As a born again gamer, I've found myself most attracted to the affects of narrative in the gaming process. Initially, I saw this as simply adding context to the missions that I was enjoying in a few first person shooter games. However, because of reading Narrative, Games, and Theory, I've come to assimilate much more into my paradigm of narrative in games.
Narrative adds to the gaming experience by causing us to "adopt the outlook of the characters who are living the plot as their own destiny (Ryan, 2001)." Simons refers to this phenomenon as "prospective" rather than reflective. At issue here is whether or not this approach to game play is more valuable than the objectivism preferred by ludologists. As both perspectives are considered, an understanding of the potential relationship with narratology and narrative becomes more complex.
Interesting to the debate is the lean of game theorists regarding the presence and role of narrative in delineating all potential strategies and evaluating relative advantages and values of each. Whereas a casual gamer might finish a game and use the culmination of the narrative to help him or her retroactively connect the dots amongst the sequence of events, game theorists "weigh the outcomes of the alternative choices they are confronted with" in order to "be able to compare the payoffs of all possible outcomes of a game" before taking action. To effectively evaluate competing strategies, narrative in the context of a game is strongly considered. Simon's findings support this, stating, "Games not only become 'stories' after the fact, but stories can be an important part of the decision making process during the gameplay itself."
There is no doubt in my mind that I am more of a narratologist in my enjoyment of gameplay. The immersive quality of a well-composed narrative keeps me more engaged than the actual activity of play itself. Simon's thoughts certainly fortified the way that I view narrative in games. Additionally, they have helped me to better understand the functionality of narrative beyond simply adding context to an otherwise arbitrary endeavor.
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Friday, January 31, 2014
Play vs Game
The terms play and game are quite similar, so much so that some might use them interchangeably. In fact, in the German language a game is any activity executed only for pleasure and without conscious purpose. Doesn't that definition sound a lot like play? So, where do the two forms of entertainment diverge?
According to Peter Grey in Psychology Today, play must meet four basic criteria: 1) Play is self-chosen and self-directed; players are always free to quit. 2) Play is activity in which means are more valued than ends. 3) Play is guided by mental rules. And 4) Play is non-literal, imaginative, marked off in some way from reality. To synthesize the criteria into a succinct definition of play for myself, I see play as a participatory activity in which those involved rely on imaginative self directed interactions within the framework of unwritten but agreed upon rules.
A game, while sharing a confluence of traits with play, has its own distinguishing features. Primarily, a game has fixed rules which guide player interaction. A game also has an final objective which motivates players to fulfill. A third defining characteristic of games is that they must have some sort of counterbalancing challenge to establish some degree of difficulty. As we pursue the final objective of a game, by nature of game play, we require frequent feedback on performance. How are we doing compared to the challenge, the clock, a points system, or other players? Finally, unlike play, games by definition must be competitive.
Though the focus here has been on the difference between play and games, the conclusion must not be reached that the two are mutually exclusive. To the contrary, they are quite complimentary and supplemental. Nevertheless, for the sake of understanding their relationship with one another, it is important to understand how each is identified by their own merits.
According to Peter Grey in Psychology Today, play must meet four basic criteria: 1) Play is self-chosen and self-directed; players are always free to quit. 2) Play is activity in which means are more valued than ends. 3) Play is guided by mental rules. And 4) Play is non-literal, imaginative, marked off in some way from reality. To synthesize the criteria into a succinct definition of play for myself, I see play as a participatory activity in which those involved rely on imaginative self directed interactions within the framework of unwritten but agreed upon rules.
A game, while sharing a confluence of traits with play, has its own distinguishing features. Primarily, a game has fixed rules which guide player interaction. A game also has an final objective which motivates players to fulfill. A third defining characteristic of games is that they must have some sort of counterbalancing challenge to establish some degree of difficulty. As we pursue the final objective of a game, by nature of game play, we require frequent feedback on performance. How are we doing compared to the challenge, the clock, a points system, or other players? Finally, unlike play, games by definition must be competitive.
Though the focus here has been on the difference between play and games, the conclusion must not be reached that the two are mutually exclusive. To the contrary, they are quite complimentary and supplemental. Nevertheless, for the sake of understanding their relationship with one another, it is important to understand how each is identified by their own merits.
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Learning Theory Mashup: Social Constructivism Learning
Born of Albert Bandura's Social Learning Theory and Jean Piaget's Constructivism Learning Theory, what I call Social Constructivism Learning Theory marries principles of both philosophies into a working model of how we learn today.
