A well-maintained coal plant in SimCity Societies, a game released in 2007.
A city polluted due to mismanagement of coal-plant emissions.My post over the weekend on growing recognition of a role for gaming in learning generated a great mix of responses that are worth highlighting and building on here.
The piece focused on Will Wright, the mind behind Spore and The Sims, and solicited questions for Wright as well as others’ views on the notion that virtual experiences can help fit infinite human aspirations on a finite planet.
Early efforts have focused on embedding scientific or environmental themes in conventional games, as was the case in SimCity Societies (left) in 2007. (The climate-related components of the game were sponsored by BP, which was the subject of a very different game last year.)
That’s just one tiny facet of what might be explored. I think far greater potential lies in using gaming technology and design, along with explosively expanding communication channels, to foster global collaboration and knowledge sharing.
Not all games involve avatars or buttons. I’ve participated in Model U.N. meetings and events organized by the International Education and Resource Network, but would love to help see similar efforts bring students around the globe together via the Web to play out scenarios in which they grapple with issues that grownups are stuck on — like the “climate divide” behind many of the fights over global cooperation to limit climate risks.
Here are some of the most interesting insights and reactions from readers (I’ve added some links and video here and there for context):
JBinstock of Boston, Mass.:
Through my research about gaming for positive goals, I have two different approaches. One offered by people like Andrew Revkin wants to keep the game platform and work off of it to make video games a learning experience and hopefully…change the physical world. Others like Jane McGonigal, author of Reality is Broken, prefer using game mechanics in the real world to promote innovation and positive social behavior.
What do you think the strengths and weakness of both approaches are?
His question was intended for Wright, but I offered my answer in the comment string:
Clearly a mix is ideal. When my wife was teaching middle-school science, she and her partner, Mike Topchik, did a fantastic variation on a fairly conventional “building bridges” project. (Teams of kids take a set amount of balsa, build a bridge, then put weight on it until it breaks, then analyze what went wrong, etc.). The variation was a budget, so the kids got credit for a mix of points from durability and economy. (Of course, this was in a private school; if anyone knows of such efforts in a time-stressed public-school classroom, let me know!)
Also look at the Maker Faire activities described in Friday’s post:
The advantage of virtual gaming is the exploding access from poor places. Look back to my video of poor kids [using a bank of computers] in a community center in an Istanbul slum. Borderless collaboration, soon with instant translation….
Here’s the Colbert Report interview with McGonigal about “Reality is Broken“:
| The Colbert Report | Mon – Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Jane McGonigal | ||||
|
||||
Chayzar from New York City:
Extrapolating from Mr. Wright’s previous games, my opinion is that the future must think of such games in terms of applicable projects where the developers respond and adapt to the players. To date, we have developers who create and “publish” games (perhaps releasing a few patches afterward) which are then left in a timeless state from which they or the players cannot progress. Games as science or as education must evolve in order to be relevant and for that to happen, the developers must participate just as much as the players, changing the rules, boundaries, etc. I’d go so far to say that they should “exist” within the game minute-by-minute just as a dungeon master is always on hand to answer questions and react to player input in a consistent manner.
A.I. does not exist, just automation.
My suggestion:
-Create a game, for example, a simulation of a moon colony with the ability to script in almost any variation of events.
-Distribute the game to every university on the planet.
-Have local professors/grad students gather teams to play the colony game which can be altered at whim.
-Send results back to NASA/JPL.We must get past the notion of a monolithic developer. We must see games as tools which can be used or altered in ways not foreseen by the initial developers in order to grow past the game as entertainment. [ Read the rest.]
Suzanne S., New York City:
“Is there a way to keep the magnetic allure of such games but build in scientific concepts or goals that could foster progress on this finite planet?”
There is a whole community and new movement of people and orgs exploring the use of games to “foster progress on this finite planet”: www.gamesforchange.org
The results of some of the earliest examples are impressive including changing the way people think and act around pressing social issues – games that inspire thousands of letters to Congress, helps kids take better care of themselves, eat healthier foods, and understand the world around them. The games are new and not nearly as sexy as mainstream games but a handful are very well-designed and getting millions of players. The field is definitely on the rise. And with people like Will Wright entering the fray, it’s an idea that will surely bear big fruit in the next 5-10 years. Imagine what it could be like if you as a player could fiddle with the climate controls, rather than listening to a slide show. Some people say that games may just be the best medium available for social change because they let people immerse themselves in issues rather than passively hear/learn about them.
