While this was helpful and well done, I find it incredibly amusing that after I popped in my email, I was hit with very similar dark patterns trying to get me to pay for a Substack subscription, follow people, and share it.
Cool idea, pretty good execution, but your UI is confusing.
1. There's so much happening on the screen between your app's UI and the fake UI with the dark patterns that it's confusing. IMO you should show the objective first, and then let the user click to reveal the fake UI and challenge. For example, simply show, "Challenge #1 — Find the button that actually lets you cancel the subscription." Then have a button that says, "Start Challenge." When that button is clicked, then reveal the UI.
2. Give me some context. If you just say, "Find the button that actually lets you cancel the subscription," that's not really enough. You should set the scenario. "Imagine you're subscribed to an app, but you don't want to be subscribed anymore. So you sign into the app and click the cancel button. It loads a new screen. How do proceed from here to finalize your cancelation?"
3. Don't tell me the answer in advance. Naming the first challenge "Color Confusion" tells me the answer.
4. Don't auto-advance steps. I had no idea that I auto advanced. I changed tabs, then came back, then was scrolling down looking for the next step button. Just let me manually click to the next step as a user. Preferably at the bottom, near the pattern explanation.
Just adding on to number 4 - I didn't realize there was additional information explaining the pattern further below the interactive challenge for the first couple steps. When completed, it should then show the explanation and a button to continue.
I wish to opt out of receiving exclusive promotional offers and updates about products I might be interested in.
What this means:
When checked: They will send you marketing emails. Uncheck to stop promotional emails.
How it tricks you:
They use 'opt out' and 'wish' to create a double negative - saying no to opting out means saying yes to emails
Fun stuff! But I'm really unclear about this particular checkbox on lesson 9 - in my eyes, wishing is not a negative - so this is a single negative, and you would check it to not receive updates
The worst offender I've seen in this regard was some GUI program on Windows, and it had this checkbox in its installation process with some wording like this:
"Please do not uncheck if you do not wish to not install XXX (bundled bloatware)"
I just assumed that the default state must be installing the bloatware, and changed it, and fortunately I was right.
The double negative is incorrect, but perhaps the negative "opt out" is being a bit obfuscated by the "wish".
It's been common for these types of questions to say something like "I wish to receive exclusive offers..."
So this phrasing is a little bit tricky in that if someone doesn't read it carefully they will think checking the box is saying yes to marketing spam, when in reality it's the opposite.
It would seem to me that "I wish to opt out" doesn't make it clear whether you actually opt out or not, simply that it would be your desire. So checking or not checking wouldn't make any difference, as neither way is answering the actual question of opting out.
The first two levels want you to click the non-misleading option and then the third requires you to click the misleading option, which then has a "Report as Deceptive Marketing" button. This feels counterproductive if you're trying to teach people to not fall for dark patterns, you've just rewarded them for falling for it and punished anyone who didn't!. Then, a later level has the opposite, you see (almost) the same dialog from level 3, but you need to click the other option.
The instructions for Level 3 do say you're supposed to "find the hidden truth", but that's not necessarily what clicking the "Activate Premium Features" button would do in real life. I think it would work better if it stuck to one side of things, probably having players always try to avoid getting misled. At the end it says one of the outcomes should be "Improved muscle memory", so the goal should probably be no clicking on bad things.
This also makes it confusing what it's supposed to be simulating to me. I've never had a site offer to let me report their own promotions as deceptive (or as a later level has, "Report Bait and Switch Tactic" when you go to check out).
The "Trick Questions" level had only pre-checked checkboxes that you should uncheck (and the button tells you to uncheck all of them, there's no thought required here), I think it would work better if some needed to remain checked. It ties in to the same "muscle memory" issue, unchecking isn't guaranteed to be a good action. Similarly, it might make sense to have Basket Sneaking include a coupon code or something that you shouldn't remove from your cart, so players learn to read closely.
Yes, I stopped at question three because just lying is not what I consider a dark pattern. The three check boxes are not giving the site permission to do what you say they will do.
