see


today.
 AI
 will
 personalize
 the
 hell
 out


of
 it
 to
 the
 point
 when
 there
 is
 going


to
 be
 a
 built-in
 behavioral
 layer
 inside


each
 app.
 So
 what
 exactly
 will
 happen?


Number
 one,
 personalization
 is
 going
 to


be
 on
 the
 user
 level.
 Social
 media,


gaming,
 e-commerce
 will
 be
 reading


behavioral
 signals
 and
 know
 exactly
 what


motivates
 each
 individual
 user.
 When


they're
 about
 to
 disengage,
 how
 to


change
 the
 experience
 on
 the
 spot,
 what


to
 put
 in
 your
 notifications,
 how
 to


adapt
 lesson
 difficulty,
 how
 to
 change


your
 training
 plan
 depending
 on
 how


you're
 feeling
 today.
 What
 AI
 will
 do
 is


mimic
 the
 system
 that
 Dolingo
 pioneered.


AI
 will
 turn
 lots
 of
 products
 into


living
 systems
 that
 will
 constantly


change
 and
 adapt.
 Number
 two,
 listen


closely.
 The
 definition
 of
 loyalty
 will


be
 reframed.
 Latest
 research
 and


predictions
 around
 transactional


loyalty.
 Transactional
 loyalty
 being


discounts,
 points,
 and
 cash
 back
 show


that
 there
 is
 going
 to
 be
 a
 strong
 trend


towards
 emotional
 loyalty.
 Things
 like


recognition,
 relevance,
 and
 relationship


with
 the
 product.
 So
 to
 all
 founders,


techies,
 and
 users,
 of
 course,


gamification
 isn't
 dead.
 Yes,
 we're


absolutely
 bored
 of
 it
 at
 this
 point,


but
 it's
 about
 to
 change
 fundamentally.


So,
 say
 what
 you
 will
 about
 Gen
 Z


trends,
 but
 vibes
 are
 becoming
 the


factor
 when
 it
 comes
 to
 loyalty.
 As


always,
 we
 hope
 this
 was
 helpful.
 Till


next
 time.
 Bye.

</details>