Learning Through Play: A Study in Game Design

The following information is used for educational purposes only.

LeAnne Wagner

Learning Through Play: A Study in Game Design


Colleen Macklin, Chris Prentice

September 1.2008


I. Introduction
Playing a well-designed game can be a powerful learning experience for people of any age. Games and the notion of “play”, have the capacity to delight, captivate, and educate. People inherently like to play and creating a game that simultaneously educates and entertains isn't about tricking the player into learning, but immersing them in the experience. This is an especially important concept to consider when designing a game with the explicit goal of education. A game has to be fun to be truly successful and it is the designer’s role to elegantly weave the educational components into an enjoyable interaction. Educational games have had a notorious history of being dull and disengaging, it hasn’t been until more recently that the tide has begun to change. Games like World Without Oil (http://worldwithoutoil.org/) and Ayiti (http://www.unicef.org/voy/explore/rights/explore_3142.html) are examples of popular games with a social message. They have helped to reveal the potential games have to educate and entertain on the same level as traditional non-serious games. Combining the energy that surrounds games and social issues creates an effective tool for social change and awareness.

My specific interest in game design is the exploration of effective learning in social spaces fostered through game play and design. Aside from the social interaction that occurs while actually playing a game, the process of designing a game is a socially innovative experience as well. There is a vast amount of observation, ethnography, and research that must occur to create a game. I’m interested in exploring methods through which this design/learning experience can be distilled utilizing new technologies and participatory media spaces. The focus of my research will be around big games, which are games that utilize public spaces in their play. I find big games particularly exciting because they offer a way for people to interact in their environment in context, providing a unique way to learn about it and the people sharing it. Big games also use technology, but are not subservient to it (area/code). The big game space is an ideal testing ground for the use of mobile phone technology, which is another area of interests to me and my prior research projects.

From my research in big games I have found that many big games employ a scavenger hunt or seek and find mechanic in their game play and I would like to question the effectiveness of this mechanic and variables through my research. Are there other mechanics that could facilitate more effective learning? How do you promote quality learning over quantity? How do you share and document the learning experienced through play? These are all questions that arose during my first big game prototype and where I would like to begin my research. The manifestation of my thesis research would ideally result in a big game, facilitated through mobile phone technology and participatory online media spaces. I am by no means set on using any specific technology though and will be prototyping in a variety.

The working subject of the game is based on food and the role it plays in history and present day culture. Aside from food and cooking being a personal interest, it also has the power to bring people together in social spaces (Whyte). Food has a strong connection to the history of a place making it an ideal topic for the type of big game I’m proposing. Ideally game players will take a closer look at the ethnic neighborhoods of their city through the foods that help define them.

II. Prototypes
Re:Activism is a big game I helped design through PETLab (PETLab) and launched for the first time in June 2008 for the Come Out & Play (Come Out & Play) festival in New York City. The game revisited locations of historic protests and taught game participants about the events and related social causes. In order to progress through the game, the participants raised awareness of protest events by creating present day interventions and public interactions. Teams of game-players raced from location to location to complete challenges and use activist tactics to increase their score. The teams also used mobile phones to send and receive text messages as they progressed through the game and completed challenges. The game was a built around a participatory model, which provided a structure through which spontaneous or directed interactions could occur in the public realm. This meant that the game-learning experience could be designed to a certain point, but then had to be play-tested in order to continue the iterative design process. Design and play-testing of the game were rotated over the course of eight weeks preceding the official launch of the game. Each iteration contributed toward advancements in the design and added to the overall learning experience. This method of design has been referred to by Come Out and Play co-founder, Nick Fortugno as a “second-order” design problem, meaning that the design is not complete until the game has been played.

An essential part of the iterative and participatory design approach was play-testing, which allowed for early game-play using rapid prototypes. The game needed to be played and tested early and often in order to make sure the design was conceptually sound and learning would be facilitated. Utilizing this method of iteration early in the design process revealed inadequacies in the mobile communication setup and scoring. It also raised important design questions such as: How much time was needed to travel from site to site? How many sites should be included in the final three-hour version of the game? How many challenges should be included at each site? What was an adequate team size? Did participants learn about social causes and protest events as they played the game?