"Unlocking exclusive and premium content" doesn't mean it will always be promotional content. The exclusive content has just as much chance as being an ad as the rest of the content.
"Personalized deals just for you" is not a dark pattern. That is basically just asking if you want to see more ads. That's a light pattern,
"24/7 support" presumably means you will get some support. If they share data with folks who are not support folks, then that's just lying.
Yeah this confused me quite a bit too. I thought the point was to spot the misleading options and avoid them/do whatever was necessary to fix the sneaky tricks the site pulled, not deliberately fall for it to find out why it's misleading.
The forced 5 second wait time is killing me. Why not just let me click between the puzzles? Also feels like a left-to-right orientation would be easier to browse, as opposed to the mobile style stacked cards.
Yes. I tried to click on that twice; the first time within the text of the toast button and then on the right chevron. I really hate having to wait when it's arbitrary and doesn't add anything to the challenge.
It is actually a really cool idea! Why i tried it out however it is not always clear to me which parts are the 'game interface' and which parts are your 'tooltips'. Not sure if this is intentional though
I was also just about to complain that you shared something to Show HN that is behind a subscription - then I realized that was part of the experience!
Thanks for trying it out and for the feedback, it's really helpful! The blur between simulation interface and the tooltips/guidance is one of the design challenges I've been iterating on. It's been something I'm actively working to improve for both this game and future ones.
Haha, that's gold! I was a bit nervous about putting the subscription pattern as the first question, but went with it since it's so relatable. Really glad it created that "aha!" moment where people realize they're experiencing what they're learning about.
So, am I the only one who finds it kinda amusing that right after a game about avoiding dark patterns, we get a Substack email sign up that seems like it's subtly trying to manipulate you into using it (the bouncing arrow, obvious border/highlight/etc)?
But as far as the game itself goes, it's good, but kinda confusing in its design. Sometimes it seems like you're meant to show you won't fall for the tricks by clicking the right option, whereas sometimes you're forced to do the wrong thing first so the game can explain why it's the wrong choice. It'd be better if you just had to do what was needed without clicking the wrong/misleading option, since it'd be a better test of your ability to recognise online manipulation.
Also the delay between each puzzle felt really arbitrary, not gonna lie. Don't know why I'm forced to wait 5 seconds between rounds.
I liked the idea! However I do have a few pieces of feedback
1. Switching between mobile and desktop modes resets the progress
2. When I complete a lesson, an explanation is given but I'm given just a few seconds to read it, and then the game forcefully continues to the next lesson. Sometimes I could miss the explanation.
Thanks so much for the feedback—it’s super helpful! Persisting progress between mobile and desktop is definitely on my roadmap. As for the lesson timer, I’ve just updated it to 5 seconds as a quick fix while I work on a better long-term solution for completing lessons. Appreciate you pointing that out!
Very cool interactive, nice work! I think your progression probably works well on desktop, just turn off the "auto scroll to next activity" on mobile devices where it's impossible to see the message without scrolling back up to it... and maybe stick the message right below the last place the user clicked.
Also, I didn't really understand this one, where the phrase in question is "I wish to opt out of receiving exclusive promotional offers and updates about products I might be interested in." How does unchecking this result in an opt out? I can't figure out how to read this to make "[x]" mean anything other than "opt me out of offers and updates."
>
What this means:
When checked: They will send you marketing emails. Uncheck to stop promotional emails.
How it tricks you:
They use 'opt out' and 'wish' to create a double negative - saying no to opting out means saying yes to emails
Edit: oh I see. I got confused by the triple negative! The "correct" answer is indeed to keep it checked, but the instructional aspect of the page as a whole implies that you need to uncheck the box to have succeeded (aligning with the mistake). I think starting with the box unchecked might be a little more clear for the purposes of demonstrating.
Nice game! Seems like someone already gave the feedback about the lack of time to read the explanation before the game progressed automatically.
