Still surprised by my actions and enjoyment I got from playing Gears of War 2, I was still questioning it. Before I could understand the initial entertainment value of killing some creatures with powerful weapons and experiencing the feeling of having achieved something. But I could never understand why gamers would continue playing when killing one enemy was very similar to killing another. I had now become one of those players that for some reason found themselves continuing to play. I must admit, that I do get some enjoyment out of using a new weapon in order to defeat an enemy and finding out how to use the weapon and how much damage it does. But I wouldn't say it is enough to motivate me to play till the end.
I then remembered the article I had read ,which I mentioned in a previous post, about female players needing or preferring to have a connection with the characters in the game. So I began thinking about the game and its story. Was it something in the story which had gained my attention or made some type of connection with me?
In Gears of War 2 the world has been taken over by Locusts and most of the human population are dead. It is the Gears who set out to stop the Locusts and restore human civilisation. In the game there is a character name Dom who looks a picture of him and a women. Having not completed the game yet or played the previous game, I am assuming that this is his wife. She has been missing since the world was thrown into chaos and he is desperate to find her. He wonders if she is even still alive. When watching this cut scene I found myself wondering the same thing, is she still alive and will he find her at the end of the game? I secretly hope that he will and this makes me wonder was this particular part of the story added to attract the female audience? I can't see many male gamers being concerned with whether or not he finds her, but this is pure bias and a complete generalization on my part. Whether is has been added for this reason or not, it has succeeded in grabbing my attention and this has been a one of the reasons for keeping me motivated during the game.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Have I been converted?
I recently received a present of Gears of War 2. I seen a lot of ads for it on television and heard some talk about it but had never been that interested in playing it until I got it. I had been studying all day when it was given to me, but as I am so dedicated to my study :) I decided to leave it aside until I was done. I couldn't imagine myself ever playing the game in the first place, but as I continued typing on my laptop I could help throwing a side glance at the box. Every now and then I would pick it up, stare at the picture or read the back of cover. I wasn't sure if it was sheer desperation at needing to get away from my laptop or if after all the talk on war games in class I had actually become curious.
In the end I gave up on my study and decided to play the game. Before I knew it I had become totally immersed in the game and found myself mumbling 'yeah' or 'I dunno' to questions from my brother even thought I was totally unaware of what was actually being asked. I was too involved in concentrating on running around shooting ugly looking creatures and chainsawing through obstacles to focus on anything else that was going on around me. I even refused taking a phone call as I was too busy chainsawing through a piece of flesh, having lost the complete knowledge that there was a pause button in the game.
I had never been the type of person who would become so detached from the real world because of a game, let alone a game so full of violence and gore. I have to admit that I was taken aback by the amount of gore within the game at the start. In the beginning, my stomach would start to turn at the sight of blood being splashed onto the screen. But as I continued playing I found myself yelling “yeah!” whenever I was successful in killing someone. I also found myself giving out to my NPC team-mates in the game when I would die because they took too long to revive me. I was even angry with them as I had risked my life, or rather my characters life to save them before yet they didn't bother trying to save me!
Thankfully I managed to drag myself away from the game after a few hours. It was only then when I realised how I had reacted while playing the game, I had become rude and uninterested in anything else or anyone else around me. I had even become angry at 3d characters on a screen. What has happen to me?
I had felt stressed before playing the game, the amount of College work that has started to pile up began to panic me, but after playing the game I felt relaxed and calm. It was like I had managed to take my frustrations with my assignments out on the enemies within the game. It is a weird thing, how could I have found so much enjoyment out of a game so full of violence and gore? Usually games like this wouldn't hold my attention for long, but I continued playing even thought essentially I was doing the same thing over and over again. Has all this talk of war games and shoot-em ups finally converted me?
In the end I gave up on my study and decided to play the game. Before I knew it I had become totally immersed in the game and found myself mumbling 'yeah' or 'I dunno' to questions from my brother even thought I was totally unaware of what was actually being asked. I was too involved in concentrating on running around shooting ugly looking creatures and chainsawing through obstacles to focus on anything else that was going on around me. I even refused taking a phone call as I was too busy chainsawing through a piece of flesh, having lost the complete knowledge that there was a pause button in the game.
