In case you haven't yet read this charming article, I thought I would share it. An adorable local five-year-old named Cassie created a video game with her father recently at Toronto indie Game Jam. The game (found here: http://www.untoldentertainment.com/blog/2011/05/24/sissys-magical-ponycorn-adventure/), centres around a little girl's search for ponycorns (ponies that are unicorns, in case you were wondering).
The game is sweet, full of logic only found in the brains of small children. What made me think, however, was that this little girl was actually having fun creating something (a video game), that is often only associated with men. The creation has become a form of play for her, as she illustrated all the graphics and voiced the main character.
So often, people bemoan that video games are anti-social. Not only does this ignore that playing video games is in incredibly social (as found in Bart Simon's article), but the creation of games is also. Games are rarely created by one person, but rather require teams of builders working in cooperation with one another. Events like game jams bring people together to bond over creating something they love. It's fantastic that Cassie's dad recognizes that events like this are creative opportunities and a chance for his daughter to learn. No little girls had ever attended the event prior to this, let alone made their own game. I'm hoping this inspired more parents to let their children see if they enjoy this sort of activity.
Something that's important to note is that Cassie was introduced to games and programming in a way that related it to something she liked (in this case, ponycorns). She got to pick the content of her work and think up the narrative. Rather than presuming that she wouldn't be interested in games or telling her what to do, Cassie got to carve out her own space. What's more is that her dad let her know that her success means more girls like her will be welcomed to the event. With the decline in women in programming,there needs to be attention put towards engaging young girls and women in fields that are typically not open to them. Doing this in a creative and fun way will hopefully start bringing women into the field more successfully than more traditional means.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Playing Alone with Thousands of Others
My first experience playing one of the world's most popular games, World of Warcraft, was surprisingly for class. Considering how popular this game is and how many games I play, this was a bit surprising! I set off on my journey as a lone Night Elf Rogue, determined not only to be able to better understand this week's readings, but to finally understand the obsession that is World of Warcraft.
The game itself is fascinatingly different from anything I have played. Upon entering the world, I saw dozens of other players, all in my immediate area. Everyone jostled for space, for quests and for creatures to vanquish! Players spoke to each other in chat in some weird modified version of English so filled with abbreviations that I gave up trying to understand it. Some players did not seem to even be on quests, but simply walking around the environment.
What people weren't fighting for, however, was companionship. It seemed that there was no one trying to greet newbs like myself. In his work "Never Playing Alone," Bart Simon discusses the myth of the lonely gamer in relation to WoW. All gamers know the stereotype-the recluse hiding in their parents' basement, never seeing the light of day except when they want to purchase a new title or console. WoW is one of those games that can really work against this stereotype. The exception to this rule seems to be found, however, if you begin a character not knowing others playing the game who are willing to play with you. The beginnings of WoW are quite lonely as you work tirelessly to grind and level your character up to a point where other players want to play with you.
My experience playing, as I've said, was quite lonely. The graphics in WoW are also quite outdated and the quest lines are incredibly generic, generally boiling down to "kill n of x and bring back y in return for z". Compared to a non MMOG game with similar themes and style, such as Dragon Age or its sequel there are other games far more sophisticated than WoW. Yet WoW remains incredibly popular. What is it, then that creates such a strong appeal for gamers?
Arguably, one aspect that makes WoW so popular is the way it is designed in terms of reward/incentive for a player. One always feels as if they have just leveled up or are very close to reaching another level. Even in the short time I played, I managed to level up a few times, and near the end was tempted to keep going, just to reach the next level, even though I wasn't really having that much fun! The carrot at the end of the stick in this case seems always just within reach.
WoW is also, for many players, a way of socializing. Guilds form around those who know each other "irl" and total strangers. Simon discusses the ways in which players apply to guilds, making them unique gated groups that select for specific criteria they value. The note to make your guild application "personal" found in Simon's example is a testament to how guild members often become more than just avatars working together. They are a mini-community unlike any other I can think of. I for one know at least one marriage in which the parties met on WoW.
In addition to allowing for the creation of guilds, WoW also supports the development of other types of communities. Game mods, for example, bring people together who both use the mods (as discussed in Simon's article) but also those who develop them. However, it is also notable that the use of mods can be exclusionary for those who are not technically capable enough to use them. This is similar to how the mores and language unique to WoW can often be daunting for a new player, as they certainly were for me.
Overall, playing WoW proved a valuable experience in learning about a unique sector of the gaming world, but also about one of the most successful examples of game design currently out there.
The game itself is fascinatingly different from anything I have played. Upon entering the world, I saw dozens of other players, all in my immediate area. Everyone jostled for space, for quests and for creatures to vanquish! Players spoke to each other in chat in some weird modified version of English so filled with abbreviations that I gave up trying to understand it. Some players did not seem to even be on quests, but simply walking around the environment.
