Category: Game Design Studio 2

Reading Response questions 

• what learning games have you played? can you categorize them by the theory of learning types: behaviorism, constructivism, constructivism or social nature? if you played more than one which was the most effective? I forget the game name, but in high school, we used this grammar and punctuation website and we had to complete learning modules in it by fixing sentences. They tried to make this more fun by having the sentences tailored to your specific interests and you could pick musical artists, movies, and cartoon characters that would be featured in your sentences. Another one that I remember playing was the games based on the Super Why show on PBS. I remember having to spell out certain words to do things in the game, but not much more than that. I think that these games were mostly behaviorism because it was very much rinse and repeat and not necessarily fully integrated into making the experience as a whole good. While I can’t think of many more examples, I don’t think that behaviorism would be the most effective, and I think that constructivism or social nature could be much more effective.  
• is gamification bullshit, what is ian bogost’s argument and do you agree? where have you encountered it outside of class and what was your experience? Bogost says, “More specifically, gamification is marketing bullshit, invented by consultants as a means to capture the wild, coveted beast that is videogames and to domesticate it for use in the grey, hopeless wasteland of big business, where bullshit already reigns anyway.” Essential Bogost says that gamification is something that companies do to try to sell more product, expand their audience and they just do it as a way to expand themselves. This can be done in a very sloppy manner. I think that I would tend to agree with Bogost. One example of where I have encountered this are the playable ads that I see Progressive using quite often. To me, they don’t really seem very effective and are just poor quality ads that don’t make me want to get Progressive anymore. It also just feels exploitative because it seems directed towards younger children, and I don’t know why they would do that except to increase brand awareness UNTIL they grow up and can purchase insurance. 
• What is a serious game and why aren’t they chocolate covered broccoli? According to the article, “Serious Gaming is used to teach and train K-12 students or as professional development”. You want to avoid chocolate covered broccoli “serious games” that are just education with a sweet coating trying to make it a little more fun as an afterthought. It’s not really effective of convincing people that the topic as a whole should be enjoyable and engaging and its not as fun unless the game fully integrates mechanics with problem solving, for instance. 

Games from the games for change site for podcast

• I particularly looked at the free games on the site because they would be most accessible to myself and a larger audience. Here are some that stood out to me:
  • A Blind Legend – a game designed for the visually impaired 
  • Datak – A Serious Game About Personal Data
  • Gamer Girl
  • Harmony Square
  • Heirloom
  • Quandary 
  • Sky: Children of the Lights
  • Syndesi
  • Tendar

Observance Game Review 

• Was it fun? Yes, this game was fun. The gameplay is a lot like Battleship and I quite enjoy that game normally. 
• What were the player interactions? For me, I played as the US border patrol side and I got to do different search patterns to try to find the people that were trying to cross the border. I would call out the space that I was out and what search formation. If I found someone, they were captured and taken out of the game. I also got to hide the churches and green card like you would with the ships in Battleship, and kept it a secret from the other player. The other player from the Mexico side would ask me for coordinates to search for the churches and the green cards. When they found them, it allowed them to have a safe space to rest and be able to safely cross the border.  
• How long did it take to learn? This game didn’t take very long to learn at all, thanks to it being very similar to Battleship. 
• Would you play it again? Yes, I would play this game again. I liked the games message and gameplay and I would like to see who would do better if the roles were reversed. 
• Analyze the game using the 3 act structure. In the first act, the US border patrol side places the churches and the green card without letting the Mexico player know. Players take turns moving their characters in and out of and around the board, each searching for different things. The second act would have been after the first few turns and when there were significantly more characters out on the board. The US border patrol player started to place a few walls that blocked both players’ path, and each player started to find a few of what they were looking for. The third act of the game was when there was only 1-2 characters from Mexico remaining. That meant that they would either safely cross the border or be captured from the US side. When all the characters were captured or safely crossed the border, the game ended. 
• What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? This game was definitely competitive, as players played as the US border patrol vs citizens from Mexico looking to get a better life. The players directly opposed each other, with the US side trying to remove the Mexican characters from the game, and the Mexican side just trying to safely survive. 
• What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? The game’s metaphor is about illegal immigration between Mexico and the United States. I liked that each of the characters had their own backstory about what led them to be in that position for either side, as it really humanized the situation and gameplay. The standout mechanic for me was being able to pick different search formations, and I somehow always seemed to pick the wrong one, where I would have caught them had I picked the other one. 