I had never been the type of person who would become so detached from the real world because of a game, let alone a game so full of violence and gore. I have to admit that I was taken aback by the amount of gore within the game at the start. In the beginning, my stomach would start to turn at the sight of blood being splashed onto the screen. But as I continued playing I found myself yelling “yeah!” whenever I was successful in killing someone. I also found myself giving out to my NPC team-mates in the game when I would die because they took too long to revive me. I was even angry with them as I had risked my life, or rather my characters life to save them before yet they didn't bother trying to save me!
Thankfully I managed to drag myself away from the game after a few hours. It was only then when I realised how I had reacted while playing the game, I had become rude and uninterested in anything else or anyone else around me. I had even become angry at 3d characters on a screen. What has happen to me?
I had felt stressed before playing the game, the amount of College work that has started to pile up began to panic me, but after playing the game I felt relaxed and calm. It was like I had managed to take my frustrations with my assignments out on the enemies within the game. It is a weird thing, how could I have found so much enjoyment out of a game so full of violence and gore? Usually games like this wouldn't hold my attention for long, but I continued playing even thought essentially I was doing the same thing over and over again. Has all this talk of war games and shoot-em ups finally converted me?
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Game Spaces
What is the impact that a space has on us as players of a game? That was a question in our discussion today. A game space tells us of the environment the game is set, it sets the mood,tone or general feel of the game.
But what is it that defines the space and how does it set the tone of the game? Is it through its visual entities, what the player sees on the screen? Is it the use of light? Bright light usually conveys a feeling of happiness whereas darkness usually invokes a feeling of danger. Sounds in the background also helps to set the scene and give the player a greater understanding of the game space. Gun fire would suggest to the player that the game is focus on war or some form of shooter game. Background music is also used to add to the environment, depending on the game, it is often used to create a sense of suspense within the game. Some games even add vibrations to the controller after an explosion of some type to engage the player immediately in the space. Good game spaces usually use all of these components in there creation, appealing to the different senses of the gamer.
I was surprised to learn that it takes a player only 3 seconds to decided whether they wish to continue in the game based on their initial reaction to the space. In some ways this is easy to believe, but I myself can't think of a game where after 3 seconds I have decided that I do not want to continue. Maybe this is because I have purchased the game and want to get my moneys worth.
This leads me to think of free online games, there are many games which after 3 seconds I have pressed the exit button and never looked back. I suppose game developers take this reaction into account when designing a game, nobody wants to spend money on a game that after 3 seconds they feel like turning it off. This shows that a lot of thought has to go into creating the game space in order for it to have a greater chance at becoming a success. So the question now is, whether it is the games which have the most appealing game spaces that are the most successful?
But what is it that defines the space and how does it set the tone of the game? Is it through its visual entities, what the player sees on the screen? Is it the use of light? Bright light usually conveys a feeling of happiness whereas darkness usually invokes a feeling of danger. Sounds in the background also helps to set the scene and give the player a greater understanding of the game space. Gun fire would suggest to the player that the game is focus on war or some form of shooter game. Background music is also used to add to the environment, depending on the game, it is often used to create a sense of suspense within the game. Some games even add vibrations to the controller after an explosion of some type to engage the player immediately in the space. Good game spaces usually use all of these components in there creation, appealing to the different senses of the gamer.
I was surprised to learn that it takes a player only 3 seconds to decided whether they wish to continue in the game based on their initial reaction to the space. In some ways this is easy to believe, but I myself can't think of a game where after 3 seconds I have decided that I do not want to continue. Maybe this is because I have purchased the game and want to get my moneys worth.
This leads me to think of free online games, there are many games which after 3 seconds I have pressed the exit button and never looked back. I suppose game developers take this reaction into account when designing a game, nobody wants to spend money on a game that after 3 seconds they feel like turning it off. This shows that a lot of thought has to go into creating the game space in order for it to have a greater chance at becoming a success. So the question now is, whether it is the games which have the most appealing game spaces that are the most successful?
Gamers: Male vs Female
Recently, while browsing the web, I came across an interesting article about male and female gamers and what separates them from each other. Why is it that gamers are predominately male instead of female? The article concluded that the nature and appearance of most games today just does not appeal to the female gamer, mainly in the way that the female characters are “overly endowed, highly sexualized, all but naked.” The games also seem to lack an emotional connection between the character and the player.
