LibLaureate

GLS 2007: Five Key Moments: A Litmus Test for Game Design

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Five Key Moments: A Litmus Test for Game Design
Presenter: Katie Salen

We should be studying the question - what does the game want from me?  Not what do I want from the game.

The Litmus Test for players

1. Can I try?
2. Can I save it?
3. Want me to show you?
4. How did you do that?
5. I know a better way.

This process cycles through the levels of engagement, agency, expertise and back again.  Also, three aspects of participation:

1. Need to know
2. Need to share
3. Occasion to share

The rest of the session looked at Big Games - those that involve interaction within the community - mostly details of the Karaoke Ice project.

I like the litmus test - and asking what the game wants since at this stage - what are the rules of the game, etc.  How do I play?  Not how do I want to play the game.  I think this ties into those studying the involvement of players in the design of the game - creating the way they want it to be played.

GLS 2007: Beyond Games: The Rise of Learning-Based Metaverses

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Beyond Games: The Rise of Learning-Based Metaverses
Presenter: Robert Gehorsam

I missed the very beginning of this session but was quite interested in the use of MMOGs for training purposes.  That MMOs can be used as a rehearsal space for other things.  The look and feel can mimic MMOGs but within a learning space.  He used OLIVE as an example - training individuals, not just emergency personnel how to respond to different situations but bystanders as well.  The benefits are significant, especially cost, when considering shutting down parts of a city, or getting people to participate, and can be continually run.  Instead of "game" where NPCs are computer controlled - ALL the players are live and can react and do things in different ways.  In this case, he showed an explosion, and the reaction of emergency and medical personnel.  From on the scene reactions to diagnosis on the emergency table (using real - but not live - vital signs, x-rays, etc. - the players can make decisions).  His motivation for this type of training increased after reading the 9/11 report and learned about the miscommunication that was happening.  Forterra has their own MMO platform, OLIVE (On-Line Interactive Virtual Environment), and can design many types of large-scale scenarios.  He ran a demo with some people from his office and a grad student not located in the same spot (the real-time feel added to the drama of the scenario - an explosion at a bank - no one knowing why, etc.).

I know that there are currently a number of simulations that already exist - but I found the real-time aspect quite interesting.  The novel element of not knowing the exact way (and thus not requiring programming) has excellent potential.  Applicability for IL lies in the wider context of the discipline - no sense doing IL as a stand-alone - the benefit of these scenarios is the interdisciplinary aspect - if it's important, it will be included.  Do undergraduate students want to take on the role of being an undergraduate student trying to find resources for students?  If one good limit to a discipline and then extend across campuses - then it might have more wide-spread appeal.  If the physical isn't as important, then perhaps collaborate with other institutions so ALL the biology students or history students are all online and playing together at the same time - solving the same type of problem.  You might be able to mobilize a larger part of the staff.  I wonder if a self-contained worlds like this would be more effective than SL?  Who pays the cost for those to register if the institution doesn't pay - would this increase the inequity that Gee suggests is occurring with regards to learning?

GLS 2007: Learning in a Participatory Age

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Learning in a Participatory Age
Presenter: Henry Jenkins & Kurt Squire

A lot of what was talked about here was covered in Jenkins' book, Convergence Culture.  Basically, people coming together and creating in a new space - using a variety of different means. Learning in schools vs. learning in a participatory culture.  There is a reversing as roles - the rules are changing.  Children and adults can interact on the same level - children editing adult fan fiction for example.  A participation gap does exist as does inequality.  He suggests wikipedia is a model of participatory culture - debate, bias, point of view, opinions come together to form ideas - and it can shift too.  The 'chat' also shifted to politics and how 'participation' has transformed politics in some ways but not in others - motivating voter turnout in the younger age group - bringing out more obscure information into the mainstream media - would Howard Dean's outburst hit the mainstream media if it had not landed on YouTube.

Links to Henry Jenkins' blog and his MacArthur Foundation white paper, Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture Media Education for the 21st Century.

GLS 2007: Storytelling in Games

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Storytelling in Games
Presenter: Charles Herold, NY Times, videogame critic

Well, I would have been better off going to one of the other sessions.  I should have known, looking back at the description, "a rambling exploration" that this would not really address any issues.  In fairness, this was a fireside chat, but there was no real substance to this session at all.  Never got to the core about the importance of storytelling - does it really mean anything?  How do you define a good story within a game?  What makes a good game narrative?  How the medium prevent crafting excellent games?  By the end of the session, it was pretty much what came down to personal preference as people made suggestions about  which games they thought had good stories.  I'd like to see a poll or study about the impact of the narrative on gameplay - this may come down to some people are drawn to different games than others.

GLS 2007: Games & Schools: A Marriage Made in Heaven or Hell?

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Games & Schools: A Marriage Made in Heaven or Hell?
Presenter: Angela McFarlane

FutureLab continues to look deeper into the subject of games and learning - exploring the learning that does or does not occur.  They're looking at COTS in the classrooms - are they effective, what resources are needed, are learning needs being met, etc.  Games need to be more than just learning, they need to address other issues as well - the context, the social aspects of gameplay, etc.  For example, students considered themselves 'good' SIMS players yet couldn't keep their SIMS alive for longer than ten minutes and showed little self-motivation on changing that.  "Make, create, share, edit" is a better model for learning - learning is about creating and schools should focus more on tools to make stuff.  Much of what she spoke about is highlighted in the Teaching with Games report from FutureLab.