BTW something on the game is making my CPU go 100%. I'm on Firefox, Linux and in the JS console I can see "Unexpected value translate(52.460687992082626%, 52.24894125700998%) scale(1.0398801892701597) parsing transform attribute." warning being printed nonstop.
Thanks for helping identify my first ever hotfix! There was bound to be an issue given this is my first real solo web development project - the background animation was causing the CPU issue as I immediately suspected. I've just pushed a fix that resolves this, along with extending the completion timer to 5 seconds for better readability. This timer adjustment is a temporary solution until I can implement a more configurable system.
Fantastic idea, the UI of the site is clean, I think the actual content itself could use some improvement.
After opening the site I had to "fail" a couple just to understand what the user goal even was. I recognized the fake/misleading UI but still wasn't sure what to do with that information.
I think you should take this exact concept, do some user studies, and come out with a V2. There's a market for this. My grandparents are getting to the age where I don't really trust them with access to their own credit cards / operating the web, I frequently come over to fix their computer and it's just extensions they've unintentionally installed. If this was iterated on & repackaged as either a educational course or a "test" to see if they are "safe on the internet", I would pay money for it.
And on the other end, it's well-proven at this point that tech literacy for the average person peaked somewhere around people born in 1985-2000. Before then, people grew up without as much access to tech. After that, people grew up in an environment where common tech problems were already solved. (A 10 yearold in 2012 wasn't dealing with corrupted disks, they were playing on an iPad). Offering this concept as a course targetted at the age range could be good.
I wish to opt out of receiving exclusive promotional offers and updates about products I might be interested in.
I legitimately think the phrasing on this one is wrong if you're expecting unchecking it to be the way to avoid a dark pattern. The follow-up explanation is written as though there's a double negative, but there isn't one here.
And then, at the end, there's an onboarding funnel for the author's paid Substack, which has several screens of dark patterns. I put "uce@ftc.gov" in the email box.
Appreciate this! It’s clear there’s a lot of room to make things more intuitive. I’ll definitely focus on improving the clarity and flow in the next iteration.
From a technical point of view the page scrolls a little slowly. I'm on Firefox for Android and it's usually faster than that. However for those scammy sites slowness is par for the course. It adds to the realism of the experience.
The gamification of the "levels" starting with "Misdirection" doesn't really make sense to me. After the first few "levels" you've established how the game works: the player has to click on the button that opts out of the bad stuff, and gets a green box (success). Opting into the bad stuff gives a red box (fail).
But then suddenly you switch it up: the player is forced to opt into the bad stuff, so you can give a guided tour through the bad stuff. You still give red failure feedback for all of this, but you also give red failure feedback if the player opts out of the bad stuff, since you were trying to get them to see it.
Even after this point, some levels work the original way where you have to opt out of bad stuff.
Again on "Basket Sneaking", the goal is to remove items from the cart, but when removing items from the cart, you give red failure-like feedback.
On "Privacy Zuckering" the "Show details" are not anything you'd see on a real website. Here the idea that you're giving a guided tour clashes with the idea that you're showing us a mockup of a real app.
This reply was delayed by a few hours due to HN rate limiting.
Thank you for the super detailed feedback—this is incredibly helpful!
Other comments have highlighted similar issues, and I definitely see the need to re-work the lessons to maintain a more consistent positive action pattern.
Balancing guided exploration with clear player expectations has been tricky, but your input gives me a lot to think about.
Thanks again-really appreciate you taking the time to share this.
The game is good but it's missing a level where you need to uncheck 500 checkboxes which are hidden behind the "legitimate interest" dropdown..
To me, there's one thing worse than dark patterns - no real choice at all, and this is what FB/Instagram does with its "pay or okay" approach and I can't figure out how is this even legal here.
While this was helpful and well done, I find it incredibly amusing that after I popped in my email, I was hit with very similar dark patterns trying to get me to pay for a Substack subscription, follow people, and share it.
Touché?
Cool idea, pretty good execution, but your UI is confusing.
