Wow! that was seriously annoying to complete, but in a surprisingly useful way. From the first screen I could tell this wasn’t your average user interface game. The design choices kept tricking me, redirecting my attention, and making me question every click. The whole experience is a perfect study of dark patterns.
I noticed several specific tactics as I progressed through the game:
- The visual layout constantly shifted priorities: buttons that looked like “next” actually led me down a path I didn’t intend, and checkboxes were designed to confuse or mislead. This kind of manipulation reflects what Brignull describes, where designers exploit psychological insights (like “people stick to defaults”) for business benefit rather than user benefit (Brignull, 2011).
- Some elements were buried in fine print or placed in weak visual hierarchy, making me click through before I fully understood the consequences. That mirrors Brignull’s point that hiding key information is a deceptive pattern rather than an honest one (Brignull, 2011).
- The game’s “choices” often weren’t real choices! It was set up to lead me toward a particular outcome. Brignull explains that dark patterns often “test well” because they boost conversion but degrade trust and clarity (Brignull, 2011).
- In the final rounds I realized I was less the active agent and more the prey in a UI maze built to steer me. That felt like a powerful moment of awareness about how real interfaces (outside the game) might use similar techniques to push behaviours, whether buying, consenting, or staying on a site longer.
From a learning perspective, the game made theory real. In my Grade 8 MYP Design class (where my students are designing sustainable bags), I’ll use this as a cautionary example of how design can serve users vs how it can serve profit or manipulation. It reinforces the idea that as designers (or teachers guiding designers) we have a responsibility to choose transparent, user-centered practices rather than hidden, coercive ones.
In terms of the reading, Brignull (2011) frames dark patterns along a continuum from honest interfaces to “dark” ones, showing that some practices slip into manipulation even if they seem minor (para. 83–88). This game made me feel those “minor” manipulations in a hands-on way. Also, the article points out that companies often stick with dark patterns because they boost short-term metrics and stepping away from them requires a cultural mindset shift toward trust, user value, and long-term brand health (Brignull, 2011). That’s a strong takeaway for any educator or aspiring designer: metrics matter, but not at the expense of ethics and clarity.
Reference
Brignull, H. (2011, November 1). Dark Patterns: Deception vs. Honesty in UI Design. A List Apart.