[x-posted at HistoricLee Relevant]
Skinner’s behaviorism has generated intense debate for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the role of free will.
In videogames, the game world has been constructed by game designers with a set of game rules, a world within which you (meaning your character) operate. Some games provide a greater amount of latitude with regard to possible actions within the game, others more. For example, there are a very limited number of actions to be performed, levels to be explored, and coins to gather in Super Mario Brothers. By contrast, World of Warcraft offers many more options with regard to the same; more actions, more levels, more coins. Nevertheless, your actions are constrained. Your choices are limited. This is what might be called behavioralism light. Hardcore behavioralists would argue that the game world, scaffolded by game rules, actually compels a certain set of reactions. There are no choices, no other options; there is only the game. There are only stimuli and response. The real world operates this way as well. The world, scaffolded by rules of biology, physics, chemistry, etc., compels a certain set of reactions from us. These actions are not the result of free will or choice but, instead, they spring from reactions to stimuli.
Behaviorists fail to appropriately explain the real world’s “game designers.” In point of fact, though, they have very little interest in such matters. For them, it doesn’t matter if the Big Bang created these conditions or if Vishnu sat on top of giant turtle while Jesus prattled on about talents and wine and such and then the universe coalesced into being as a result of their divine conversation (which, I imagine, would be something like the best Seinfeld episode ever).
“[Free will] is a fiction…By discovering the causes of behavior, we can dispose of the imagined internal cause…Once you have found those causes there is less need to attribute to an internal act of will and, eventually, I think, the need to attribute nothing to it.”
So, for Skinner, there is no free will, and our participation in videogames seems to confirm this suspcion. But, this may be the point at which the utility of videogames as an analogy for life stops because, in the end, I can put down the controller.
My friend who is a computer science major sent me an interesting article on mobile applications. He is currently taking a class dedicated to creating a mobile app. The article suggests that, “Soon, more users will access the Web using mobile devices than using PCs, and it’s going to make the Internet a very different place.”
I’m very interested to see how this changes the internet. The article did not expand on that claim, but being an iPhone user I can see how my relationship with the internet has changed. I now spend shameful amounts of time on my email and “Facebooking.” Recently I had an interesting encounter with a mobile game called Shadow Cities. Shadow Cities is a multi-player game that uses your actual location as the backdrop. I thought this was both interesting and extremely creepy. The game knew exactly where I lived and the streets surrounding my house (ideal for stalking). I considered playing Shadow Cities for this class, because of its accessibility. Smartphones and tablets allow their users more convenience than PC’s. I could be walking to class (although I do not recommend this) and playing Shadow Cities. I was not convinced that convenience was the only perk of mobile technology, so I did more research.
A New York Times Article about Shadow Cities supports the idea that mobile games are the future, “Shadow Cities fully employs the abilities of the modern smartphone in the service of an entertainment experience that feels almost impossibly exciting and new.” Both articles left me with more questions than answers. What implications will mobile apps have on educational games? Will mobile technology help or hinder learning? How will mobility change the gaming world? Being enrolled in two learning and technology courses, I hope to answer at least one of these questions by December.
http://thejournal.com/articles/2011/09/12/mobile-to-surpass-wired-internet-connections.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/16/arts/video-games/shadow-cities-a-new-iphone-video-game-review.html
I’ve never been into videogames, or even games in general. I used to play Super Nintendo with my siblings and that’s about it. I can’t recall a time where I’ve been bored and decided to pick up a remote controller to play Zelda or Prince of Persia. I’m not terrible, but I’m not good – just… average. Which I can’t stand.
I also wonder about the ROI on videogames from a personal standpoint. They cost money. What do I get out of it? A few hours of play? Why not just read a book for free from the library? Why not go running? What can I get from playing a videogame, besides potential personal satisfaction?
It’s not that I don’t believe videogames can offer great things for people who play it – I’m sure any communication medium, like television, music, or the arts, have the ability to offer whatever you’re looking for. After reading reviews of the game “Braid” I’m certain that it’s an intelligent, well-thought out, allegorical game. For all I know, it could be the “Faerie Queene” of the videogame world. But for me, the world’s laziest videogame player, how do I get “into” it? Effectively, how do I get over myself to want to engage with something I was always told would rot my brain?
And so you may be wondering: why this class? Because I love thinking about design and how it connects with people. This is why I find urban planning and thinking about applying its theories to other fields so fascinating. I want to know how videogames can help us learn about other realms of knowledge. And as a former first-grade teacher, I employed game-like activities to encourage my kids to find their work relevant to their lives in Spanish Harlem. I want to see how this works. It’s like George Michael says, I gotta have FAITH.
Okay, dance party time.
Hey everyone. So I interned at OnLive over the summer. For those of you who don’t know, OnLive is a cloud gaming company that streams typical console and PC games to multiple devices so users don’t have to have a high-powered machine to play high-powered games.