What I took from Bandura's Social Learning Theory is his idea that we learn by observation. According to Bandura, observation can take one of three forms: 1) Live Model observation, which is watching the behavior of a person in the same physical space, 2) Verbal Model observation, which describes observing a behavior mentally as someone describes it verbally to you, and 3) Symbolic Model observation, which reserves observational learning for real and/or fictional characters' behaviors as demonstrated on TV, in movies or books, and as I would like to add, in games and virtual worlds.
Piaget's Constructivism Learning Theory offers up some complimentary principles to join to those taken from Social Learning Theory, mainly that we arrive at knowledge construction and understanding through our own unique experiences.
The diagram which I have created to represent my Learning Theory Mash up shows the three models of learning as outlined in Bandura's approach. These three models are interconnected, lending themselves to a comprehensive observational approach to learning. And as illustrated behind the triangle, Constructivism Learning Theory is depicted as a branching tree. I chose this metaphor to capture the variance in our experiences as learners. While we all participate in some degree of each of the three models of observational learning, we do so from our own unique context as prescribed by the experiences we have enjoyed through life.
As you consider Social Constructivism Learning Theory, ponder the following questions. Leave your thoughts in the comments thread below if you would like.
- How significant of a contribution do you think observation makes to our overall learning?
- Is one model of social learning (Live, Verbal, or Symbolic) more influential than the others?
- Will we become more intelligent as we have more frequent and richer experiences?
- What do we need to do to ensure an experience is meaningful?
Friday, January 24, 2014
Different Types of Games
Shoot 'em Ups
The closest thing to a shoot 'em up (or SHMUP) game that I had played before this assignment is probably Angry Birds. Yeah, I know. Angry Birds isn't exactly a shooter style game. But SHMUPS just hasn't ever really been a genre of gaming that appealed to me. Yet, as I embarked on this quest and played three different SHMUP games, I found myself increasingly engaged in them as the story became more real.
To begin with, I played Asteroids. A simple game with a simple objective along with simple controls, this retro SHMUP game was fun for a fleeting moment. I did find myself face-palming myself as my ship would be destroyed by a meteor fragment or an invading foe, but without context, Asteroids didn't hold my attention for long.
Next, I went to AddictingGames.com, and found Awesome Pirates under the Shooter tab. The objective of this game is to defend your fort against increasingly larger swarms of pirates. In the same style as Angry Birds, you and the pirate invaders take turns angling your cannons at one another and firing with the objective of either destroying my fort or sinking the pirate crews. Obviously, what I liked most about this was the story which added context to the game. Not only was there a plot present, but the pirates would exclaim things like "Yiaarrrrr!" when they were hit and "ROFL" when my cannon balls missed them. Additionally, as I conquered more pirates on subsequent levels I earned money which could buy me both more and better cannons to take on the ever-growing challenges. With this option available to me, I quickly found myself considering the economics of the game. Should I purchase the next best cannon now or see if I can get by for a few more levels to buy the grand daddy of them all? Awesome Pirates is certainly bookmark worthy, but don't tell my boss that.
Finally, I played Sniper Team, also found at AddictingGames.com. This game was far outside of my comfort zone, which is to say that I shy away from the simulated real-world violence of military-style games. However, just as happened with Awesome Pirates, I found the storyline to grab my attention and take me further and further into the game. In Sniper Team, you are a member of a group of snipers who are stationed throughout a military base. As waves of intruders approach, your objective is to get them in your cross hairs and wipe them out, so to speak. However, these intruders are strategic and aren't in a hurry to give you the easiest shot or wait their turn. Instead, they use simulated precision as they fire from relatively secluded stations with weapons of varying intensity. Not only did Sniper Team force me to focus on my attention to detail as I surveyed the base, it also encouraged improved hand-eye coordination in a short amount of time. Kill or be killed as they say. To my surprise, I enjoyed this game much more than I initially expected myself to. The storyline was epic and the required skill level was just enough to offer a moderate challenge without being overwhelmed as a "newb".
Other Games
This genre of gaming includes card games, board games, dice games, etc. Perhaps the easiest of all games to play, the games in this category don't require as much energy as others might, which could appeal to a population of casual gamers (those who play Solitaire at work, for example) more than, say, MMORPGs.
While these types of games are relatively more passive, many of them do require an element of strategy to at least be good at playing them. Chinese Checkers is an example of this. Until this quest, I had never played Chinese Checkers before. And as I started my first game, I had no idea what the rules or objective were. However, as I watched the nature of the other players' moves, I was able to deduce the rules and objective which in turn helped me to devise a strategy which helped me to win my very first game.