The use of text messaging and mobile technology provided a metaphorical link to activist tactics used in the past, for example text messaging was used by protestors during the 2004 Republican National Convention protests to coordinate actions and avoid arrests. As teams moved from location to location throughout the city text messages were sent to relay scores and record challenges. Early game text-messaging setups were overwhelmed by the high-level of communication required for relaying scoring information to multiple teams simultaneously. The need emerged for a custom software solution that would allow for an increase in communicative capacity, regular scoring updates, and a more rapid reply-rate as teams played the game.

It would have been impossible to determine the amount of time the game took to play had it been designed without regular play-testing. A Google Map was also utilized to plot out all of the sites of protest that could potentially be used in the game along with their corresponding historical research. The sites originally spanned multiple boroughs across New York, but were eventually pared down to just Manhattan. As further game-testing began to reveal more accurate travel times, the “game-board” was eventually limited to sites south of 14th Street to fit into the required three-hour window. As testing progressed players also suggested that the game was more engaging if participants were given more choices and had greater control over their strategy. This led the development team to create challenges of varying difficulty for each site and allowed teams to determine for themselves the most advantageous path to various locations. The game content was also altered throughout the testing process. The challenge concepts were all based on the historical events that occurred at each site. Some challenges required the players to interact directly with the public by documenting interviews, while others required the teams to temporarily alter public space by writing in chalk or reenacting a protest. The final version of the text-messaging application, the total number of sites, the issues the game covered and the final locations chosen for the game were all the result of the iterative play-testing process.

When the final version of the game was run on June 7, 2008, over 30 participants were divided into five teams and outfitted with backpacks, mobile phones, chalk, water, and other materials needed to complete challenges and create public interventions. The design process succeeded in crafting an overall structure through which unanticipated interactions and engagement with the public occurred. The game development process resulted in three main areas of learning about the game content. On one level the game developers who researched the sites where the game would be played learned about the content in depth. On another level the game participants learned about historical events while reading plaques and engaging in actions related to social causes. The public who encountered the game participants during the game also learned about the events as they were asked to be interviewed about social causes for certain challenges (Wagner, Yust).

Since the launch of the game, continued revisions and versions of Re:Activism have been created. A revised version of the game is being developed for play in conjunction with an art exhibit this fall. Prototypes are also in the works for an iPhone version of the game, which utilizes the phones GPS capabilities and geo-tagging, and a downloadable classroom curriculum version.

III. Assumptions
The biggest assumptions in Re:Activism were that it was fun to play and that players would learn about activism through the play. Based on the feedback gathered from players, they did indeed have fun playing the game. There were some tweaks to the game play that were suggested that would make it more enjoyable. For example, most teams didn’t like the sabotage card, which allowed them to steal points from other teams. We assumed that the players would enjoy the added element of competition from the cards, but in the end they didn’t like “playing the bad guy.” They did on the other hand enjoy the collaboration cards, where they got to complete challenges with other teams. Based on this feedback in future renditions of the game we will try to incorporate more collaborative, group interactions in the game.

One thing we didn’t anticipate was the flaw in our scoring system. The game is designed in a manner that allows the teams to strategize their movements to maximize their point total. One of the sites that game participants could visit was where the “Stonewall Riots” for gay rights occurred in 1968. When the “Yellow Team” visited this site, they met two pedestrians who had actually participated in the “Stonewall Riots” and recorded an interview on their mobile phones with the former protesters while trying to complete one of the game challenges. The “Yellow Team” came in last place in point accumulation, but had perhaps the most engaging interaction of the entire game. This occurrence raised consideration on how to account for qualitative and highly-educational public engagements in addition to the quantitative scoring system. As the scoring was originally devised we only accounted for quantitative and now realize we need to better address the meaningful interactions and give them a quality scoring as well.