What people weren't fighting for, however, was companionship. It seemed that there was no one trying to greet newbs like myself. In his work "Never Playing Alone," Bart Simon discusses the myth of the lonely gamer in relation to WoW. All gamers know the stereotype-the recluse hiding in their parents' basement, never seeing the light of day except when they want to purchase a new title or console. WoW is one of those games that can really work against this stereotype. The exception to this rule seems to be found, however, if you begin a character not knowing others playing the game who are willing to play with you. The beginnings of WoW are quite lonely as you work tirelessly to grind and level your character up to a point where other players want to play with you.
My experience playing, as I've said, was quite lonely. The graphics in WoW are also quite outdated and the quest lines are incredibly generic, generally boiling down to "kill n of x and bring back y in return for z". Compared to a non MMOG game with similar themes and style, such as Dragon Age or its sequel there are other games far more sophisticated than WoW. Yet WoW remains incredibly popular. What is it, then that creates such a strong appeal for gamers?
Arguably, one aspect that makes WoW so popular is the way it is designed in terms of reward/incentive for a player. One always feels as if they have just leveled up or are very close to reaching another level. Even in the short time I played, I managed to level up a few times, and near the end was tempted to keep going, just to reach the next level, even though I wasn't really having that much fun! The carrot at the end of the stick in this case seems always just within reach.
WoW is also, for many players, a way of socializing. Guilds form around those who know each other "irl" and total strangers. Simon discusses the ways in which players apply to guilds, making them unique gated groups that select for specific criteria they value. The note to make your guild application "personal" found in Simon's example is a testament to how guild members often become more than just avatars working together. They are a mini-community unlike any other I can think of. I for one know at least one marriage in which the parties met on WoW.
In addition to allowing for the creation of guilds, WoW also supports the development of other types of communities. Game mods, for example, bring people together who both use the mods (as discussed in Simon's article) but also those who develop them. However, it is also notable that the use of mods can be exclusionary for those who are not technically capable enough to use them. This is similar to how the mores and language unique to WoW can often be daunting for a new player, as they certainly were for me.
Overall, playing WoW proved a valuable experience in learning about a unique sector of the gaming world, but also about one of the most successful examples of game design currently out there.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Intellectual production: Responding to game reviews
Laura's video review (found here: https://sites.google.com/site/baciblog589/)-Some of the themes you describe in your book about the changes needed to update education fit in really well with those found in the book I chose. Jenkins et al. discuss participatory culture and developing media literacies in youth, ideally in after-school programs and informal learning communities. While Gee and Hayes don’t talk about these exact concepts, they very much discuss how education has to shift away from simply drilling in facts to teaching about problem-solving and creativity. Participatory culture, along with its features such as small, supportive groups are an intrinsic part of many of the examples Gee and Hayes use in the book I chose. For example, the Sims online communities were looked at along with after-school programs that taught through using the Sims. The success of many of the individuals profiled came from the support systems they had online and in person. Other players so liked their work that they sent them positive feedback, encouraging them to keep going. These are good examples of the participatory culture Jenkins and his colleagues are discussing in this book. Unfortunately, it is not the kind of environment that we usually find in classrooms. Generally, students do not give feedback to one another, nor is the work they are given the kind that allows for flexibility and interactivity.
I think Laura’s video is a great introduction to a lot of the ideas of how technology is being underutilized or even used incorrectly in education. Her critique about a lack of good supporting information, or reliance on the author’s own research is one I also found in my own book. I am not sure if this is coincidental, or simply a byproduct of the fact that this is very new research and thus there is little external information or research to rely on. Regardless, both books identify problems with education that are probably obvious to anyone knowledgeable about today's media-driven world.
Additional responses
I think Laura’s video is a great introduction to a lot of the ideas of how technology is being underutilized or even used incorrectly in education. Her critique about a lack of good supporting information, or reliance on the author’s own research is one I also found in my own book. I am not sure if this is coincidental, or simply a byproduct of the fact that this is very new research and thus there is little external information or research to rely on. Regardless, both books identify problems with education that are probably obvious to anyone knowledgeable about today's media-driven world.
Intellectual production-Game Review
The game I chose to play was Portal 2, a puzzle game developed by Valve. The game itself is fantastic on a number of different levels. The writing is exceptional for a video game, as is the voice acting. One of my favourite aspects of the game, however, is the way the designers have created a fun co-operative experience for players of many ages and skill levels. Someone who does not play games could play the game's co-operative portion of the game quickly because it has been designed to teach the player skills gradually. Despite this, however, the more advanced player doesn't feel coddled through the tutorial because there is a clever narration to keep them laughing.
