Video Games & Literature
Confuzor
Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2412Awaiting Authorization
Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2412Awaiting Authorization
<div class="IPBDescription">What's the hold up?</div> I'm a little curious as to why the medium of video games hasn't taken off in presenting literature, when it has so much potential to do so. It's a norm nowadays to show movies in English class; video games have thus far been used in edutainment for teach basic skills, as well as for training simulations, but little has been produced to catering to literature in general. In fact, the only game I remember in school (elementary only) that used a game like this was <a href='http://www.mobygames.com/game/sheet/p,5/gameId,2081/' target='_blank'>Wrath of the Gods</a>, and no doubt, that title seemed like a excellent choice for schools since it was directly linked to Greek mythology.
Make no mistake, most games out there probably aren't suitable for school time, but games have the potential to be such great pieces of literature; particularly the adventure genre, (and RPGs as well... poor Black Isle <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> ). But as it is well visible, games of the adventure genre don't tend to sell to well compared with most other genres, (i.e., Grim Fandango). I guess the other factor besides profit affecting the growth of "literature games" is that schools don't have the money to buy so mamy computers, but every school is starting to catch up...
My God, the possibilities... I can't see any reason why an English teacher would allow fictional novels and movies in class, but not adventure games, (virtually all provide text, so students are reading). It's definitely not a brain wasting experience, and it's rather sad to see this reality, (I'm positive that it will happen sometime in my lifetime), take shape so slowly. Interactive electronic novels seemed so promising to begin with; I played <a href='http://www.mobygames.com/game/sheet/p,2/gameId,94/' target='_blank'>A Mind Forever Voyaging</a> while I was taking Sci-Fi English class, and that game would have fit perfectly.
Too crazy of an idea? Or a highly probable future?
Discuss.
Make no mistake, most games out there probably aren't suitable for school time, but games have the potential to be such great pieces of literature; particularly the adventure genre, (and RPGs as well... poor Black Isle <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo--> ). But as it is well visible, games of the adventure genre don't tend to sell to well compared with most other genres, (i.e., Grim Fandango). I guess the other factor besides profit affecting the growth of "literature games" is that schools don't have the money to buy so mamy computers, but every school is starting to catch up...
My God, the possibilities... I can't see any reason why an English teacher would allow fictional novels and movies in class, but not adventure games, (virtually all provide text, so students are reading). It's definitely not a brain wasting experience, and it's rather sad to see this reality, (I'm positive that it will happen sometime in my lifetime), take shape so slowly. Interactive electronic novels seemed so promising to begin with; I played <a href='http://www.mobygames.com/game/sheet/p,2/gameId,94/' target='_blank'>A Mind Forever Voyaging</a> while I was taking Sci-Fi English class, and that game would have fit perfectly.
Too crazy of an idea? Or a highly probable future?
Discuss.
Comments
The first being the death of adventure gaming. One of the saddest moments of my gaming life was finally realising that nobody makes them any more. Gone are the days of compelling stories and puzzles and i have little faith that they would make much of a return.
The second factor is the massive boom in the console market. Gradually over the years consoles have become more and more popular, now it's extremely rare to find a kid that doesn't own at least one. Excuse me for making a pretty rash generalisation here, but console games have never been extremely deep. I know there are a great number of exceptions to this, but i'm also aware that they're outnumbered by games with virtually no story.
These days people want games you can just pick up and get playing, that's why beat-em-ups and driving games have such high sales. It's not because of an indepth story or a believable world, it's because they're simple and fun.
I'd love to see a few novels brought to life in games, i really would, but the chances are getting slimmer and slimmer as each day passes.
Literature is the best medium for presenting abstract thought, whereas videogames are bound to "physical reality" in that they have to represent something in a visual style that will make sense to the viewer.
Hmmmm... I would think a properly designed video game (like say, Deus Ex 1 or Morrowwind) allows much more cognitive thinking from a person than a book. After all, a book forcefeeds you everything, and leaves the reader no paths. Some books (mainly high-level literature) have room for some interpretation, but it's mostly pretty clear and requires little thought. Hell, most modern 'literature' could be read in outline form. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
For an even more famous example, plays were considered rubbish, senseless entertainment until someone called Shakespeare's compilation a "work" in the late 19th century. He was laughed at for suggesting such a thing, and now Shakespeare is hailed as a God in some circles.
