Monday, February 26, 2007

Is play a functional requirement?

Does the product need play? Is play a functional requirement? [draft]

I have a friend who told me once, if you have a hobby that you really love doing, don't skimp on the tools, supplies, and so forth. If you can't splurge on the things you love, the things that bring you joy; the things that are under your control and choice completely, then what can you?
Do people have hobbies anymore? I talk to people at work, and there are very few who have hobbies just because they love doing the thing. Can people stand to do something that they aren't the best at? If they can't be the virtuoso, it's too frustrating, and they can't bear to do it.

It's in the play, the joy of doing, that we find our spirit; our truth and contribution.
When we play, we tend to get out of our way, and let the stars smile at our genius.
When we play, just as when we experience "beginner's luck", we approach the thing without a preconceived notion of what the outcome is supposed to be. We let it happen. We absorb the experience and we interact with it in the moment.

When we play, we get in touch with that side of ourselves. The side of us that gets out of the way and let Spirit Lead. We are closer to joy, bliss, and peace.

When we design products that builds in an amount of play, do they like the product more? Do they take it seriously? Do they need to take it completely seriously?
Does play as a functional requirement add to the "stickiness" of the product?
[draft --> more to come]

No comments: