Pablo Moreno-Ger’s blog

I would like to post a brief reflection on the game Ayiti: The Cost of Life, which was recently brought by my attention by a friend.

Not an educational game, but rather a serious game with a specific message, Ayiti puts you in control of a family trying to survive in Haiti. The player assigns tasks to the members of the family (go to hospital to improve health, get some education at school, work at the family farm, get a job, etc.) and all these tasks have an impact on aspects such as “Happines”, “Health” and “Education”. You can see the progress of the three needs in bars that fill with care and empty with time.

Ignore the setting for a moment. Think of the actual gameplay based on giving slices of time to different activities in an attempt to keep a number of mood variables high. Yes, correct, we are talking of the best-selling PC game “The Sims”.

In essence, what we get is a (very simplified) Sims clone. But The Sims is about progress in a capitalistic society, gathering riches, getting a better house, flirting with members of the opposite sex, getting a big swimming pool and, long story short, to have the ultimate virtual doll-house representing the ideal of success in western society.

With the same gameplay, in Ayiti the priority is not getting a better swimming pool to attract more friends to your place, but actual survival. You quickly notice how it is not possible to raise a member of the family to be educated, healthy and happy. Most of the family must be doing work shifts most of the time to keep basic subsistance. Altough it is possible to keep a low level in all areas, it is not possible to excel in all of them, and the game is about sacrifice and surviving rather than about fulfilling dreams.

Ayiti transmits a necessary message: The dream we live in The Sims is happening today with 2/3 of the world being so far from it, that survival means success and the dream makes no sense at all.

In game design it is often said that the perception of progress is a key element of interesting games, and in The Sims the progress is reflected on better properties and social relations. Ayiti reflects a reality in which no progress is possible, the best you can do is to avoid failure. Maybe it does deserve the label “educational“.

Research reflections, serious games

Disclaimer: Barely any game-based learning in this blog entry, just serious gaming.

I’m not exactly sure why, but all my reading regarding serious games this last couple of weeks has been solidly returning Second Life hits. This blog reflected on IBM’s approach, with employees meeting in Second Life and with its CEO, Sam Palmisano, appearing in the game for a press conference with his own avatar. In fact, that information had previously been covered by Reuters on its permanent section devoted to Second Life . IBM is also trying concepts and holding events within Second Life.

More or less at the same time, Dell announces an in-game store where you can see your computer, configure it, and customise it. When you’re satisfied with the product, you pay and you get it shipped home. I haven’t been able to find out whether you also get a virtual computer to install in your virtual home, which would be a cool (and very cheap for Dell) gift for the customers. In any case the idea is great. It theoretically cuts down prices and provides a more attractive experience. And, even if it does not cut those prices, it gets you a heck of a PR-impact.

Same thing goes for Pontiac, opening Motorati Island in Second Life where they will be selling virtual models of their Solstice brand. I can imagine the potential should they try the same approach as Dell. Come, design your car, throw in the accessories, have a virtual test-drive and then purchase the real car. Our valet will drive it to your doorstep. In case the PR hype, plus the in-game car sales do not provide enough ROI, Pontiac will be renting lots in Motorati Island to companies and individuals willing to establish their own car-culture-oriented business in the island (I wonder if that includes competitors). BTW, both Toyota and Nissan are already doing this, let’s not assume novelty where there is not. The impact here is the sheer size of Pontiac’s initative and the amount of marketing they are dumping in the news.

And in the very same week, learning within Second Life, although not a new idea, is showcased in CNN regarding online education and virtual universities.

So, does this seem like enough hype around a concept? I think the PR people at Linden Labs must be having a huge party. Probably inside the game.

Research reflections, serious games, virtual worlds

Trauma Center. Ever heard that name mentioned in the context of serious games? Probably not, but it is not your fault because it is not a traditional serious game. It is an actual commercial game developed for the Nintendo DS portable console (a wonderful platform that sacrifices graphics and power for new forms of gameplay via its touch screen). The main objective of the game is to entertain, not to teach, but it is deserves some study from a Game-based Learning perspective.

The game puts you in the role of a young doctor just emerged from the haze of being an intern. You finally made it and you are ready to perform operations on your patients, although your distracted and overconfident attitude may soon get you into trouble. As you perform different operations, a fantastic story unfolds around you.

Gameplay itself is actually quite simple. You are presented with the interior of the patient and a set of tools is at your disposal. You use them by selecting the appropriate tool and making specific gestures. For example, you excise a tumor by selecting the scalpel and cutting along a dotted line around the tumor, or you apply stitches to a wound by selecting the needle and swinging your stylus in a zig-zag motion for the length of the wound.

The game is fun because the operations are not about being calmed, precise and thoughtful. Actually, they are a frenzy, with the clock ticking against you, problems emerging inside the patient and the patient’s condition decreasing at different rates. A mid-level operation will require you to keep under control several steadily growing aneurisms with a nasty tendency to explode, while keeping an eye in the blood that needs to be drained and having to continuously inject substances to to keep the patient’s condition high enough. Bottom-line is: operations are not easy. This is not about making the player comfortable with the procedures, but about pressing to the limit of his skill (some consider they overdid it a bit… indeed, some of the operations are a real nightmare).

In addition to the operations, the story itself also works in the line of providing fun. Soon you see yourself immersed in a bio-terrorist plot and enlist in a counter-terrorist agency of elite surgeons, where you eventually discover your dormant powers that allow you to slow time down if you concentrate enough. And you will certainly need them, for the terrorist bio-attacks grow more and more sophisticated: you will find tiny creatures eating your patients from the inside, rapidly moving tumors, intelligent cells that disguise themselves and so on.

And this is where the criticism may emerge: “It is not realistic!” “The doctors will not learn the proper lessons!” “This can’t substitute a regular class!” Those assertions are correct, although naïve. They miss the point and don’t see the potential. This is a game. It is meant to entertain and its creators never wanted it to be a learning tool. But this doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have good learning principles into it.

When challenged with an operation in Trauma Center, I will repeat it many times, devising new strategies, changing the order in which I treat the different problems and trying to figure out the most efficient procedure. While I am trying to master one of these science-fiction procedures, I am repeating to the point of automating several simple tasks such as always disinfecting before cutting, not using certain tools near sensible organs, or performing the eight-step tumor removal procedure without missing a step and in the right order. In addition, I am always being guided by my assistant, who instructs me on the procedures and teaches me about obscure medical terms and treatment names.

The game as it is right now, is just a game. But some slight modifications would turn it into a suitable learning product. And if you are thinking “well, if we remove the oversimplification of the procedures, the magic powers and the terrorist plot, we have a learning game”, I’m sorry, but I think you are wrong. Those should stay, or the game would no longer be fun and there would be no point in playing it.

Leave in the twitch speed, the terrorists, the magic powers, and the potential romance with the assistant. Just modify it so that complex real procedures with lots of steps that must be performed in a specific order are included. The assistant can always guide you through those procedures, but soon you will have to be able to do them correctly and in the right order by yourself. The game doesn’t give you enough time to read what the assistant says if you want to succeed.

And suddenly, the true and often elusive magic of game-based learning, might appear. Medicine students would still understand the procedures as usual: lectures and practical exercises with “real” patients (well, donated corpses). But the step of careful memorization of the steps of the procedures is substituted by the game. If (and only if) you didn’t kill the fun of the game with the modifications, the students will enjoy the game, play on their free time, while in the subway, at night, on the weekend, etc (as I do, and I’m not into medicine). They (we) don’t play it to learn. The objective is to beat the game, to get the highest score on each operation. And in doing so, those procedures are being memorized far more deeply than with any study session.

And this is precisely what would define a good example of game-based learning. Fun. If it is not fun, it is not a game. If it is not a game, it is not game-based learning. If it is not game-based learning, it is just another bunch of boring multimedia content.

Research educational games, reflections, serious games

Well, yes, this is the second post about this game. However, I think it is relevant. After all, this is the most successful title in the field of serious gaming, so it deserves a lot of attention.