Though John Carmack may have his cult of believers and zealots, we need to give it more time. It'll all come in time.
Because the world around you is already created, I find games aren't as involving. Sure, I have emotional attachment to the characters sometimes; but generally, characters ingame are either predictable, hideously stereotyped, dull, vague, or a combination of the above.
Morrowind didn't really immerse me. I could believe in the <i>world</i>, sure, but I had no character to speak of. And it seemed like they were always sending me off to find some damn mushroom in a swamp somewhere.
I am not really sure what is used today in elementary schools, but if your talking about using video games at the high school level, that seems it will be unlikely to be common. First, the financial costs of buying the computers to play these games on is huge, think Morrowind. Second, kids will clearly have to spend a good deal of time on these computers to play these games, so each child would probably need their own individual computer as opposed to a computer lab. While the merits of computer gaming education are something to look into, after all school's are perfectly inept when it comes to real education, but the financial reality says so otherwise.
While there are some games out there that focus on educational value, I really doubt their effectiveness. When a child plays a game that teaches simple mathematical concepts, he's setting himself up in the future for failure when there won't be an easy or fun way to learn things. Playing such games also narrows the mind because children are programmed to think a certain processed way and when approached with a problem presented from a different perspective, the children will be helpless.
Movies in the classroom are for lazy teachers. A student can absorb much more material by having the stuff explained to him by a good teacher rather than watching a movie.
<a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/1879019.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/educati...ion/1879019.stm</a>
<a href='http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,59855,00.html' target='_blank'>http://www.wired.com/news/games/0,2101,59855,00.html</a>
In other news, you don't have to use a chalk slate and memorize all the state capitols to be better educated. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Teachers introducing games to help his/her children learn would be inefficient. I would encourage a parent buying his children games that increase cognitive abilities however, but it shouldn't be included in the schools curriculum. As Imma said, literature would be a much more useful way of increasing a child's intelligence.
Sorry if my post seemed a little negative, I'll try to lighten up in the future. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thing is, literature and video games has so little in common. Video games are basically simulations. Not Airplane simulations specifically, but simulation in the very broadest terms of life, play. Basically a video game is a play activity, where as literature is a pure intelletcual excercise that does not motorical skills. It's that simple really.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Two words: <b><span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Planescape: Torment</span></b>
Depends on what genre of gaming, really. I find it hard to see the simulation aspect in <b>adventure and role-playing games</b>, . It may be true that the stories involved in games have already been done in books before, but considering that books have a far richer history than video games, it doesn't come to anyone's surprise. If video games came before books, VGs would most likely contain a far richer list of original literature, and there would be no contest as to which we would rather live without.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Video games on the whole just don't require as much imagination, leave little open to interpretation and (dare I say it) need less thought than a book. Don't get me wrong, I love video games, but they're not in the same league as a good book in this respect. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The same can be said about movies. However, I would like to hope that in most cases of literature based movies, the teacher gets the class to read the book first <i>before</i> watching the movie, forcing the student to imagine on their own vision of the literature. Movies of literary works are simply one of countless visions possible based off a single person's imagination, not the literary work itself.
Even with games that aren't based on and work of literature can still force a participant to use their imagination. If you played Planescape: Torment, there was a LOT of reading to do; not all of it was acted out by the sprites on the screen. Envisioning the text coming to life requires your imagination.
[edit] A funny thing to note is that some people have actually taken the time to novelize <a href='http://www.wischik.com/lu/senses/pst-book.html' target='_blank'>novelize Planescape: Torment</a>. The reading probably isn't gold, but keep in mind that it was simply meant to be a game, not a book. Same goes to Shakespeare's works; they were meant to be plays, not novels.[/edit]
Teachers introducing games to help his/her children learn would be inefficient. I would encourage a parent buying his children games that increase cognitive abilities however, but it shouldn't be included in the schools curriculum. As Imma said, literature would be a much more useful way of increasing a child's intelligence.
Sorry if my post seemed a little negative, I'll try to lighten up in the future. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, if you would care to do a few years of research and disprove these teachers and scientists, I'll listen to your theory. Until then, you have opinion and they have quantification. Based on my psychological & IQ testing knowledge (which is not considerable, but I do have a degree in it), their studies are credible. You might try instead to offer up some counter-studies to convince me otherwise.