The issue with scoring also raises another deeper lying assumption, that being that players can learn through the play. Can effective learning be fostered in social spaces through game play or does the competitive nature of the game discourage more meaningful learning? This is a question that can be posed to any educational game and is of much debate and interest to my own research. I feel that the nature of a scavenger hunt game mechanic is possibly not the most ideal to learning conditions due to the “racing” that they often contain. When time becomes an element of the game often the quality of the learning suffers, but it also the timing and quick pacing that often adds excitement to the play. Finding the compromise between these two elements needs to be considered for future versions of the game.

IV. Rationale
Though the popularity of big games is relatively new, the creation of one is not. Big games have existed for many years. Buckminster Fuller created one in the early 60’s called the World Game that is still being played today (World Game). Through my research I want to study the use of technology in big games because I want to find out how learning through play can be better facilitated by the inclusion of technology in order to better understand how to create a fun and effective learning experience through game play. The use of mobile phones and GPS devices is essentially ubiquitous and in my game research I plan to explore the use of these technologies to bring people and places, possibly both virtual and physical, together in a learning environment. The idea of creating an educational game environment that bridges the gap between these two worlds excites me and is derived from my experience with the creation and adaptation of Re:Activism. I would like to begin my research in the areas where Re:Activism failed, focusing on the exploration of qualitative scoring/learning and the dissemination of the knowledge and materials gained from game play.

V. Research (see Bibliography for a full list of sources)
Much of my research knowledge up to this point has been gained through my affiliation with PETLab, which has been a fantastic introduction into the world of game design. Through it I have found that the research interests of many of the Parsons faculty and alumni coincide directly with my own thesis interests. Those that I have been in contact with include Karen Sideman, Colleen Macklin, Katie Salen, Dave Carrol, Chloe Varelidi, and Chuck Yust. I’ll also be working with designers from area/code this fall on a big game based around the fiscal crisis. Area/code is a leader in the field of big games, having created many successful big games. I expect the project to be an enriching research and design experience.

Another important source of research will be derived from college students at Baruch University. I am teaching a class there called Design and Photography Theory and Concept, with the focus of translating real world experiences and observations into a visual medium. The topic of the course is food on ethnic neighborhoods of New York City and how specific foods play a role in the history and stories of these neighborhoods. Teaching this course will not only give me a better understanding of how food and history play an important role in public space, but will also provide me with user group to test my prototypes on.

VI. Conclusions
Based on the conclusion gathered from my prototype the first question that I would like to further dissect is how can effective learning be fostered in social spaces through game play. I want to focus on the educational component by creating a series of game prototypes that apply different game mechanics to big games and test them for the level of learning that they encourage. Through these prototypes I hope to gain a better understanding of how people learn from games and which game mechanic will be the best to push forward with. In these prototypes I will experiment with the incorporation of mobile technology and media spaces.

Another conclusion drawn from my research thus far is that creating a successful game is a very large task for a single person. My ultimate goal is indeed to make a game, but I have come to realize that the form that the game prototype takes may be rough. I would favor answering the questions I have posed about learning through play over creating a highly polished game prototype. The prototype I plan to create will embody a proof of concept, grounded in rigorous research, testing and, most importantly, fun.




VII. Visual Map of Domains

Bibliography

Ackerman, Diane. A Natural History of the Senses. New York: Random House, 1990.
I enjoy this book because the writing style is more poetic than academic while still delivering useful insight into human physiology applicable to interactive design.

Ackerman, Diane. Deep Play. New York: Vintage, 2000.
This book looks at play in its more instinctual poetic sense, which is a good juxtaposition to academic writings and analysis on the subject.

"Big Reality: A Chat with 'Big Game' Designer Frank Lantz." Gamasutra. 29 Aug. 2008 .
This article provides good insight into what a “big game” is and area/codes’s body of work.