Yhatzee also requires some strategy and a good understanding of probability to master this family-night game. If you simply roll the cup of die without thinking about potential outcomes, sequences, and patterns, playing Yhatzee is nothing more than a game of luck for you. But, if you play with an understanding of number frequency, the probability of rolling a straight sequence against rolling a pair and so on, you will gain some sense of purpose leading to a potentially successful strategy of game play.
Though designed for the casual player, this genre of games still offers many of the positive emotional and psychological benefits of other types of game play. When we engage in casual games we still experience appropriate levels of challenge, scaffolded failure, immediate feedback, acknowledged successes, and membership into a community when played with others online or around the dinner table. Perhaps this is why even those most averse to video games occasionally find themselves procrastinating work with Solitaire.
The closest thing to a shoot 'em up (or SHMUP) game that I had played before this assignment is probably Angry Birds. Yeah, I know. Angry Birds isn't exactly a shooter style game. But SHMUPS just hasn't ever really been a genre of gaming that appealed to me. Yet, as I embarked on this quest and played three different SHMUP games, I found myself increasingly engaged in them as the story became more real.
To begin with, I played Asteroids. A simple game with a simple objective along with simple controls, this retro SHMUP game was fun for a fleeting moment. I did find myself face-palming myself as my ship would be destroyed by a meteor fragment or an invading foe, but without context, Asteroids didn't hold my attention for long.
Next, I went to AddictingGames.com, and found Awesome Pirates under the Shooter tab. The objective of this game is to defend your fort against increasingly larger swarms of pirates. In the same style as Angry Birds, you and the pirate invaders take turns angling your cannons at one another and firing with the objective of either destroying my fort or sinking the pirate crews. Obviously, what I liked most about this was the story which added context to the game. Not only was there a plot present, but the pirates would exclaim things like "Yiaarrrrr!" when they were hit and "ROFL" when my cannon balls missed them. Additionally, as I conquered more pirates on subsequent levels I earned money which could buy me both more and better cannons to take on the ever-growing challenges. With this option available to me, I quickly found myself considering the economics of the game. Should I purchase the next best cannon now or see if I can get by for a few more levels to buy the grand daddy of them all? Awesome Pirates is certainly bookmark worthy, but don't tell my boss that.
Finally, I played Sniper Team, also found at AddictingGames.com. This game was far outside of my comfort zone, which is to say that I shy away from the simulated real-world violence of military-style games. However, just as happened with Awesome Pirates, I found the storyline to grab my attention and take me further and further into the game. In Sniper Team, you are a member of a group of snipers who are stationed throughout a military base. As waves of intruders approach, your objective is to get them in your cross hairs and wipe them out, so to speak. However, these intruders are strategic and aren't in a hurry to give you the easiest shot or wait their turn. Instead, they use simulated precision as they fire from relatively secluded stations with weapons of varying intensity. Not only did Sniper Team force me to focus on my attention to detail as I surveyed the base, it also encouraged improved hand-eye coordination in a short amount of time. Kill or be killed as they say. To my surprise, I enjoyed this game much more than I initially expected myself to. The storyline was epic and the required skill level was just enough to offer a moderate challenge without being overwhelmed as a "newb".
Other Games
This genre of gaming includes card games, board games, dice games, etc. Perhaps the easiest of all games to play, the games in this category don't require as much energy as others might, which could appeal to a population of casual gamers (those who play Solitaire at work, for example) more than, say, MMORPGs.
While these types of games are relatively more passive, many of them do require an element of strategy to at least be good at playing them. Chinese Checkers is an example of this. Until this quest, I had never played Chinese Checkers before. And as I started my first game, I had no idea what the rules or objective were. However, as I watched the nature of the other players' moves, I was able to deduce the rules and objective which in turn helped me to devise a strategy which helped me to win my very first game.
Yhatzee also requires some strategy and a good understanding of probability to master this family-night game. If you simply roll the cup of die without thinking about potential outcomes, sequences, and patterns, playing Yhatzee is nothing more than a game of luck for you. But, if you play with an understanding of number frequency, the probability of rolling a straight sequence against rolling a pair and so on, you will gain some sense of purpose leading to a potentially successful strategy of game play.
Though designed for the casual player, this genre of games still offers many of the positive emotional and psychological benefits of other types of game play. When we engage in casual games we still experience appropriate levels of challenge, scaffolded failure, immediate feedback, acknowledged successes, and membership into a community when played with others online or around the dinner table. Perhaps this is why even those most averse to video games occasionally find themselves procrastinating work with Solitaire.
The Seduction Secrets of Video Game Designers
Video games are sexy, and they offer a lot of insight into how we can make our classrooms and learning spaces sexy too. What I mean by that is that by applying some of the seduction secrets of video game designers to our teaching and learning, we have the potential to engage our students and ourselves in a grippingly attractive relationship with learning. So, what are those seductive secrets? I'll tell you.