They > You. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"Games teach systematic things much better than they teach facts," Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Henry Jenkins said. "(The game) Civilization teaches how history unfolds, and it also helps show how choices affect events in the future." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You go to school to learn facts, and you learn how to apply those facts through creative thought processes to create solutions. I would be a millionare if I ever created a video game that did that. I've played civilization countless times, it's a great game, but I don't know any more history now than I did before I started playing it. I'd like to see what game you are referring to that does a better job teaching children than teachers and books.
Of course there are logic courses. Hell, I had a mandatory one in college. Which sucked, mind you. I know that you 'go to school to learn facts'; but that's often times pretty stupid, like most teachers. Anyone can learn facts, and a book will do a much better job than a 22-year old first year teacher ever will. I only rarely had teachers that made you THINK, not just memorize facts. A game with problem solving is far more useful physiologically to brain development than a book of facts. Facts which most people will never use.
Go back to my previous posts and quote exactly where I said games should replace teachers. I'll wait here patiently. Instead you will see that I specifically said using multiple media types helps your brain develop faster and more completely. You have to use a gestalt approach or you have wasted 22 years of a kid's life. This will help you be more functional, smarter, and be able to memorize more of your precious facts. ALL KNEEL BEFORE FACT MEMORIZATION!!!
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
But take a language like japanese. Hella hard to learn due to the two alphabets and the darn 4-digit symbol system. The easiest way to learn it I have found is a "mnemotechnic" way. Each letter is assigned to a drawing that both incorporates the strokes of the letter as well as looking like something that, when you pronounce it, contains the sound of the letter you are learning.
This way to learn is much faster. You involve the visual cognitive proces of our brains, and we just plain r00l on visuals.
Try then including motorical action, and you have a WINNAR. Too bad that the only educational software I have met so far is pure crap, snake oil made by hippies or con artist to siphon money from people that doesn't know better.
So far computergames seems to be best at teaching you motorical skill. Anyone played Typing of the Dead? No? Well go find it and buy it! From SEGA. Completely ownage educational game I tell you.
Now, unfortunately no one has come up with a gamey way to teach you abstract maths or physics in a game that really works. I am not sure computer games are good for this kind of education, whereas it can be very good at teaching you how to master complex systems.
Take a game like SimCity 4. You can get an almost instinctive feeling for how the system runs due to the rich media it pressents you for. You learn about how run something rather complex in a simulation. Such games, if made realistic, can give you a very good insight into these systems, perhaps learn you about society.
The same goes for wargames like Close Combat. You might not become a crack soldier from having played wargames, but your intuitive understanding of battle field conditions, tactics and other "ground military school" curriculum is heightened.
So games are good for SOME education, but I still haven't seen a superior alternitve to "booking it out" when it comes to the purely abstract, mental disciplines of learning math, natural sciences, reading.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"Games teach systematic things much better than they teach facts," Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Henry Jenkins said. "(The game) Civilization teaches how history unfolds, and it also helps show how choices affect events in the future." <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You go to school to learn facts, and you learn how to apply those facts through creative thought processes to create solutions. I would be a millionare if I ever created a video game that did that. I've played civilization countless times, it's a great game, but I don't know any more history now than I did before I started playing it. I'd like to see what game you are referring to that does a better job teaching children than teachers and books. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
No offense, but you sound bitterly narrow minded.
Theres not much I can add to the conversation that Monse hasnt already stated. But I will say that school is about far more than learning facts and applying them to problem solving. I find it hard to beleive that you truly think a child will lose problem solving capabilities if they learn those skills via multi-media games...as oppsed to pen and paper? You honestly think reading a paragraph and then writing down an answer is more stimulating than any of the thousands of ways you could gain the same knowledge with multimedia? Just the fact that Games offer 3 dimensional interactivity opens up whole new concepts for learning. The interactivity alone is using more brain power than any amount of chalk on the blackboard. Games can stimulate dozens of mental processes at once and allow a student to learn to use them together coherantly as opposed to; listen, read, write, repeat. Games are already used as a training tool in the military and pilot training. Not to mention that many future job skills will be based around computers and "multi-media", it only makes sense that a person would learn to use these skills at a young age. Besides, a good chunk of a persons daily stimulation is coming off a screen anyway.