The article discussed what was wrong with game today and what needed to be done to attract female gamers. The main spokesperson said that they observed a 13 yr old female who was excelling a playing a popular game, but instead of advancing to higher levels in order to complete the game, the girl got bored and quit playing. When asked why, the girl replied “I pulled his heart out once, why do I need to do it again?”
I think this is very true, a lot of popular games out there are very repetitive and focus on defeating enemies, but once you have defeated one enemy, don't you defeat the rest of the enemies is a similar way? Yes, you may have new skills and weapons, and the other enemies may have become more powerful that the previous one, but isn't the process the same, just a variety of buttons pressed in a particular order, or no order at all?
But then again, maybe it is exactly this which attracts male gamers more than female gamers. The end result is the same, the enemy is dead, but this time he died from being decapitated instead of being shot in the heart. Does this really make all the difference? Is it what separates male and female gamers?
The article discussed what was wrong with game today and what needed to be done to attract female gamers. The main spokesperson said that they observed a 13 yr old female who was excelling a playing a popular game, but instead of advancing to higher levels in order to complete the game, the girl got bored and quit playing. When asked why, the girl replied “I pulled his heart out once, why do I need to do it again?”
I think this is very true, a lot of popular games out there are very repetitive and focus on defeating enemies, but once you have defeated one enemy, don't you defeat the rest of the enemies is a similar way? Yes, you may have new skills and weapons, and the other enemies may have become more powerful that the previous one, but isn't the process the same, just a variety of buttons pressed in a particular order, or no order at all?
But then again, maybe it is exactly this which attracts male gamers more than female gamers. The end result is the same, the enemy is dead, but this time he died from being decapitated instead of being shot in the heart. Does this really make all the difference? Is it what separates male and female gamers?
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Portumna Website
One of my classmates has created this website,
Portumna Community & Tourism Website
so I'm adding the link to boost its goolge rating :)
Portumna Community & Tourism Website
so I'm adding the link to boost its goolge rating :)
Rules, rules and more rules!
Today we had an interesting lecture about rules. The rules in life and the rules in games. Firstly, how do we define a rule? As suggested in class, is it a constraint which we must adhere to or its it a proposed idea which we have the option to follow? I think it depends on the context of the rule. There are rules in life or rather laws, such as the laws of physics which give us no choice in whether to follow or not. They are what they are and that is that.
Then there are government laws. These are laws which were created to aid the running of the country in a successful way. To outline what is acceptable and what is not in society. These are rules which if broken have consequences.
Is this the same for rules in games? Depending on the game, do the rules have to be followed, or can they be broken and if they are broken, are there consequences? I could spend all day giving examples of the different types of rules in games, ones which have to be followed and ones which don't. But for now I am going to move on to another point brought up in class, which is are/can all rules be defined before the game begins? Or are there rules which the player imposes on themselves?
We discussed the game of tic-tac-toe to examine this point. The game rules usually state:
1. Game is played on a 3x3 grid
2. Chose to be X or O, players take alternating goes
3. First player to get 3 of their pieces in a row (horizontal, vertical, diagonal) wins.
These are the rules, but what happens if during one players go, they never make a move, how does the game continue? There is no rule to state that the player must make a move on their turn or by a certain time. Yet, this does not mean that because the rule is not stated that the game is never completed. It seems that the rule of 'on your go you must place make a move' is enforced by the player themselves. This is one rule I myself have made before beginning a game. I will not have discussed this rule with my opponent although they too seem to follow the same rule. It does not seem possible to create a rule for every situation which may arise during the playing of a game. These rules are somehow formed by the player either before or during the game.
Before our lecture I never thought about these subconscious rules we make. I just assumed that the rules of the game that we defined were the only rules. It is interesting to see that we ourselves, whether it is common sense or something totally different, define our own rules. Without these rules would we be able to complete the games? Or run the country? Or do anything else which rules are needed for?
Then there are government laws. These are laws which were created to aid the running of the country in a successful way. To outline what is acceptable and what is not in society. These are rules which if broken have consequences.
Is this the same for rules in games? Depending on the game, do the rules have to be followed, or can they be broken and if they are broken, are there consequences? I could spend all day giving examples of the different types of rules in games, ones which have to be followed and ones which don't. But for now I am going to move on to another point brought up in class, which is are/can all rules be defined before the game begins? Or are there rules which the player imposes on themselves?