Bogost, Ian. Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. London: The Mit Press, 2007.
This book was written by one of the leaders in the game design field.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, and Joseph M. Williams. The Craft of Research, 2nd edition (Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing, and Publishing). Chicago: University Of Chicago Press, 2003.
This books helped my formulate my research questions and methods.

Bransford, J.D. , A.L. Brown, and R. Cocking. How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School: Expanded Edition. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999.
This book is a good basic primer in understanding how different people learn that I use to prepare myself for curriculum design.

"Chowhound." Chowhound Boards. 31 Aug. 2008 .
This is message board community where people post restaurant reviews, locations of hard to find foods, and recipes.

"Come Out & Play 2008." :: Come Out & Play 2008 ::. 30 Aug. 2008 .

Fogg, B.J. , and Dean Eckles. Mobile Persuasion: 20 Perspectives on the Future of Behavior Change. Stanford: Stanford Captology Media, 2007.
This book shows 20 case studies in how mobile phones are being used in un-traditional or experimental environments.

Greenfield, Adam. Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Indianapolis, IN: New Riders Publishing, 2006.
This book provides good insight into the future uses and mindset of mobile devices.

"Group Recipes - Food Social Network." Group Recipes - Food Social Network. 31 Aug. 2008 .
This is a social network based around food and sharing recipes.

Laurel, Brenda. Design Research: Methods and Perspectives. London: The Mit Press, 2003.
This book proved to be very helpful when learning about my own design research process.

Maeda, John. The Laws of Simplicity (Simplicity: Design, Technology, Business, Life). London: The Mit Press, 2006.
The principles discussed in this book should be applied to all design.

"Multi Ethnic Eating tour." New York City Walking Tours | Big Onion. 31 Aug. 2008 .
This is a historical walking tour, based in Little Italy/Chinatown area, that covers the history and food of the various surrounding neighborhoods.

"PETLab Work Site." PETLab. 30 Aug. 2008 .

Perkins, David N.. Knowledge As Design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1986.
This book provides good insight into teaching systems design.

"Recipes, wine, and friends -- thousands of recipes and drinks at Food Connect." Recipes, wine, and friends -- thousands of recipes and drinks at Food Connect. 31 Aug. 2008 .
This is a social network based around food and sharing recipes.

Salen, Katie, and Eric Zimmerman. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. London: The Mit Press, 2003.
The quintessential primer on game design.

Salen, Katie, and Eric Zimmerman. The Game Design Reader: A Rules of Play Anthology. London: The Mit Press, 2006.
This book is a collection essays and case studies on game design and criticism.

Wagner, LeAnne , and Charles Yust. Design Through Play: A Case-Study for How the Iterative Game-Design Process Promotes Learning. New York: Cumulus Conerence Saint-Etienne, Design and Research, 2008.
This is a short research paper to be presented at the Cumulus Conference in November.

Wark, Mckenzie. Gamer Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007.
The author provides a unique perspective on game theory.

Whyte, William H. The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. New York: Project For Public Spaces Inc, 2001.

"World Game." Buckminster Fuller Institute. 31 Aug. 2008 .

Zimmerman, Eric, and Nick Fortugno. "Learning to Play to Learn." Eric Zimmerman. 30 Aug. 2008 .
This essay talks about the pitfalls often associated with educational game design.

Zimmerman, Eric. "Narrative, Interactivity, Play, and Games." Eric Zimmerman. 30 Aug. 2008 .
This essay discusses the general concepts associated with game design.

"area/code big game manifesto." area/code. 29 Aug. 2008 .
Glossary

big game - large-scale, multiplayer games that include some form of real-world interaction; a big game might involve transforming an entire city into the world's largest board game, or hundreds of players scouring the streets looking for invisible treasure, or a TV show reaching out to interact with real-time audiences nationwide

game mechanic - a system of rules essential to the game, all games have a mechanic, examples include puzzles, turn-based, scavenger hunt, shooter, alternate reality

participatory media spaces – media spaces that are created by a collaborative mass, examples include Wikipedia, Facebook, Digg


Source: www.a.parsons.edu