After completing my initial evaluation of the game (at home and in my spare time *grrrr*) I thought “Wow, this deserves being studied in detail”. My small post about it was only a brief introduction and first impressions. I was planning to write something deeper and looking for some documentation when I stumbled upon an entire thesis about socio-cultural aspects of the game: Changing the Rules of Engagement – Tapping into the Popular Culture of America’s Army, the Official U.S. Army Computer Game, by David B. Nieborg.

I’ve been reading it during the weekend and it tells everything I would want to tell, only much better. So instead of trying to produce some brilliant reflections about the game, I invite you to check out David’s website and, most of all, his M.A. thesis.

Research serious games

Gamasutra is a website with daily news about the game industry. Its core audience is not necessarily gamers, but more precisely game developers, and it is certainly a very valuable resource for anyone interested in the domain.

I think it is interesting to point out that in the last 7 days, this website has published two articles about “serious gaming”.

The first article (October 19, 2005) is “Proof of Learning: Assessment in Serious Games“, by Sande Chen and David Michael. It deals specifically with game-based learning concerns, with emphasis on how to asses the progress of the student (a basic requirement in order to make game-based learning a trusted reality).

The other article (October 24, 2005) is “The State of Serious Games“ by Ben Sawyer. It is far more generic but can be a very interesting introduction to the field of serious games (not only for learning purposes).

Although both articles are interesting, they are not the highlight of this post. The important thing is that they exist and that the game industry (via Gamasutra) acknowledges the existence and importance of the field.

By the way, Gamasutra belongs to the same company that organizes the Serious Games Summit.

Research serious games

This weekend I’ve been playing the videogame America’s Army. It is a competitive online game developed and freely distributed by the U.S. Army.

First of all, a brief disclaimer: Although it is marketed as a tool to learn about the life in the army, strictly speaking it can’t be considered as an educational game. Actually, the game is designed as a recruitment tool, giving a very partial view of army life mixed with highly patriotic messages about honour, duty and the pride of being an American soldier.

However, there are very interesting things inside it that anyone interested in the field of “serious gaming” should take notice of:

First and most important: The game is FUN. This is the part that many educational games often forget. A boring game is not better than a boring lecture. In AA we find cooperative factors, teamplay with other humans, ranking systems… all these factors make the game attractive and urge the player to progress in the game and replay the missions again and again.

Also very important: It is a high quality product with a high level of realism. It features state-of-the-art graphics, realistic 3D sound, elaborated smoke and fog effects, etc. It truly feels professional and could compete in shelves with A+ games (remember, the game is distributed free of charge).

Its quality, its widespread success and the big entity behind the game (Department of Defence) make AA a reference in the field of serious games.

As of learning value, the game itself includes some training lessons to be played offline before deploying into online matches. These lessons are practical (like the typical videogame tutorial) and some others are theoretical, with the objective of transmitting that a military career includes a good deal of interesting studying. The theoretical lessons are studied inside the 3D game world, with the player entering a classroom where there is a teacher and some slides are presented on the wall. After a few minutes of lecture there is a short assessment.

This theoretical part is as boring as a regular classroom, although very condensed. And it is always possible to find amusement in watching the body language of the NPCs in the most realistic representation of the classroom ambient that I have ever seen.

It is also interesting to point out that the game imbues some additional knowledge in a subtle way. The stereotypical videogame portrays the player as the absolute hero, which obviously doesn’t happen in modern armies. The realism of the game makes it impossible to win any kind of mission on your own and it is imperative to cooperate deeply in order to achieve good results. In addition, once the results are achieved, the entire team is rewarded. Here you have a rich and successful tool to teach the importance of team play.

And for the end, a small rant: Playing this game helps in my research and is as relevant as evaluating a tool or reading an article. Why do I see myself forced to play the game at home during the weekend? We must not forget one of the greatest barriers of game-based learning: The social perception of videogames as simple entertainment.

Research reflections, serious games