This article aims to examine the gamification-based engagement strategies embedded in web-based Generative Artificial Intelligence interfaces, drawing on interface and game studies and employing the Octalysis Tool framework (Chou 2016) as a taxonomic instrument. Specifically, it focuses on those strategies that frame AI as a toy, highlighting components, mechanics, and dynamics that resemanticize human–AI interaction in ludic terms. Adopting the perspective of critical media and interface studies, it questions whether a reproachful explanation is legitimate in the case of GAI interfaces. After discussing the inconsistencies of this position, the article proposes two possible directions: the first is comparative in nature, seeking to trace elements of continuity with contemporary media tools; the second is speculative, aiming to emphasize the gap between human–AI interaction practices and properly ludic forms of play with toys.
AgreP (1995) Conceptions of the user in computer systems design. In: ThomasPJ (ed) The Social and Interactional Dimensions of Human-Computer Interfaces. Cambridge (GB): Cambridge University Press, 67–106. Cambridge Series on Human-Computer Interaction 9.
2.
AndersenPB (1997) A theory of computer semiotics: semiotic approaches to construction and assessment of computer systems. In: Cambridge Series on Human-Computer Interaction 3. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
3.
AndersenCUPoldS (2018) The Metainterface: The Art of Platforms, Cities, and Clouds. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: The MIT Press.
4.
BogostI (2013) Exploitationware. In: ColbyRJohnsonMSS (eds) Rhetoric/composition/play Through Video Games. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US, 139–147. Rebekah Shultz Colby.
5.
BoomenMvan den (2014) Transcoding the Digital: How Metaphors Matter in New Media. Amsterdam: Institute of Network Cultures.
6.
BoryP (2019) Deep new: the shifting narratives of artificial intelligence from deep blue to AlphaGo. Convergence: The International Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies25(4): 627–642.
7.
BrattonBH (2015) The Stack: On Software and Sovereignty. Software Studies. Cambridge, Mass. London: MIT press.
8.
BucherT (2017) The algorithmic imaginary: exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society20(1): 30–44.
9.
CailloisRMeyerBCailloisR, et al. (2001) Man, Play, and Games. 1. Illinois Paperback. Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press.
ChunWHK (2005) On software, or the persistence of visual knowledge. Grey Room18: 26–51.
12.
CramerF (2005) Words made flesh. Code, Culture, Imagination. Rotterdam: Piet Zwart Institute. Rotterdam: Piet Zwart Institute.
13.
DeS (1993) The semiotic engineering of user interface languages. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies39(5): 753–773.
14.
DeterdingSDixonDKhaledR, et al. (2011) From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “gamification”. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic Mindtrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, New York, NY, USA, September 28–30, 2011, 9–15. Association for Computing Machinery.
15.
EmersonL (2014) Reading writing interfaces: from the digital to the bookbound. In: Electronic Mediations. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
16.
FuchsM (2014) Gamification as twenty-first-century ideology. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds6(2): 143–157.
17.
GallowayAR (2012) The Interface Effect. Cambridge, UK ; Malden, MA: Polity.
18.
GibsonJJ (1986) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. New York: Routledge.
19.
GiddingsS (2024) Toy Theory: Technology and Imagination in Play. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
20.
IdoneC (2019) Towards a trading zone. A semiotic method for Cross- disciplinary case study analysis of gamified systems. Proceedings of the 3rd Internation GameFIN Conference. Levi, Findalnd.
21.
ManovichL (2001) The Language of New Media. 8. Print. A Leonardo Book. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
McGonigalJ (2011) Reality is Broken: Why Games Make us Better and How they can Change the World. New York: Penguin Press. Ed. with a new, 2. appendix.
24.
NarayananAKapoorS (2024) AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence can do, what it Can’T, and How to Tell the Difference. Princeton Oxford: Princeton University Press.
25.
NataleS (2021) Deceitful Media: Artificial Intelligence and Social Life After the Turing Test. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
NormanDA (1999) Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions6(3): 38–43.
27.
PickoverCA (2019) Artificial intelligence: an illustrated history: from medieval robots to neural networks. New York: Sterling.
28.
RabinS (ed) (2002) AI Game Programming Wisdom. Hingham, Mass: Charles River Media.
29.
RancièreJ (2005) Le partage du sensible: esthétique et politique. Paris: La fabrique.
30.
ReyesE (2025) Generative media: sign, metaphor, and experience. In: BankovKBiggioF (eds).Digital Age in Semiotics & Communication. Sofia, Bulgaria: New Bulgarian University.
31.
RomeleA (2024) Digital Habitus: A Critique of the Imaginaries of Artificial Intelligence. Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy. New York , London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
32.
RussellSJNorvigP (2016) Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. 3rd ed. In: Boston Columbus Indianapolis. London: Pearson. Prentice Hall Series in Artificial Intelligence.
33.
SouchierE (2007) Formes et pouvoirs de renonciation éditoriale. Communication et Langages154(1): 23–38.
34.
ThibaultM (2020) Ludosemiotica. Il gioco tra segni, testi, pratiche e discorsi. Canter237.
35.
WebleySChamK (2016) Designing for the play instinct gamification, collective voodoo and mumbo jumboThe Business of Gamification. A Critical Analysis. New York: Routledge, 204–229.
36.
YannakakisGNJulianT (2018) Artificial Intelligence and Games. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