What is this 3-dimensional interactivity you speak of? I can't imagine having more options than figuring a way to solve a problem on your own, rather then the programmed answers you have contrive and give to the computer.
Yes, I agree with you, some job training forces computers to be used because there is no possible way you could learn to fly an airplane without using a simulator, short of actually climbing in a plane with an instructor which would would of course be dangerous. Same goes with typing programs, the process of typing is directly connected to the computer, so of course it owuld make sense to learn to type through games.
I challenge you to find a game which could effectively teach part of a curriculum.
In other news, science fiction novels are barely and rarely accepted to be literature, even though they are by far the most innovative and timely stuff being written. Its going to be a long time before video games reach even a minimal level of scholarly interest.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess I've misinturpreted this?:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Playing such games also narrows the mind because children are programmed to think a certain processed way and when approached with a problem presented from a different perspective, the children will be helpless. </b><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Besides, couldnt exactly the same be said about the way problems are presented currently? If anything, the current way of learning is extremely processed and static, and it's not creating any such problem.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->class discussion and excercises are more effective at teaching facts than games.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats up for debate in my book. Traditional exercises and discussion can be effective for many people and not for others, I dont see why a media-rich presentation wouldnt be an effective way to present facts to students. Would a slideshow be less effective than drawing charts on a chalkboard? Quite the opposite imo.
Besides, there is a large movement among educators to re-think schooling altogether, simply because the traditional style of teaching fails so many students...what they are realizing now is that...not all kids learn the same way, and in order to be effective they need to create all new approaches to education in a more focused fashion.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What is this 3-dimensional interactivity you speak of? I can't imagine having more options than figuring a way to solve a problem on your own, rather then the programmed answers you have contrive and give to the computer.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I dont quite understand what you mean by that statement, but what I meant by 3-D interactivity is this: Textbook illustrations are 2 dimensional, even when trying to convey 3 dimensional concepts. Obviosly a 3-D interaction with the concept will be more effective than diagrams on a flat page. Not to mention displaying abstract concepts in new ways.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I challenge you to find a game which could effectively teach part of a curriculum.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It would take a very short-sighted definition of what a game is to think that something couldnt be created. Of course I cant find a game like that...they dont yet exist, thats what this entire <i>theoretical</i> conversation is about remember?
The Game? RAMA, made by Sierra (Pre-Suck <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> ) and featured pre-rendered backrounds with actors that moved across them. The game was cool, not only was the acting top notch that landscapes and music sucked you in. And get this IT HAD HELP FROM THE AUTHOR! yes Arther C Clarke and Gentry Lee the authors of RAMA 2 which the game was based off helped the development team and helped adapt the game. SOmething unfortunatly is mostly unheard of in the gaming industry.
Oh and it was immersive.
So anyone remember it?
If you do you are one of a very small selection of people but if you happen to see this game lying around somewhere go buy it (It's likely to be cheap) but it is one of the best put together Adventure games and worth it if you can get it.
And it got me into reading Clarke proper which is a plus I suppose!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I guess I've misinturpreted this?:<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I'd say so, what I meant was that it forces children to think a certain way, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they would forget whatever methods they've already learned.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats up for debate in my book. Traditional exercises and discussion can be effective for many people and not for others, I dont see why a media-rich presentation wouldnt be an effective way to present facts to students. Would a slideshow be less effective than drawing charts on a chalkboard? Quite the opposite imo.
Besides, there is a large movement among educators to re-think schooling altogether, simply because the traditional style of teaching fails so many students...what they are realizing now is that...not all kids learn the same way, and in order to be effective they need to create all new approaches to education in a more focused fashion.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, I say if you need games to learn facts (not presentations and the such), you're not truly capable of grasping the concept. Secondary school's main purpose is to prepare you for the workforce or college, and people are going to be shocked if they rely on gaming in middle school. That's part of what education is about.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I dont quite understand what you mean by that statement, but what I meant by 3-D interactivity is this: Textbook illustrations are 2 dimensional, even when trying to convey 3 dimensional concepts. Obviosly a 3-D interaction with the concept will be more effective than diagrams on a flat page. Not to mention displaying abstract concepts in new ways.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I was hoping to get some clarification on what you meant by 3-dimensional. If you mean length, width, and depth, then I don't see how the computer is any different then a book. Both have flat surfaces, which can be used to present pictures in a 3-dimensional way. I was hoping you meant something else though...