We discussed the game of tic-tac-toe to examine this point. The game rules usually state:
1. Game is played on a 3x3 grid
2. Chose to be X or O, players take alternating goes
3. First player to get 3 of their pieces in a row (horizontal, vertical, diagonal) wins.
These are the rules, but what happens if during one players go, they never make a move, how does the game continue? There is no rule to state that the player must make a move on their turn or by a certain time. Yet, this does not mean that because the rule is not stated that the game is never completed. It seems that the rule of 'on your go you must place make a move' is enforced by the player themselves. This is one rule I myself have made before beginning a game. I will not have discussed this rule with my opponent although they too seem to follow the same rule. It does not seem possible to create a rule for every situation which may arise during the playing of a game. These rules are somehow formed by the player either before or during the game.
Before our lecture I never thought about these subconscious rules we make. I just assumed that the rules of the game that we defined were the only rules. It is interesting to see that we ourselves, whether it is common sense or something totally different, define our own rules. Without these rules would we be able to complete the games? Or run the country? Or do anything else which rules are needed for?
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Dissertation
As part of this module, we must write a dissertation on any topic we like, as long as it is in relation to gaming of course!
If I am being honest, it is not something I have been looking forward to starting. This is due to the fact that I feel like I wouldn't have enough to talk about. But after reading through my previous post I have come up with a few ideas.
The main idea that I would like to focus on is Online Gaming. This is something I have never taken part in, not sure if it was due to the fact that I didn't find it that appealing or because I didn't have any broadband at home. But I find it fascinating to see that so many people are part of this environment. I think it would be interesting to find out why they have been drawn to it and to differentiate between the casual online gamers and the serious online gamers. What sets them apart? Is it the environment they chose to play in or is it due to the player themselves? I also feel that I can introduce a number of topics which I have already mentioned in previous posts such as learning and community. The social factor, which is an obvious characteristic of online gaming will play a huge part in this investigation. It should be interesting :)
If I am being honest, it is not something I have been looking forward to starting. This is due to the fact that I feel like I wouldn't have enough to talk about. But after reading through my previous post I have come up with a few ideas.
The main idea that I would like to focus on is Online Gaming. This is something I have never taken part in, not sure if it was due to the fact that I didn't find it that appealing or because I didn't have any broadband at home. But I find it fascinating to see that so many people are part of this environment. I think it would be interesting to find out why they have been drawn to it and to differentiate between the casual online gamers and the serious online gamers. What sets them apart? Is it the environment they chose to play in or is it due to the player themselves? I also feel that I can introduce a number of topics which I have already mentioned in previous posts such as learning and community. The social factor, which is an obvious characteristic of online gaming will play a huge part in this investigation. It should be interesting :)
Death of the Console?
Is it true to say that the gaming console its on its way out and online gaming is taking over? This was a concept brought to my attention in today's lecture. The main reason for this suggestion was due to the fact that storage on the web is becoming more and more popular as it allows anyone to access data stored from anywhere in the world. If games took this approach, then any gamer could access their saved game without having to be in the comfort of their room. I think it is fair to say, that this is a good idea, it makes sense, but would gamers enjoy it as much?
I find that the environment I am in reflects on how I enjoy the game. Being in the same environment every time I play the game allows me to become more engrossed in the game. I think it has something to do with the familiarity of the place. When playing a game, I am not familiar with the environment within the game, but knowing that I am familiar with the environment outside of the game allows me to focus my full attention on the game which adds to my enjoyment of it.
A thought just occurred to me, I said above that being able to access your game online anywhere is a good idea. But maybe it isn't? Take for instant the young gamer, who spends all there time in front of the television playing till they can't keep there eyes open any more. Parents can hardly drag them away for dinner let alone anything else. So when a trip away is planned it is a time for the family to spend together without the distraction of an Xbox or PS3. Most children known that taking a console on board a plane is not going to happen and have come to terms with the fact that they are going to have to last a week without any gaming. But if games are now available online, all over the world, this quality time with a family is going to become, once again a challenge for parents. Maybe this isn't a fair statement to make, you could argue, isn't it up to the parents to decide when and where their children can play games and yes, I suppose it is.....this could lead to a whole other discussion so I will stop there. The point I am trying to make is that, is it really necessary to make games available online? Would the purpose of this be so that the dedicated gamer could continue their game no matter where they are? Or would it be purely as another way of playing games without having to purchase a gaming console?