Thoughts on Ames’ chess game 

While I didn’t get to play and I don’t really know much about normal chess, I really like that message of this game of chess. I found the mechanic of the bomb to be super interesting and would love to see how the game plays out if someone decided to use it. I also thought that it was super clever and interesting to include the little citizen pegs in the sandy parts of the chess board. I think that helps people think about the citizens that are often caught up in the middle of war, as opposed to just having the chess game stacked in the favor of one side. 

Thoughts on Train

I think that this is a super effective and clever way to communicate the message of the Holocaust in a game format. I find it interesting that this game is something that would really only work in a gallery setting. I also like how the designer made it so that players were compliant in making bad decisions, but they didn’t know until the very end of walking through the exhibition. I would really like to experience this in person, but I don’t really want to personally play the game myself, but I would love to watch others’ reactions to this experience. 

Thoughts on Síochán Leat (aka The Irish Game)

I really love how this designer decided to make a game to teach their kid about their background. It makes me think about how cultural education could be taught even more so through games. I also think that the design of the game board looks super interesting with some of the pieces almost appearing to float above the ground. 

Responses to Readings

What Learning Games Have You Played? How Do They Fit Into Learning Theories?

Games teach in different ways. Typing Club uses repetition and rewards to build typing speed, but not deep thinking. Minecraft: Education Edition lets players learn by creating and problem-solving, needing some teacher guidance. Foldit uses teamwork for real science, but needs background knowledge. Minecraft is likely the best, as it encourages hands-on learning and problem-solving over simple repetition.

Is Gamification Bullshit? What is Ian Bogost’s Argument?

Bogost thinks gamification is a trick. Companies use points and badges to control people, not to make things fun or educational. They add game-like things to make people keep using their products, but without real value.

I agree. Things like Duolingo streaks and Starbucks rewards make people do things without really learning. But, some gamification, like Khan Academy’s, can be good if it’s used to help real learning. I’ve seen it myself: reward programs feel like marketing, and Duolingo focuses too much on streaks, not learning.

What is a Serious Game, and Why Aren’t They Chocolate-Covered Broccoli?

Serious games teach, not just entertain. Bad games try to hide learning, like boring math games. Good games teach through playing, like “Papers, Please.” Good games are fun by themselves. Gamification can be bad, but good for real learning. Learning games are best when players explore, create, and work together.

• how does mary flanagan’s definition of game differ from chris crawford’s as well as the definition crafted by katie salen and eric zimmerman? 

Flanagan emphasizes that games can be seen as a form of cultural expression, while Crawford sees games as systems of interaction, focusing on the idea that games are interactive stories. Salen and Zimmerman define games more formally as structured activities

• what is an activist game?

An activist game is a game designed with the intention of making a political, social, or cultural statement.

• go and chess are examples of games that feature “perfect information”, what other games share that feature?

Checkers, Tic tac toe, connect four

• why might chance or gambling games hold spiritual or religious importance to ancient cultures?

Chance or gambling games may have held spiritual or religious significance because they represent the unpredictability of life or the will of the gods.

• when was the earliest battle between government/ religious groups and games? what modern games can you think of that have been banned or demonized?

One of the earliest recorded battles over games can be traced back to ancient Rome, where authorities sought to limit or ban games of chance like dice. In more recent years, D&D has been demonized.

• what is a fox game, and what would be a modern example?

A fox game refers to a game that involves trickery, manipulation, or misdirection. A modern example would be Mafia.

• what was the purpose or intent of the game: Mansion of Happiness?

Mansion of Happiness was a board game that was designed to teach children about virtue and the consequences of their actions.

• Why do artists from the Fluxus and Surealist movements play games? Why did Surealists believe games might help everyone?

Fluxus artists were interested in the breakdown of traditional art forms and the idea of making art part of everyday life, while Surealists believed that games could reveal the unconscious mind and inspire creativity.

• Changes in what can signal profound changes in games?

Changes in the social, cultural, or political environment can signal changes in the design and purpose of games.

• What statements did Fluxus artists make by reskinning games like monopoly and ping pong?

By reskinning games like Monopoly and Ping Pong, Fluxus artists were challenging the commercialization of play.

• How are artists like Lilian Ball, Marcel Duchamp, Takako Saito, Yoko Ono, Gabriel Orozco and Ruth Catlowusing war games?

These artists have engaged with war games as a means of avoiding traditional understandings of conflict and violence.

• Why is it important for players to have agency in a critical or serious game?

Agency in serious games is important because it allows players to feel that their actions have consequences.