I thought with all this research on how games can help improve one's education, <b>someone</b> must have had the brilliant idea of creating a game solely for the base of education to be used in schools.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
How are books any different?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well, I say if you need games to learn facts (not presentations and the such), you're not truly capable of grasping the concept. Secondary school's main purpose is to prepare you for the workforce or college, and people are going to be shocked if they rely on gaming in middle school. That's part of what education is about.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why cant a game be a presentation? I'm not sure jumping to conclusions about a persons abiltity to understand a concept has any bearing on the discussion at hand...but if you cant grasp a concept, you need to learn it in a way that allows you to grasp it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I was hoping to get some clarification on what you meant by 3-dimensional. If you mean length, width, and depth, then I don't see how the computer is any different then a book. Both have flat surfaces, which can be used to present pictures in a 3-dimensional way. I was hoping you meant something else though...<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Im hoping this is sarchasm...length, depth and height? No book can possibly allow you to look at something in 3-D, in a game you can rotate and veiw it from any angle, break it apart and dissect it in an interacticve environment...a book has to display a static images to convey a 3-d concept or object. A game would actually allow you to interact with it.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I thought with all this research on how games can help improve one's education, <b>someone</b> must have had the brilliant idea of creating a game solely for the base of education to be used in schools.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What research? it's all theoretical, were discussing it's possible effectivness arent we?
I do recall quite a few games from math class in like 4th grade, And there are a ton of pen and paper games and exercises used to aid in learning. Not to mention many of the numerous ways "fun & games" are used to make learning more interesting. Its really just the difference between, static images and words frozen in time that hasnt changed at all in decades and can only present media in one, very specific way, or media rich interactive learning environments that has the capacity for change and to present media in whatever way needed.
Neither may work in all instances, and either may work for different people, but I dont doubt that games can be effective learning tools. "Games" has a very broad definition, and no, noone is going to learn biology playing first person shooters, but a chemistry simulation may very well aid in the leaning process. Puzzle games can teach systematic reasoning, and facts can be presented the same way they are in modern "workbooks".
I'm not exactly talking about books here, I'm just referring to involved classroom discussion and the such. I'd say kids have a much greater chance of retaining knowledge from reading and class discussion, but I suppose thats where our opinions differ.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Why cant a game be a presentation? I'm not sure jumping to conclusions about a persons abiltity to understand a concept has any bearing on the discussion at hand...but if you cant grasp a concept, you need to learn it in a way that allows you to grasp it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Usually because gaming requires the user to be involved. And grasping a concept is pretty fundemental to education; if games can't help you do that, then what's their purpose?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Im hoping this is sarchasm...length, depth and height? No book can possibly allow you to look at something in 3-D, in a game you can rotate and veiw it from any angle, break it apart and dissect it in an interacticve environment...a book has to display a static images to convey a 3-d concept or object. A game would actually allow you to interact with it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What exactly is the use of rotating something on computers? Real life models would be much more useful and interactive. I was thinking you connected 3-D somehow with interactivity, guess not.
There is no line that seperates a game from a simulation. I suppose what could be a game to you might be a simulation or an exercise to me. If facts were somehow incorporated into a "fun" game, what would force the person to memorize them? If they simply had to regurgitate facts, it would become less of a game and more of an exercise.
As you said, I wouldn't consider a chemistry simulation to be a game. Even if it was, doing an actual lab would make it more likely the student would retain the information.
