I have been looking into games used within education, and peoples views on such a topic. It was interesting to read and listen to such comments.
“Gamers
are virtuosos at weaving a tight fabric. There's a lot of interesting
research that shows that we like people better after we play a game
with them, even if they've beaten us badly, and the reason is that it
takes a lot of trust to play a game with someone. We trust that they
will spend their time with us, they will play by the same rules,
value the same goals, they will stay with the game until it's over.”
Do
we want children to “barely notice” when they develop valuable
skills? Not to learn that hard work plays a role in that acquisition?
It’s important to realize early on that mastery often requires
persevering through tedious, repetitive tasks and hard-to-grasp
subject matter.
I
think if parents actually understand what it is, umm, realise that
video games aren't all the same. You know like books aren't all the
same, there's Fifty shades of gray, and then out humanities text
book, for example. And movies, there's Jackass and there's a
documentary about what we are learning in school. And then there is a
video game, there is Call of Duty and there's MinecraftEDU.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5Recp9xpYY : Exploring history and humanities using a special map designed for this purpose, importantly it is not compulsory and it is within students spare time, rewards are given within school for code words to help encourage them to learn at home.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eybEx960Wj4 : The balance between ecology and student goals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BBvYyo1VCQ : In use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7x6pf09hfs : Learning English for Japanese students, now teaches Japanese for anyone around the world! Once again mainly people who chose to learn.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBh3K4NR00U : Building using contour maps. Working together to create a mountain from contours, interesting to hear students working with each other, even though there is a bit of tension between some with comments within the game, such as "GET OUT OF MY WAY"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPiLAyq9vbI : Creating 3D representations of cells in the body, note one group did not do what was expected of them and overall the time scale is an hour and a half, a very long time for such a simple task.
I have decided to look at collaboration games, looking into their history and how effective they have been. Since they are focused on working together rather than working against other players, can they teach us anything?
After a little confusion over the task I have refined my essay title down to "What are collaborative games, and how can they be used within education?"
With this in mind I am going to look into the use of Minecraft for teaching children in schools all around the world. What are they trying to teach, and will it fit the requirements of a traditional education game?
We have been asked to analyse 3 games, focusing on the constituent part of the game. (Conflict, aesthetics and what purpose the game serves).
The games are:
LA Noire
Spore
Dear Esther
LA Noire
Structure:
Conflict within the game often arises when the player is confronted by an uncertainty about who the criminal is. Often trying to investigate conflict is present when confronting innocent people, or the criminal themselves. Due to being a single player game the player is only confronting npcs, rather than other people.
The game offers interactive experiences in the form of objects, and npcs. Both may be interacted with in order to find clues and obtain information. These lead the player hopefully towards the correct conclusion and form part of the meaningful play crucial to the game outcome.
Aesthetic:
The style is clearly from the 1940s, drawing on film noire references, even including a black and white style if the player wishes.
Spore
Structure:
Conflict within spore is mainly focused on survival and food consumption. With other npcs vying for better positions within the food chain you must either defend yourself or chase other species down. With this in mind it is clear to see the focus is on player vs game rather than other players.
The player interacts with both the environment and the other organisms within it. By means of travel and combat, as well as a source of food. All of this is mostly focusing on survival initially, however this changes as the game progresses and becomes more social based. These work to create meaningful play, educating younger children about evolution and how life develops, even if it is simplified.
Aesthetic: The style is cartoony, appealing to children, with many cute sounds and animations to appeal to this audience.
Dear Esther
Structure:
The only conflict within Dear Esther is the environment, potentially confusing the player on where to go, especially within the crystal caves. However possible conflict is also represented within understanding the deeper message the game has to offer, where the player must try to challenge the game to receive more information, via exploring. Also some audio is randomly played in different playthroughs, showing the game withholding parts of the story until played again. This is mainly an internal struggle with the game and the player, however outside the game some players argue over what the true meaning of the game is, so there is slight player conflict.
The only player interaction is via exploration, and in turn knowledge gathering. However there is limited meaningful play, with very little to "play" in the game.
Aesthetic: The style is realistic, with limited physical interaction with the environment it is important to have a visual interaction, with many interesting scenes to view.
An example of the beautiful landscape during the ending cut scene.