1. There's so much happening on the screen between your app's UI and the fake UI with the dark patterns that it's confusing. IMO you should show the objective first, and then let the user click to reveal the fake UI and challenge. For example, simply show, "Challenge #1 — Find the button that actually lets you cancel the subscription." Then have a button that says, "Start Challenge." When that button is clicked, then reveal the UI.
2. Give me some context. If you just say, "Find the button that actually lets you cancel the subscription," that's not really enough. You should set the scenario. "Imagine you're subscribed to an app, but you don't want to be subscribed anymore. So you sign into the app and click the cancel button. It loads a new screen. How do proceed from here to finalize your cancelation?"
3. Don't tell me the answer in advance. Naming the first challenge "Color Confusion" tells me the answer.
4. Don't auto-advance steps. I had no idea that I auto advanced. I changed tabs, then came back, then was scrolling down looking for the next step button. Just let me manually click to the next step as a user. Preferably at the bottom, near the pattern explanation.
Just adding on to number 4 - I didn't realize there was additional information explaining the pattern further below the interactive challenge for the first couple steps. When completed, it should then show the explanation and a button to continue.
The worst offender I've seen in this regard was some GUI program on Windows, and it had this checkbox in its installation process with some wording like this:
"Please do not uncheck if you do not wish to not install XXX (bundled bloatware)"
I just assumed that the default state must be installing the bloatware, and changed it, and fortunately I was right.
"I just assumed that the default state must be installing the bloatware, and changed it, and fortunately I was right."
That's how it is usually and also my way to navigate modern UI.
"No, I don't want to share all of what I do on my device with you and your 800 partners"
The double negative is incorrect, but perhaps the negative "opt out" is being a bit obfuscated by the "wish".
It's been common for these types of questions to say something like "I wish to receive exclusive offers..."
So this phrasing is a little bit tricky in that if someone doesn't read it carefully they will think checking the box is saying yes to marketing spam, when in reality it's the opposite.
5 bucks say it was written by a LLM
It would seem to me that "I wish to opt out" doesn't make it clear whether you actually opt out or not, simply that it would be your desire. So checking or not checking wouldn't make any difference, as neither way is answering the actual question of opting out.
Yes, I came here to say that. "Wish" definitely does not create a negative, and ticking the box is the correct thing to do.
I'd say you shouldn't tick it. By ticking it they may grant your wish to opt-out.
They send emails > you opt-out > wish fulfilled > you're welcome.
It's a nice game but I have some feedback:
The first two levels want you to click the non-misleading option and then the third requires you to click the misleading option, which then has a "Report as Deceptive Marketing" button. This feels counterproductive if you're trying to teach people to not fall for dark patterns, you've just rewarded them for falling for it and punished anyone who didn't!. Then, a later level has the opposite, you see (almost) the same dialog from level 3, but you need to click the other option.
The instructions for Level 3 do say you're supposed to "find the hidden truth", but that's not necessarily what clicking the "Activate Premium Features" button would do in real life. I think it would work better if it stuck to one side of things, probably having players always try to avoid getting misled. At the end it says one of the outcomes should be "Improved muscle memory", so the goal should probably be no clicking on bad things.
This also makes it confusing what it's supposed to be simulating to me. I've never had a site offer to let me report their own promotions as deceptive (or as a later level has, "Report Bait and Switch Tactic" when you go to check out).
The "Trick Questions" level had only pre-checked checkboxes that you should uncheck (and the button tells you to uncheck all of them, there's no thought required here), I think it would work better if some needed to remain checked. It ties in to the same "muscle memory" issue, unchecking isn't guaranteed to be a good action. Similarly, it might make sense to have Basket Sneaking include a coupon code or something that you shouldn't remove from your cart, so players learn to read closely.
Yes, I stopped at question three because just lying is not what I consider a dark pattern. The three check boxes are not giving the site permission to do what you say they will do.
"Unlocking exclusive and premium content" doesn't mean it will always be promotional content. The exclusive content has just as much chance as being an ad as the rest of the content.
"Personalized deals just for you" is not a dark pattern. That is basically just asking if you want to see more ads. That's a light pattern,
"24/7 support" presumably means you will get some support. If they share data with folks who are not support folks, then that's just lying.