Ron Davidson of San Diego, linking to “Making a Game of Education” on his blog, R World, argued that games and education are a natural fit: “Games provide flow but rarely provide meaning. Education provides meaning but rarely provides flow.”
Anita Prentice, a neighbor of mine in the Hudson Valley, posted background on Quest to Learn, an experiment in game-based education. (I’d love to hear updates on this project.)
Robert from Minneapolis-St. Paul, expressed strong concerns:
Video games have been around in some form now for roughly 30 years, yet we live in an age of scientific ignorance, where blockbuster movie special effects — created by people who know their mathematics — and the endless fantasies of video games are surrogates for knowledge of the real world, where most people don’t have any idea what a laser is, how many planets there are, or when the dinosaurs went extinct. A large percentage of adults in this country believe the earth was created just 6,000 years ago.
The one good thing to have come out of computer gaming was when Nvidia realized that inexpensive — but very computationally powerful — graphics cards could be used for advanced scientific and engineering computations. These are true desktop supercomputers, but ironically, their power is mostly being used to destroy young minds.
Clearly the allure of using video games in education is that games are “fun.” But this is comparable to the “fun” of a temporary high from recreational drugs. We should be teaching our children that hard work, concentration, and patience will result in a much deeper and satisfying “high” that can last for a lifetime.
Lee Sheldon, from Troy, N.Y.:
Speaking specifically to the point of using games in education, I’d like to caution people who immediately assume the answer is video games or virtual worlds in the classroom. Far simpler, cheaper and more accessible to everyone is designing the coursework in a class as a game. No tech needed.
I’m the person mentioned in Jesse Schell’s talk on pervasive games at last year’s DICE conference. Contacted by over a hundred educators, I’ve set up a blog at //gamingtheclassroom.wordpress.com… contains the syllabus of one of the classes, plus some notes on student reactions to the class and my observations on it. There’s also a forum. I’m on my fourth multiplayer class now.
The book I’m writing, The Multiplayer Classroom: Designing Coursework as a Game, is scheduled to be published in May by Cengage. Besides my own experiences, it will include case studies from people around the U.S. now designing classes as games in a variety of fields and age groups. If you have any questions, or if I can offer any more help, please let me know.
Russel Demaria, a game designer from Seattle who has worked with Will Wright:
Will and I have been friends for more than 20 years, since I wrote a strategy guide for SimEarth. He is brilliant, kind and inspiring. In part because of my friendship with Will, over the past 15 years or so I have worked to promote the idea of “positive impact games,” which means games that can teach and/or inspire. There’s no question at this point that game play can lead to both positive and negative effects on players, with positive impact outweighing the negative IMHO.
I love Jane McGonigal’s approach and her incredible creativity and boldness. She has been conducting all kinds of experimental and innovative real-world and online games for years.
For my part, I am sort of a product of the mainstream industry, and as such I have hoped to inspire mainstream game designers and producers to think more creatively about the opportunities to benefit their players and society within the context of popular and successful game development. I have helped to start a special interest group for the IGDA called the Positive Impact Games SIG, and have run star-studded panels (including with Will Wright) at GDC and GameX.
My book, “Reset: Changing the Way We Look at Video Games” is not as bold as Jane’s, but it was aimed at non-gamers to inspire them to think again about how games work, and only partly at the game design community to inspire them to consider games that teach, model, simulate and inspire while accomplishing their entertainment and marketing goals.
And I firmly believe that just about any idea can be translated into a game experience if you understand both the primary content and the art and technology of game design. Bringing visionaries, content experts and game designers together can result in great new approaches. I often find myself consulting with people who want to use games for specific purposes, so I know it’s possible. I’m always delighted to help people with great products who could use some game design perspective.
Remember, just about anything is possible in a game.
Jeff Taekman, Durham, N.C.:
I’ve been a fan of Will Wright for many years.
I believe virtual learning environments (serious games and simulation) will hold a prominent place in 21st-Century education and ultimately in certification / high-stakes assessment.
At Duke University, in the Human Simulation and Patient Safety Center, we are studying the efficacy of virtual environments and serious games. We are about to issue (in Feb 2011) an RFP to build a virtual environment for health care education.
For those who would like to learn more about simulation, virtual environments, and serious games in health care, I’ve made a recent chapter (Virtual Environments in Healthcare: Immersion, Disruption, and Flow) available for download on my blog: //blog.simsingularity.com/?p=843. [Read the rest.]
There’s plenty more to explore in the comment thread. One thing missing in the discussion so far is a look at ways to forge relationships between the global North, South, East and West through such platforms.