EDIT: At the time of posting your postcount is 666. Your whole "gaming for education" concept is just a means to lure kids into the realm of satan so you can eat their souls, isn't it? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And I wouldnt condone eliminating them altogether. I dont think all kids learn in the same way, and I think the same knowledge can be gained by non-traditional means.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Usually because gaming requires the user to be involved. And grasping a concept is pretty fundemental to education; if games can't help you do it, then what's their purpose?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Education needs to be involving in order to be effective. And my point is not that a game cant teach a concept, but that if one method doesnt make you understand, another method might.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What exactly is the use of rotating something on computers? Real life models would be much more useful and interactive. I was thinking you connected 3-D somehow with interactivity, guess not.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
What is the use? The same use as a real life model would have. A real life model may not be practical in all situations, and access to hundreds of models on the fly is certianly usefull. Not to mention a plethora of other applications for 3-D interaction...use your imagination. Seriously try using your imagination, it's the only way this conversation will go anywhere. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is no line that seperates a game from a simulation. I suppose what could be a game to you might be a simulation or an exercise to me.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Semantics really...lets refer to it as "educational multi-media" as opposed to "games" then.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If facts were somehow incorporated into a "fun" game, what would force the person to memorize them? If they simply had to regurgitate facts, it would become less of a game and more of an exercise.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Fun is keeps peoples attention far better than mundane. You cant "force" anyone to remember anything. In general people only remember facts that interest them anyway, and being entertained and engaged with the cirriculum is far more memorable. The most engaging teachers have the greatest effect on thier students, but not all students are engaged in the same manner.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As you said, I wouldn't consider a chemistry simulation to be a game. Even if it was, doing an actual lab would make it more likely the student would retain the information.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, this may not be practical in all situations, hell, it may even be unsafe. Its a secondary option if anything.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->EDIT: At the time of posting your postcount is 666. Your whole "gaming for education" concept is just a means to lure kids into the realm of satan so you can eat their souls, isn't it? <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nah, childrens souls are too salty <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
I would just like to throw in some of my experiences. One of my most memorable math teachers was a guy named Mr. Hendrix who brought a computer into the class room. It was this really beat up 5 inch floppy drive thing. If I did really good on my questions, he would let me play one of two games: Gold Miner or Cross Canada Trucker.
Gold Miner: I had a time limit, I was stuck in a cavern with this huge load of gems and precious metals in a cart and the only way to get out was to setup a system of ramps, levers, gears and pulleys that would be properly configured according to weight and space constraints, and if I was able to think fast enough with the tools at hand, I could make off with the booty. I still understand alot about basic mechanics because of that game.
Cross Canada Trucker: Shortest way I could describe this game was like it was the original X-COM but you are a trucker. I had to plan out my route, decide my cargo, figure out fuel, where the best place to buy and sell were, accept special jobs, pick up hitch hikers, make sure the truck was locked, and deal with traffic and weather conditions. I had my jaw hit the floor once when I had my cargo stolen by a hitch hiker when I forgot to lock the container...
Wanna know how old I was when I was playing this stuff I still remember and also the math from that class? 10 years old.
Also, I know I can type with my eyes closed because of the driving game in Mavis Beacon and the countless times I have pulled off high grade english writing assignments thanks to pondering a game I had been playing or the artwork I would draw in my spare time as I dreamed up a game design for the NES (Original Nintendo game console).
Ok, those are just some of my experiences. But I would like to present something else. In my opinion, text books do what educational software are doing anyways - especially if they are open source, have an editor, and a game to boot! - since text books are constantly being revised and publishing new editions and teachers' editions and teacher's assistant editions! Its about damn time some folks tried to replace some text books with games to properly get across "facts" and concepts, since it might save a few trees and improve some childrens cognitive processes for good measure!
Our history books would mean alot more if you were put in charge of military campaigns first, allowed to fail when logistics, politics, culture, technology, industry, etc. bring your little mind to the breaking point, and then show you what the historians think the actual persons involved did, then allow the teacher to lead a discussion with the class as to why they got such different results than the what the historians thought happened. And that's just wargaming (Anything from SSI), real time strategy (Age of Empires, Empire Earth, Rise of Nations), city building (SimCity), nation building (Civilizations) - among the myriad of other gaming genres involved! Heck, I find myself reading in my latest issue of PC Gamer about a show which features folks trying to reinact historical battles for a telivision show in the UK called Time Commander using Rome: Total War from Creative Assembly! How many other facets of human knowledge could be made more relevant and interesting enough for imaginative and playful children to remember if they were made into a game?!?
We already spend so much time sitting in class on our ****, how would it be so different if we were spending it on an interesting and relevant game? There are so many computers these days, why don't we fully utilize this potential of our new "printing presses"? I'm all for it, and I know for one, I will be using this avenue to teach my own children when that opportunity presents itself.