Something that really interested me was the way that the designers overcame the very difficult issues associated with two players trying to solve a puzzle together, usually over a distance, sometimes without being able to communicate verbally. To do this, they equipped the players with different symbols they can show to their partner. I imagine it was difficult for them to not only choose symbols that were clear, but they had to anticipate the communication needs players would have, certainly no small feat!
As a tool for learning, I think that the co-operative aspect of Portal 2 goes beyond just teaching players how to solve physics puzzles (which is of course still important). There is no way to beat the puzzles on your own, so you must always be working co-operatively, unlike many games where you are working towards being the best. Instead, players are also learning how to communicate with a partner and combine problem-solving skills.
Something that really interested me was the way that the designers overcame the very difficult issues associated with two players trying to solve a puzzle together, usually over a distance, sometimes without being able to communicate verbally. To do this, they equipped the players with different symbols they can show to their partner. I imagine it was difficult for them to not only choose symbols that were clear, but they had to anticipate the communication needs players would have, certainly no small feat!
As a tool for learning, I think that the co-operative aspect of Portal 2 goes beyond just teaching players how to solve physics puzzles (which is of course still important). There is no way to beat the puzzles on your own, so you must always be working co-operatively, unlike many games where you are working towards being the best. Instead, players are also learning how to communicate with a partner and combine problem-solving skills.
Monday, May 9, 2011
Newman and the ideas of ludus vs. paidea
Emergent gameplay is one of the more fascinating types of play for me. I love hearing about the ways people play video games that are not what the game developers intended.
Newman discusses how games now have elements of ludus and paidea, allowing players to engage in what he calls “goal-oriented” or “free-play” activities. When this happens in emergent gameplay, players are using games not only as they are intended to be used but in ways unintended by the designers. They are constructing a new game themselves from the components of a pre-made one.
So what does this type of gameplay look like?
In some cases, players create new narratives within free-play, and this has elements of Newman’s “paidea”. A player may decide, for example, that their story in an open-world game such as Fallout or Grand Theft Auto is not to complete the main quest and narrative of the game, but rather to think up a new, unique back story for the character and set out on mission to act out this story in game. In this case, rather than making the choices needed to accomplish the main goal, the player is making decisions as they would in the narrative he or she has thought up.
In other cases, players give themselves personal goals other than those dictated by the game. This is a type of activity Newman describes as ludic, as the player is creating a new set of rules along with this new goal.
For example, I know of an individual who played the game Oblivion and decided to steal and sell every plate they could find in the game. As a rule set, the player could not get caught while doing this. In doing so, the player created a meta game in which the goal was theft and stealth, something the game allowed for but that was not really the way the developers intended plates and stealth skills to be used. Thus the attributes of the game become the building blocks for another.
In some cases, emergent gameplay is more complex, with players actually using the game attributes in more complex ways. However, as open-world games become more and more detailed and flexible, even players without great technical skills are able to create new narratives or new goals to fuel their desire to create new games.
Do you play games only as intended? What are some ways you can think of playing some of your favourite games that are not intended by the designers?
Newman discusses how games now have elements of ludus and paidea, allowing players to engage in what he calls “goal-oriented” or “free-play” activities. When this happens in emergent gameplay, players are using games not only as they are intended to be used but in ways unintended by the designers. They are constructing a new game themselves from the components of a pre-made one.
So what does this type of gameplay look like?
In some cases, players create new narratives within free-play, and this has elements of Newman’s “paidea”. A player may decide, for example, that their story in an open-world game such as Fallout or Grand Theft Auto is not to complete the main quest and narrative of the game, but rather to think up a new, unique back story for the character and set out on mission to act out this story in game. In this case, rather than making the choices needed to accomplish the main goal, the player is making decisions as they would in the narrative he or she has thought up.
In other cases, players give themselves personal goals other than those dictated by the game. This is a type of activity Newman describes as ludic, as the player is creating a new set of rules along with this new goal.
For example, I know of an individual who played the game Oblivion and decided to steal and sell every plate they could find in the game. As a rule set, the player could not get caught while doing this. In doing so, the player created a meta game in which the goal was theft and stealth, something the game allowed for but that was not really the way the developers intended plates and stealth skills to be used. Thus the attributes of the game become the building blocks for another.
In some cases, emergent gameplay is more complex, with players actually using the game attributes in more complex ways. However, as open-world games become more and more detailed and flexible, even players without great technical skills are able to create new narratives or new goals to fuel their desire to create new games.
Do you play games only as intended? What are some ways you can think of playing some of your favourite games that are not intended by the designers?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)