When I left, I was given a bunch of passes for free games. OnLive’s selection isn’t the best, but if the game you’re playing is on there and you want it for free (or if you want some other game for free), let me know.
Email: bmkrenz@gmail.com
Having played every free flash game on the internet, I thought I’d post some here that I find unique and challenging in a certain way. The first game I wanted to talk about is one of the most insane things I’ve ever played: game, game, game and again game. I found this game many years ago and was simply delighted by the absurdity of it. Each level includes extremely sketchy and disorienting graphics, nonsense sentences centered around abstract philosophical principals, and inscrutable home videos.
This game intrigues me as it creates an eternal knowledge gap. Despite the simple goals (collect these weird flashing items, get to the exit), the game purports to make interesting statements with each level. Reading the poetic and just slightly incoherent text and comparing it against 10-second arbitrary home videos, considering the shape of platforms and the paths available to the player, the blue squiggle of death. the heavy music juxtaposed against images of syringes and graves… the player begins to believe there is some underlying message in each level. In combination the levels seem to bring the player even closer to the truth. In further evaluation, however, all interpretations seem valid. You are left eternally questioning what it might all mean.
The author created a number of other interesting games and flash artistic productions available at the same site. I encourage you to play, alone, with the lights off.
OK, first things first – did you know that Michigan has a fabulous resource called the Computer and Video Game Archive? It’s located in the lower level of the Duderstadt Center, and is a unique and awesome resource available to students, scholars, and players at the University of Michigan!
As part of their efforts to spread the word about the CVGA, they are forming a Girls’ Gaming Group (G3). The G3 will meet on 2nd and 4th Thursday of each month at the CVGA. They have a public Facebook Group as well: https://www.facebook.com/groups/cvgagirls/
Hi all,
Seems VALVe has made their awesome Orange Box gem, Portal, free to download until September 20. They state that educators have been using it to teach physics in the classroom! How cool is that? For those who haven’t played it, the game is basically all about solving puzzles (i.e. getting from the beginning of a level to the end) and using momentum created by jumping into user-created portals (you get to make 2 of them at any time, and either act as an entrance or an exit) to get to otherwise unreachable areas.
I’m not sure if using it to teach physics is a stretch or not, but I do know that VALVe is pretty on top of releasing their SDKs for their games. With this in mind, I can definitely see companies creating “educational mods” for games like Portal to make it more school-friendly. I think I would be focusing too much on having fun with the game rather than learning from it, as it stands now… but who knows, add some numbers over my head when I speed through portals (“V = 5 m/s”), let me solve equations in-game… and I think I’d be able to do a LOT of learning!
That said, I’d be interested in playing it in a school setting without any mods to see what educators have already come up with. Anyone have any interesting ideas as to how teachers have taught using only the game?
– Omid
Professors outline syllabi in every first class, taking the time to describe (in lengthy detail) what denotes an A, B, etc. Only in a select few classes I have taken, was it actually the case that a B was average. Barry stated that we could choose how much effort we put into the course and assignments and, thus, choose the grade we receive. Furthering one’s education is about bettering oneself and being better prepared when striving to attain a goal. For a little input, we get a lot of output and we adjust our efforts accordingly. Even though a B is average, putting forth the effort for a better grade promises a better return for our efforts.
I’ve never had a professor bluntly state the fact above, but it is true in every class and in our every endeavor. In higher-education, it takes a very self-aware learner to acknowledge and accept that they will be obtaining a B in a course, and part of that also involves knowing limitations when tackling a full course load. Then again, if we can get a “B for effort” and the grad school adage is “B’s get degrees,” I imagine some would just stop there.
It is easy to see that Barry is trying to provide us examples through his teaching methods and the syllabus for thinking about motivation and formal assessments. But I am wondering if his “B for effort” statement undermines what he is trying to model and/or what is the potential effect of this type of assessment system on motivation?
Didn’t have the chance to add to the discussion in class today about this topic. Hope what is below makes sense.
I feel that the voluntary nature of gaming is implicit in its definition – a player has to voluntarily submit to a set of rules in order to play the game. An informal contract is in play here, where the gamer agrees to follow the rules in return for whatever he/she wants to get out of the game. The rules can be violated, voluntarily or not, but in which case the contract becomes invalid, and the player’s objectives cannot be achieved (unless cheating is involved heh heh).
Like it or not, I think that going to school is voluntary as well. What then, does a child want to get out of school, in exchange for submitting to its rules and regulations? Not many students would be so mature as to say that their primary aim of schooling is the acquisition of knowledge or improvement of self. I would hazard that their motivations would run the range of: making parents happy, trying to secure a better-paying job in future, the social life and friends in school, etc. Is this where schooling differs from gaming then, that students’ objectives of “playing” school often are not what its designers (or administrators and staff) intended?
Or is this also true of some games… =)
Videogames, Learning, & School Design (EDUC602) 