Either way, I do not think that the gaming console is on the way out. As one of my classmates mentioned, Ireland does not have good enough broadband to support this idea and the likelihood that in the near future our broadband coverage will have greatly improved looks dim.
I find that the environment I am in reflects on how I enjoy the game. Being in the same environment every time I play the game allows me to become more engrossed in the game. I think it has something to do with the familiarity of the place. When playing a game, I am not familiar with the environment within the game, but knowing that I am familiar with the environment outside of the game allows me to focus my full attention on the game which adds to my enjoyment of it.
A thought just occurred to me, I said above that being able to access your game online anywhere is a good idea. But maybe it isn't? Take for instant the young gamer, who spends all there time in front of the television playing till they can't keep there eyes open any more. Parents can hardly drag them away for dinner let alone anything else. So when a trip away is planned it is a time for the family to spend together without the distraction of an Xbox or PS3. Most children known that taking a console on board a plane is not going to happen and have come to terms with the fact that they are going to have to last a week without any gaming. But if games are now available online, all over the world, this quality time with a family is going to become, once again a challenge for parents. Maybe this isn't a fair statement to make, you could argue, isn't it up to the parents to decide when and where their children can play games and yes, I suppose it is.....this could lead to a whole other discussion so I will stop there. The point I am trying to make is that, is it really necessary to make games available online? Would the purpose of this be so that the dedicated gamer could continue their game no matter where they are? Or would it be purely as another way of playing games without having to purchase a gaming console?
Either way, I do not think that the gaming console is on the way out. As one of my classmates mentioned, Ireland does not have good enough broadband to support this idea and the likelihood that in the near future our broadband coverage will have greatly improved looks dim.
Community
Recently we had a discussion about massively multiplayer online games (MMOG) and how they create the sense of community. The most popular type or genre of MMOG is massively multiplayer online role playing games or more commonly referred to as MMORPG. These games require the player to create a character they wish to play as and then lets them explore the world. Through their exploration they meet other online players who they can interact with. Many of these MMORPG have quests within the game. Players receive rewards for completing quests, these rewards vary from being given gold or increasing their skill level.
The MMORPG we discussed in class was EverQuest. This games is set in a fantasy world and is said to have been inspired by Dungeons and Dragons. In the game the player can interact with the other online players through role-playing, joining a guild or duelling.
It is in joining a guild where the sense of community appears. In some ways the guild can be seen as your online family. You are a member of a group, a group of people who have agreed to help each other out. I have never played EverQuest so I do not know how it feels to be accepted into a guild. But I can imagine that it gives the player a sense of belonging. They have been chosen by a group of people to become “one of them”. I believe that it is this sense of belonging that is the reason so many people continue to play MMORPG. If it wasn't then why choose an online game over your stand-alone off line game?
The MMORPG we discussed in class was EverQuest. This games is set in a fantasy world and is said to have been inspired by Dungeons and Dragons. In the game the player can interact with the other online players through role-playing, joining a guild or duelling.
It is in joining a guild where the sense of community appears. In some ways the guild can be seen as your online family. You are a member of a group, a group of people who have agreed to help each other out. I have never played EverQuest so I do not know how it feels to be accepted into a guild. But I can imagine that it gives the player a sense of belonging. They have been chosen by a group of people to become “one of them”. I believe that it is this sense of belonging that is the reason so many people continue to play MMORPG. If it wasn't then why choose an online game over your stand-alone off line game?
Unit Operations
Unit Operations is a term introduced by Bogost. To be honest, I found it difficult to get my head around the concept. I am still not sure if I understand what he is proposing but this is what I took from it.
Bogost uses unit operations to describe how every medium can be broken down into separate units so that intellectual mediums can be compared to technical mediums and critiqued. When I say intellectual mediums I am referring to mediums such as poetry, literature, etc.
In relation to technical mediums, he introduces us to the term called Object Technology. This states that when a developer is developing a program, they create separate components which can be reused.
By looking at unit operations and object technology it is clear that both take the same approach, breaking down components of a system into smaller units so they can be examined and reused in other mediums.
It is by using this approach that the analysing of video games takes place. Both the technical and non-technical aspects can be examined and compared to other mediums. With unit operations it enables us to see how the smaller parts of the game relate to other mediums which we could not see when view the game as a whole.