Yeah this confused me quite a bit too. I thought the point was to spot the misleading options and avoid them/do whatever was necessary to fix the sneaky tricks the site pulled, not deliberately fall for it to find out why it's misleading.
I like this. We should have a community site that scores websites based on how many dark patterns they use.
The forced 5 second wait time is killing me. Why not just let me click between the puzzles? Also feels like a left-to-right orientation would be easier to browse, as opposed to the mobile style stacked cards.
Yes. I tried to click on that twice; the first time within the text of the toast button and then on the right chevron. I really hate having to wait when it's arbitrary and doesn't add anything to the challenge.
It is actually a really cool idea! Why i tried it out however it is not always clear to me which parts are the 'game interface' and which parts are your 'tooltips'. Not sure if this is intentional though
I was also just about to complain that you shared something to Show HN that is behind a subscription - then I realized that was part of the experience!
Thanks for trying it out and for the feedback, it's really helpful! The blur between simulation interface and the tooltips/guidance is one of the design challenges I've been iterating on. It's been something I'm actively working to improve for both this game and future ones.
Haha, that's gold! I was a bit nervous about putting the subscription pattern as the first question, but went with it since it's so relatable. Really glad it created that "aha!" moment where people realize they're experiencing what they're learning about.
So, am I the only one who finds it kinda amusing that right after a game about avoiding dark patterns, we get a Substack email sign up that seems like it's subtly trying to manipulate you into using it (the bouncing arrow, obvious border/highlight/etc)?
But as far as the game itself goes, it's good, but kinda confusing in its design. Sometimes it seems like you're meant to show you won't fall for the tricks by clicking the right option, whereas sometimes you're forced to do the wrong thing first so the game can explain why it's the wrong choice. It'd be better if you just had to do what was needed without clicking the wrong/misleading option, since it'd be a better test of your ability to recognise online manipulation.
Also the delay between each puzzle felt really arbitrary, not gonna lie. Don't know why I'm forced to wait 5 seconds between rounds.
I liked the idea! However I do have a few pieces of feedback
1. Switching between mobile and desktop modes resets the progress
2. When I complete a lesson, an explanation is given but I'm given just a few seconds to read it, and then the game forcefully continues to the next lesson. Sometimes I could miss the explanation.
I think you have successfully discovered meta-education on dark patterns.
Haha! "You were supposed to stop the dark patterns, not join them."
Thanks so much for the feedback—it’s super helpful! Persisting progress between mobile and desktop is definitely on my roadmap. As for the lesson timer, I’ve just updated it to 5 seconds as a quick fix while I work on a better long-term solution for completing lessons. Appreciate you pointing that out!
Very cool interactive, nice work! I think your progression probably works well on desktop, just turn off the "auto scroll to next activity" on mobile devices where it's impossible to see the message without scrolling back up to it... and maybe stick the message right below the last place the user clicked.
Also, I didn't really understand this one, where the phrase in question is "I wish to opt out of receiving exclusive promotional offers and updates about products I might be interested in." How does unchecking this result in an opt out? I can't figure out how to read this to make "[x]" mean anything other than "opt me out of offers and updates."
>
What this means:
When checked: They will send you marketing emails. Uncheck to stop promotional emails.
How it tricks you: They use 'opt out' and 'wish' to create a double negative - saying no to opting out means saying yes to emails
Edit: oh I see. I got confused by the triple negative! The "correct" answer is indeed to keep it checked, but the instructional aspect of the page as a whole implies that you need to uncheck the box to have succeeded (aligning with the mistake). I think starting with the box unchecked might be a little more clear for the purposes of demonstrating.
Nice game! Seems like someone already gave the feedback about the lack of time to read the explanation before the game progressed automatically.
BTW something on the game is making my CPU go 100%. I'm on Firefox, Linux and in the JS console I can see "Unexpected value translate(52.460687992082626%, 52.24894125700998%) scale(1.0398801892701597) parsing transform attribute." warning being printed nonstop.