Read notes from tidbitsofinterest and the Shifted Librarian

GLS 2007: Educational Game Design: Confidential

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Educational Game Design: Confidential
Presenter: Meagan Rothschild and Javier Elizondo

This was a 'how we done it' - what worked and didn't work.  They described a number of different problems that they ran into - staff issues, funding issues, different objectives, different partnerships.  This is part of the Star Schools Grant Project being developed at PREL (Pacific Resources for Education and Learning).  Read notes from tidbitsofinterest and the Shifted Librarian

GLS 2007: Serious Games by Serious Instructional Designers

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Serious Games by Serious Instructional Designers
Presenter: Jamie Henderson & Valerie Hainley

This session looked at creating a serious game for the Army for the training of troops in Iraq in for questioning tactics.  The game was created to try and alleviate the tedium that soldiers were going through during the training - inattention, falling asleep, etc.  They took the principles of that training and due to budget restraints, created the game in Flash.  The biggest challenge they faced was designing for failure - that poor decisions resulted in poor results.  Create a story, goal, challenge, meaningful action and appropriate feedback.  The designer had served overseas which was helpful in their discussions with the experts in questioning.  The players would be presented with a list of options and they could gauge their success by the mood meter of the scene they were in.  For example, questioning women would raise the mood and create a potentially dangerous situation.  In this case, the goal was to find the hidden weapons - failure was a plane being shot down with a rocket.  The implication that poor choices can mean real death of comrades.  Here is a link to imedia.it.  Read notes from tidbitsofinterest and the Shifted Librarian

I'm wondering if you can accurately reflect the mood of the area inside the game - can one design in enough variations? Does the proper line of questioning ALWAYS find the right solutions?  Does failure always result in deaths?  Adding to the drama of the session was 3-tour veteran who claimed that whatever was purported to be training was not how it was being done.  He was quite adamant about who the 'experts' were that had been consulted. 

GLS 2007: Using Videogames as a Strategy for Teaching Complex Topics

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007       

Using Videogames as a Strategy for Teaching Complex Topics
Presenter: Robert Brown

This had to be one of the best ideas going - what I see as a broader immersive experience for education and gaming.  DOING A WHOLE COURSE AS A GAME.  What could be more kick ass than that?  Alright - hard to tell without actually participating - but it sure sounds more interesting than lectures and cases.  Aren't I supposed to start with the details before the comments...?!

The course is ECON 201 - Principles of Microeconomics and runs parallel to the standard class-based course and students can choose which to enrol in at the time.  The course is accessible 24/7 which means much more flexibility (maybe I would be tempted to 'play' into the wee hours on economics than something else...I really like how they structured the game - making it immersive and engaging.  They seem to have integrated a number of design principles to keep the game immersive).

• Assessments are built into the game and are replayable until the student feels they've reached a point to move on.  The students are monitored as well so those that are struggling or not participating will be pushed.
• Starts with a tutorial that assumes only mouse knowledge (how much of this can be bypassed by prior genre knowledge I wonder?).
• Quizzes are the primary mode of assessment - similar to the classroom but in a game-style format.  These quizzes take the form of dream sequences to help maintain narrative consistency.  (Oh yeah, you're an alien arriving on an Earth colony and are trying to learn the economic principles.)
• Final exam is not replayable.  It's not identical to the classroom exam but has common questions.  I'm assuming a test bank for this??

The amount of work that went into this is quite significant but without getting a chance to 'play' the game - hard to get a really good idea of how well it works.  The presenters indicated that the grades were equal, if not slightly higher for those taking the online game version.  This works well for multiple choice answers - would it work the same way for short answer or essay?  There would be no reason one couldn't build in the steps to writing an essay but the downside is that you probably couldn't provide the type of real-time feedback available with the testing method.  The essay, though, could be used as a means of progression to a next stage.  If one could provide the tools and resources within game to write - I don't see why it couldn't be done.

Read notes from tidbitsofinterest and the Shifted Librarian

GLS 2007: Well-played: Interpreting Videogames

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007

Well-played: Interpreting Videogames
Presenter: Drew Davidson

Using the game Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time as his case, Davidson described the blending of narrative and gameplay throughout the game.  He showed how certain elements of story can affect the player and the interpretation of the gameplay.

He uses four ways to interpret videogames

1. undefined (subtext)
2. Balance / Imbalance
3. undefined
4. undefined Narrans (playing through stories)

You can read more about narrative and stories in these papers;
Plotting the Story and Interactivity in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time

Interactivities: from Involvement through Immersion to Investment

From a social perspective it was intriguing to see a roomful of adults watching someone play a videogame - including gasps when the character had a near death experiences - who says that videogames can't be shared experience?  Although he had some good points about how the narrative fit into the gameplay - he didn't quite delve into cultural realism and whether or not it can or cannot affect the narrative - ie. characters with British accents, etc.  Is this important?  Why or why not?  It would have been more beneficial if he had two games to compare as well.

At least I won't have to play Prince of Persia anymore since I know how it plays out.  It's a scaffolding game so unlikely I would have played anyways.  LOL.

GLS 2007:Game Technology and Open Source

Games, Learning and Society 3.0
Madison, Wisconsin
July 12-13, 2007

Game Technology and Open Source: Because Your Wallet Just Isn't That Fat
Presenter: Nathan McKenzie

McKenzie talked about design focusing on the different types of tools that could be used.  He had some tips to share gained from his experience designing for the US military.

1. More isn't always better
2. Tools need skills
3. Design means leaving only the essentials
4. Understand game design to understand what is essential

Since we're modding at Hardplay, this isn't as an important question as it once was.  By choosing Half-Life 2, we're already restricted to the type of tools that could be used.  And there definitely is a learning curve - although the editing tools exist, one still needs to learn how to use it.