Bogost uses unit operations to describe how every medium can be broken down into separate units so that intellectual mediums can be compared to technical mediums and critiqued. When I say intellectual mediums I am referring to mediums such as poetry, literature, etc.
In relation to technical mediums, he introduces us to the term called Object Technology. This states that when a developer is developing a program, they create separate components which can be reused.
By looking at unit operations and object technology it is clear that both take the same approach, breaking down components of a system into smaller units so they can be examined and reused in other mediums.
It is by using this approach that the analysing of video games takes place. Both the technical and non-technical aspects can be examined and compared to other mediums. With unit operations it enables us to see how the smaller parts of the game relate to other mediums which we could not see when view the game as a whole.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Wargaming
Why is war gaming so popular? Is it the fact that the aim of the game is to run around killing people? Something, which appeals to the majority of the male population. Fair enough, being able to let your anger out through the game by killing a few people is fun at the beginning. But isn't it just the same thing over and over again. It is this repetitiveness that I find unappealing. But somehow it has managed to keep the attention of many players. Is it the feeling of having control and power, defeating your opponents and commanding an army that drives each player?
Another question to ask is, does war gaming promote war? Or is it just purely a form of entertainment? What about the game America's Army? This was one game which was developed to influence people to join the army. It was designed as a training program and claims that playing the game will give you a greater understanding of what being in the army is all about. But is this possible? Can a game really give the player a true sense of what it would be like if they were actually in that environment. I don't think it can, how can a game prepare you for a war. It seems to me that this game was brought out to entice people to join the army, giving them false expectations of what it is really like, it allowed them to experience war without the consequences. So is it safe to say that in some way, America's Army promoted war? It presented war in a false light. It used the entertainment factor of the game to recruit players while claiming that it was purely a training exercise, but can what one learns in playing a game based on war be of any benefit when faced with the real situation?
As mentioned in a previous post, I believe that one can learn many things from playing games. Such as learning processes rather that valuable knowledge and that these process can be adapted to be used in real-world situation. But when it comes to the topic of war and war games, I don't feel that even the processes learned throughout the game will be of any benefit when faced with an actual war. Which brings me to the conclusion, that war games don't really have any other purpose other than providing another form of entertainment in games. Not that there is anything wrong with being purely focused on entertainment, but if this truly is the case, it makes the reasoning behind creating the game America's Army questionable?
Another question to ask is, does war gaming promote war? Or is it just purely a form of entertainment? What about the game America's Army? This was one game which was developed to influence people to join the army. It was designed as a training program and claims that playing the game will give you a greater understanding of what being in the army is all about. But is this possible? Can a game really give the player a true sense of what it would be like if they were actually in that environment. I don't think it can, how can a game prepare you for a war. It seems to me that this game was brought out to entice people to join the army, giving them false expectations of what it is really like, it allowed them to experience war without the consequences. So is it safe to say that in some way, America's Army promoted war? It presented war in a false light. It used the entertainment factor of the game to recruit players while claiming that it was purely a training exercise, but can what one learns in playing a game based on war be of any benefit when faced with the real situation?
As mentioned in a previous post, I believe that one can learn many things from playing games. Such as learning processes rather that valuable knowledge and that these process can be adapted to be used in real-world situation. But when it comes to the topic of war and war games, I don't feel that even the processes learned throughout the game will be of any benefit when faced with an actual war. Which brings me to the conclusion, that war games don't really have any other purpose other than providing another form of entertainment in games. Not that there is anything wrong with being purely focused on entertainment, but if this truly is the case, it makes the reasoning behind creating the game America's Army questionable?
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Learning in Games
Can we learn anything from games?
There are many games out there which have been directly focused on game-based learning. It is obvious that we learn from these games as there sole purpose is to teach the player the subject associated with the game, whether it be maths, sorting, matching, spatial reasoning etc. These games are usually directed at kids between the ages and 3 and mid-teens. So what about the rest of us? Are there any games out there which we learn from?
A number of games have been brought out for adults, that are regarded as being educational games. They are more commonly known as "Serious Games" because they are games developed with education and dealing with real world problems in mind rather than pure entertainment. Some example are "Food Force", "Democracy" and "Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing". These games have done well, but have sold no where near as many units as games which are purely focused on entertainment.
