Jun 232009
 

Earlier today I noticed that Theory of Fun was listed as “frequently bought with” Understanding Comics on Amazon. And also with Challenges for Game Designers, by Brenda Brathwaite and Ian Schreiber. I thought it was neat, I tweeted it, the end. Then I get replies piling in saying that it is because of Game Design Concepts, a cool thing that Ian is doing this summer: a free class in game design, conducted over the web by blog.

This blog is a course in game design (specifically, non-digital systems design).

  • Tuition: none. This class is open to all.
  • Prerequisites: none. It is my intention to make this course accessible to all levels of experience, while providing useful additional resources for those who are advanced.
  • Schedule: Monday 6/29/2009 through Sunday 9/6/2009. Posts will be made twice per week. You can read them at your own pace. The course lasts ten weeks.
  • Audience: anyone with an interest in game design. This includes students who are interested in game design; faculty who teach courses in game design and would like to compare course material; game developers with an interest in design or a desire to see an example of what students are being taught these days; or relatives of game designers who are curious about what these people do all day.

Course Description:

This course provides students with a theoretical and conceptual understanding of the field of game design, along with practical exposure to the process of creating a game. Topics covered include iteration, rapid prototyping, mechanics, dynamics, flow theory, the nature of fun, game balance, and user interface design. Primary focus is on non-digital games.

I am guessing this may be of interest to some who read this blog. 🙂 Not sure how I missed it before!

May 132009
 

Gamasutra has a report from a GDC Canada session discussion the role of emotions in games — that is, a researcher who is not Nicole Lazzaro! And it sounds like a fun and meaty discussion.

The counter is fear, which can cause physiological responses due to the “fight or flight” impulse. Many people love that sensation: “Look at the prevalence of the horror movie; it’s everywhere. Look at horror games.”

“Surely there’s no harm in that? Well, actually, there is,” said Chandler: Scientists have recently determined that after sustained fear, bodies stop producing adrenaline and being producing cortisol, which begins to break down non-essential organs and tissues to feed vital organs, increasing pain, promoting heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity.

So, here we have “games can cause heart disease!” 🙂 Though it should be noted, so can shock horror movies… or perhaps excessive rollercoaster riding.

There’s also a bit bolstering the arguments I made not long ago about how we have unconscious predispositions towards people and things that looks like people (such as avatars).

Speaking of which, there was a lengthy discussion on that topic on the latest “Shut Up. We’re Talking” podcast, which has led to even more debate and controversy.

Unfortunately, I think the SUWT crew missed the point a bit by saying “well, maybe mature or experienced gamers learn not to have these subconscious reactions.” Unfortunately, I don’t think that is true — any more than informed and mature people sail through those tests of their reaction times with photographs of people of mixed races. This is not an easy bias to remove…

Apr 242009
 

I spent some time with the folks from the Avault lately, and now here’s the result, the Adrenaline Vault Podcast, where we talk about (if I recall correctly) Metaplace, World of Warcraft’s dominance of AAA games, why critics of videogame violence don’t quite get it, and more.

 Comments Off on I’m on the Adrenaline Vault Podcast

A Model of Play

 Posted by (Visited 9066 times)  Game talk  Tagged with: ,
Apr 212009
 

A Model of Play is a fascinating poster (available as a PDF or as images) that takes what seems like a very game-grammar point of view on the concept of play — even freeform play.

In play, one of the primary goals is to have fun — to continue engaging in the conversation that creates fun. Individuals choose the means for achieving that goal; they choose the topic of conversation, for example, which game to play. Within a topic, they choose different strategies and pursue a series of sub-goals, adjusting means according to their effectiveness. Goals and sub-goals and associated means form a tree (or web) of possibilities for action.

Among the grammar principles that are mentioned is the notion that play always requires two, even if the second person is a “virtual person.” The notion that interactivity is inherently a conversation can be traced back to at least Chris Crawford, of course.

Also cool is the “step by step” logic version found here, which builds the poster argument by argument.

New Theory: People Need to Play More

 Posted by (Visited 6614 times)  Game talk  Tagged with:
Apr 162009
 

Did you know there is an American Journal of Play? Me neither. Anyway, apparently there’s a new theory published there that boils down to “play more!” And specifically, engage in free-form social play, non-competitive stuff, because (the theory says) it’s how hunter-gatherer societies tended to play.

Gray figures hunter-gatherer children in early human history developed into cooperative adults with the help of a type of play similar to that which once characterized American children’s summers and after-school hours in contemporary culture. This play is freely chosen, age-mixed, and, because it is not adult-organized, non-competitive, he explained. This “free play” is distinct from leisure pursuits such as video games, watching TV, or structured extracurricular activities and sports.

Of course, plenty of video games do in fact provide this style of play, though it can be drowned out by the constant emphasis on numerical achievements.