The first secret deals with tools. Video game designers provide their players with tools needed to succeed throughout the game. On top of that, they also provide players with all the time they would like just to get past becoming familiar with these tools and to master them instead. Certainly there are many areas of classroom life where this practice could apply. Instead of giving our students the basics needed to skim by, we need to recalibrate our focus from a breadth perspective to a depth perspective. We need to give our students the best tools available and all the time in the world to master those tools for learning.
Video game designers also understand basic human motivation quite well, something that you would expect teachers to have a better grasp of. With regards to video games, designers have set players up be able to fulfill their human need for autonomy--the need to have control over oneself. Whether a game like The SIMS, Assassin's Creed, Angry Birds, or Minecraft, players have the opportunity to dream, draft, and do as they see fit. In the classroom, we often expect our students to perform a task to our standard with tools that we have prescribed for them to use. There is no creativity in this approach and certainly no room for autonomy to take place. How meaningful do you think this kind of work is to the students we are expecting to do it? Not very . . . at best.
Another secret of video game designers that we teachers would be wise to adopt is noticing what our students are doing and offering them disproportionate feedback when they succeed. Oftentimes, our attention as educators is monopolized by off-task or disruptive behaviors. When we give all of our time to troublemakers, what motivation do students have to behave and perform up to their potential? Catching students doing something good is okay. Disproportionately celebrating students doing good things is even better. Short of coming across sarcastic, make a big deal out of students' successes. Celebrate them with the class. Figuratively blast off fireworks when breakthroughs happen. When we focus on the things we like to see in this way, I would surmise that those things we dislike will either disappear or fail to catch our attention any longer.
Finally, along with celebrating successes, game designers understand the need for people to fail. Not only should we allow our students to fail without criticism or judgement, we should encourage them to fail spectacularly and often. The best learning and discoveries are not made through perfection, but through failure. To use gaming terminology, it's when we "almost die" that we store our greatest experiences to memory. In the classroom, it's when our science demonstration about divergent oceanic plates almost catches on fire that we recall everything about ocean floor volcanoes years later.
Yes, it's possible to make our classrooms and learning spaces sexy. We just need to be willing to embrace those dirty little secrets that the designers of our favorite video games are sharing with us. As any of us will attest, what's the fun in secrets if we can't share them with someone?
The first secret deals with tools. Video game designers provide their players with tools needed to succeed throughout the game. On top of that, they also provide players with all the time they would like just to get past becoming familiar with these tools and to master them instead. Certainly there are many areas of classroom life where this practice could apply. Instead of giving our students the basics needed to skim by, we need to recalibrate our focus from a breadth perspective to a depth perspective. We need to give our students the best tools available and all the time in the world to master those tools for learning.
Video game designers also understand basic human motivation quite well, something that you would expect teachers to have a better grasp of. With regards to video games, designers have set players up be able to fulfill their human need for autonomy--the need to have control over oneself. Whether a game like The SIMS, Assassin's Creed, Angry Birds, or Minecraft, players have the opportunity to dream, draft, and do as they see fit. In the classroom, we often expect our students to perform a task to our standard with tools that we have prescribed for them to use. There is no creativity in this approach and certainly no room for autonomy to take place. How meaningful do you think this kind of work is to the students we are expecting to do it? Not very . . . at best.
Another secret of video game designers that we teachers would be wise to adopt is noticing what our students are doing and offering them disproportionate feedback when they succeed. Oftentimes, our attention as educators is monopolized by off-task or disruptive behaviors. When we give all of our time to troublemakers, what motivation do students have to behave and perform up to their potential? Catching students doing something good is okay. Disproportionately celebrating students doing good things is even better. Short of coming across sarcastic, make a big deal out of students' successes. Celebrate them with the class. Figuratively blast off fireworks when breakthroughs happen. When we focus on the things we like to see in this way, I would surmise that those things we dislike will either disappear or fail to catch our attention any longer.
Finally, along with celebrating successes, game designers understand the need for people to fail. Not only should we allow our students to fail without criticism or judgement, we should encourage them to fail spectacularly and often. The best learning and discoveries are not made through perfection, but through failure. To use gaming terminology, it's when we "almost die" that we store our greatest experiences to memory. In the classroom, it's when our science demonstration about divergent oceanic plates almost catches on fire that we recall everything about ocean floor volcanoes years later.
Yes, it's possible to make our classrooms and learning spaces sexy. We just need to be willing to embrace those dirty little secrets that the designers of our favorite video games are sharing with us. As any of us will attest, what's the fun in secrets if we can't share them with someone?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)