So the question now is, do we learning anything from games where there primary purpose is to provide pure entertainment? I believe we do. The learning experience is not as obvious in these types of games as in serious games, but we still learn. Every game gives the player a number of tasks to complete in order to move to the next stage. It is up to the player to figure out how to do this. Whether it be to find a NPC or collect items, it all involves a process. The knowledge you acquire within the game may not be used directly in real life. But the way in which you acquired this knowledge, the process, can be applied again and again to real life situations. Doesn't this mean that we are learning from the game?
There are many games out there which have been directly focused on game-based learning. It is obvious that we learn from these games as there sole purpose is to teach the player the subject associated with the game, whether it be maths, sorting, matching, spatial reasoning etc. These games are usually directed at kids between the ages and 3 and mid-teens. So what about the rest of us? Are there any games out there which we learn from?
A number of games have been brought out for adults, that are regarded as being educational games. They are more commonly known as "Serious Games" because they are games developed with education and dealing with real world problems in mind rather than pure entertainment. Some example are "Food Force", "Democracy" and "Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing". These games have done well, but have sold no where near as many units as games which are purely focused on entertainment.
So the question now is, do we learning anything from games where there primary purpose is to provide pure entertainment? I believe we do. The learning experience is not as obvious in these types of games as in serious games, but we still learn. Every game gives the player a number of tasks to complete in order to move to the next stage. It is up to the player to figure out how to do this. Whether it be to find a NPC or collect items, it all involves a process. The knowledge you acquire within the game may not be used directly in real life. But the way in which you acquired this knowledge, the process, can be applied again and again to real life situations. Doesn't this mean that we are learning from the game?
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Second Post :)
Seeing as this blog is dedicated to CS4067, also known as Writing Game Analysis, I suppose I should talk a little about the module. The first topic that we have started to discuss is Ludology vs. Narratology. Is it necessary to have a story told with every game, or are games that don't tell storys just as entertaining?
I think the answer to this question really depends on the player themselves. I personally prefer to know more details about the character and why they are on their particular mission. I feel that it enables me to become more absorbed in the game. Alot of the time knowing this information motivates me to complete the game when I feel that it is getting too difficult. So I suppose it is safe to say that I am more of a Narratologist than a Ludologist.
But in this discussion we came across the question: Are there any games that take a complete ludologist approach to creating a game? Do the objects and backgrounds in the game not create a story themselves? Just because the game isn't telling you the story directly, it doesn't mean that by providing you with the objects you are not creating a story yourself. So would this mean that the game would now fall under the category of Narratology instead of Ludology? If it does, then is it possible for a Ludology game to be without a bit of Narratology?
I think the answer to this question really depends on the player themselves. I personally prefer to know more details about the character and why they are on their particular mission. I feel that it enables me to become more absorbed in the game. Alot of the time knowing this information motivates me to complete the game when I feel that it is getting too difficult. So I suppose it is safe to say that I am more of a Narratologist than a Ludologist.
But in this discussion we came across the question: Are there any games that take a complete ludologist approach to creating a game? Do the objects and backgrounds in the game not create a story themselves? Just because the game isn't telling you the story directly, it doesn't mean that by providing you with the objects you are not creating a story yourself. So would this mean that the game would now fall under the category of Narratology instead of Ludology? If it does, then is it possible for a Ludology game to be without a bit of Narratology?
Monday, September 15, 2008
Hmmm...What to Say???
Well I just finished the first week of College as a fourth year and I am already stressed with the amount of work we have to do. I still haven't come up with a suitable FYP and as the deadline is Monday, to say I am panicking is an understatement! I am quickly running out of time and every idea I come up with seems too easy or too difficult, I just can't seem to find a happy medium.
But for the moment I am going to have to forget about it as I have more deadlines to meet this week. One of which requires me to write a one page summary on 50 pages of incomprehensible computery terms. Lets just say, it is not going well!
I am hoping by the end of the week I will have a clearer understanding of what lies ahead of me this year. And if not, there is always tea... or vodka, depending on the situation!
But for the moment I am going to have to forget about it as I have more deadlines to meet this week. One of which requires me to write a one page summary on 50 pages of incomprehensible computery terms. Lets just say, it is not going well!
I am hoping by the end of the week I will have a clearer understanding of what lies ahead of me this year. And if not, there is always tea... or vodka, depending on the situation!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)