Thanks for helping identify my first ever hotfix! There was bound to be an issue given this is my first real solo web development project - the background animation was causing the CPU issue as I immediately suspected. I've just pushed a fix that resolves this, along with extending the completion timer to 5 seconds for better readability. This timer adjustment is a temporary solution until I can implement a more configurable system.
Fantastic idea, the UI of the site is clean, I think the actual content itself could use some improvement.
After opening the site I had to "fail" a couple just to understand what the user goal even was. I recognized the fake/misleading UI but still wasn't sure what to do with that information.
I think you should take this exact concept, do some user studies, and come out with a V2. There's a market for this. My grandparents are getting to the age where I don't really trust them with access to their own credit cards / operating the web, I frequently come over to fix their computer and it's just extensions they've unintentionally installed. If this was iterated on & repackaged as either a educational course or a "test" to see if they are "safe on the internet", I would pay money for it.
And on the other end, it's well-proven at this point that tech literacy for the average person peaked somewhere around people born in 1985-2000. Before then, people grew up without as much access to tech. After that, people grew up in an environment where common tech problems were already solved. (A 10 yearold in 2012 wasn't dealing with corrupted disks, they were playing on an iPad). Offering this concept as a course targetted at the age range could be good.
Other than that, fun project!
Oh, that's great!
And then, at the end, there's an onboarding funnel for the author's paid Substack, which has several screens of dark patterns. I put "uce@ftc.gov" in the email box.
Very cool! I interacted with the first few pages and I am going to share this with my friends so they can learn how to avoid the dark patterns.
Glad you enjoyed it! Hearing this means a lot and motivates me to keep improving it.
I think your UI could use some work, funny enough. But I like the concept, it's just that the way the page and "game" works is not exactly clear.
Appreciate this! It’s clear there’s a lot of room to make things more intuitive. I’ll definitely focus on improving the clarity and flow in the next iteration.
Well done.
From a technical point of view the page scrolls a little slowly. I'm on Firefox for Android and it's usually faster than that. However for those scammy sites slowness is par for the course. It adds to the realism of the experience.
Haha, thanks for the heads-up about scrolling! Definitely not intentional realism, but hey, I’ll take the happy accident.
Thank you so much for this! I think this is informative and relevant.
Thank you! Glad you liked it.
The gamification of the "levels" starting with "Misdirection" doesn't really make sense to me. After the first few "levels" you've established how the game works: the player has to click on the button that opts out of the bad stuff, and gets a green box (success). Opting into the bad stuff gives a red box (fail).
But then suddenly you switch it up: the player is forced to opt into the bad stuff, so you can give a guided tour through the bad stuff. You still give red failure feedback for all of this, but you also give red failure feedback if the player opts out of the bad stuff, since you were trying to get them to see it.
Even after this point, some levels work the original way where you have to opt out of bad stuff.
Again on "Basket Sneaking", the goal is to remove items from the cart, but when removing items from the cart, you give red failure-like feedback.
On "Privacy Zuckering" the "Show details" are not anything you'd see on a real website. Here the idea that you're giving a guided tour clashes with the idea that you're showing us a mockup of a real app.
This reply was delayed by a few hours due to HN rate limiting.
Thank you for the super detailed feedback—this is incredibly helpful!
Other comments have highlighted similar issues, and I definitely see the need to re-work the lessons to maintain a more consistent positive action pattern.
Balancing guided exploration with clear player expectations has been tricky, but your input gives me a lot to think about.
Thanks again-really appreciate you taking the time to share this.
That was really well done. Nice work!
Thank you, I really appreciate it!
The game is good but it's missing a level where you need to uncheck 500 checkboxes which are hidden behind the "legitimate interest" dropdown..
To me, there's one thing worse than dark patterns - no real choice at all, and this is what FB/Instagram does with its "pay or okay" approach and I can't figure out how is this even legal here.
This is very well built. And beautiful to look at too. Congrats..
Thank you so much for the kind words!