CHI Play 2014: Toronto

Last month I went to the first CHI Play conference in Toronto - and it was fun :-) The full papers from the conference are openly available for a short time only so make sure to check them out here.

On the Sunday I took part in the somewhat provocatively titled "Participatory Design for Serious Game Design: Truth and Lies" workshop organised by Rilla Khaled, Mina Vasalou, Vero Vanden Abeele, and Maarten Van Mechelen. Participatory design (PD) is something I've recently become more interested in and our submission "Designing Persuasive Games through Competition" was about how PD influenced the organisation of the competition I ran at UCL earlier this year and some of the tensions that arose during the whole process. The workshop was a great experience as I got to meet a load of interesting people and to hear about different types of PD game research. And I learnt that defining PD, while a good learning experience, isn't particularly easy!

On the following day, I presented our paper on Player Strategies: Achieving Breakthroughs and Progressing in Single-player and Cooperative Games (Iacovides, Cox, Avakian & Knoll, 2014 - thanks to Anna Cox for the photo below!). The paper resulted from two UCLIC MSc projects I supervised and the conference also gave me a chance to catch up with Tom Knoll, one of my co-authors who is now at Amberlight. The paper builds upon my PhD work by looking at the types of strategies players use in an attempt to overcome breakdowns and breakthroughs. In single-player games, we found players use trial & error, experiment, stop & think, repetition and take the hint, while in coop games this extended to also include knowledge exchange, guidance and surrendering control/taking over. My favourite design suggestion from this work came from co-author Ara Avakian who suggested incorporating a "Quantum leap mode" in coop games but you'll have to read the paper to find out more about that :-)

In related work, Conor Linehan spoke about "Learning Curves: Analysing Pace and Challenge in Four Successful Puzzle Games", where learning curves refer to the structure and pace at which challenges are introduced to the player. We discussed how there might scope to combine our work as it would interesting to see how these learning curves actually map on to what players actually experience - particular in relation to more and less "successful" types of game. Essentially, it would be worth finding out out whether you see similar patterns of breakdown and breakthrough around the introduction of different mechanics and whether different types of learning curve lead to different types of strategy.

Some of the other highlights of the conference related to considering the design process e.g. Kathrin Gelring and Bob de Schutter presenting a framework for Gerontoludic design; Mina Vasalou reflecting on cultural appropriation when designing a Day of the Dead game for children; and Chad Richards considering the importance of context in developing gamification systems. Other highlights related to understanding game play practices e.g. Nicole Crenshaw highlighting the complexity of naming practices in online games; and Marcus Carter focusing on the use multiple screens to play different games at the same time. Meanwhile Zachary Toupes' categorisations of different cooperative communication mechanics (environment modifying, automated communication, immersive, expressive, emergent and attention focusing) got me thinking about how these forms of communication might relate to different kinds of player strategies.

There were also multiple presentations on games being used for different purposes such Michael Cristel discussing the development of a game for teaching children about the Cognitive Triangle concept of feelings, thoughts, and behaviors and Zachary Fitz-Walter discussing the gamifying university orientation (with mixed results). At a more meta-level, I also enjoyed Marcus' second presentation on paradigms in HCI game research and I'm definitely planning on looking at the paper in more depth. In addition, there was also quite a large industry presence at the conference, where I particularly liked the idea of "guerilla techniques" for user testing mobile games (e.g. at a hot dog stand) by the team from Scopely.

The keynotes were both delivered by people in industry, though I have to admit being a little disappointed by Mike Ambinder from Valve. His talk was titled "Making the best of imperfect data" and though he talked a lot about methodologies (e.g. user testing, data analytics) he mainly seemed to be lamenting the vast amounts of data he has access too and the constraints of not being able to do "proper" research in a commercial environment. Perhaps it's the result of having a background in experimental psychology (which I have too!) but it sounded like what he mainly wanted was the ability to measure everything, tools to automate data analysis and to magically remove all forms of bias. Which is fine, I guess, but I'm not really sure about the specifics of what he was wanted to find out and a lot of "why" questions he did seem to be asking a (e.g. rationales for player choice) really felt more suited to - dare I say it? - qualitative research...

In contrast, Jason VandenBerghe, Creative Director at Ubisoft, did a really good job of showing how he had engaged in research in this area and managed to use it in a positive way. Based on work such as the Big 5 personality traits and Self Determination Theory (SDT - recently applied to video games) he presented the "Engines of Play" - this is basically a tool for considering player motivations over time and for communicating with his team. His talk clearly outlined a problem space, involved some great game examples, suggested areas for further improvement (e.g. what about players drives such as "collecting"?) and managed to be entertaining as well :-)

Oh, and I almost forgot the student game design competition! This was a really quite an impressive showcase - there were games about privacy, sexual health, and even poetry while there were plenty of multiplayer opportunities e.g. a quest game involving IRC chat (and a lot of arguing!). The winner of the competition was a very cool looking game called OHR that took place in a Machinarium inspired world and required the use of physical electronic components. Below is a photo of Anna Cox enjoying a game where you have to shout into a mobile phone mic to avoid on-screen obstacles :-) Also, in the poster session, as part of Citizen Cyberlab, Anna presented some work on RedWire, a re-mixing tool for game design.

All in all, CHI Play was a good experience - and I'm sure I've missed loads out! I'm really looking forward to next year, where it looks like I'm going to be helping organise next year's conference in London :-)

If I were to design a high school program...

This morning I was working out at the gym watching "The Guild" (can't believe I'm only just starting to watch, but that's a story for another time) on Netflix and a twitter notification came up on my iPad.  It was a tweet from Sujata Bhatt.  

I've met Sujata on several occasions and of course thanks to Social Media, she's always only a tweet or email away. Sujata was trusted (for good reason!) with the enormous task of creating the Incubator school several years ago.   I met her during the year leading up to the opening of the school.  It was very exciting to hear the wonderful ideas and vision for the school.  The mission of the incubator school is simply stated...

I find it especially interesting that this was the mission of what started as a middle school (grades 7 and 8).  Now they are adding grade 6 and 9. I love the idea of starting this entrepreneurial mindset in middle school.  The vision (in my opinion) is nothing short of brilliant...

To say that the vision is entirely in line with my vision of education would be an understatement.  So, with that said (and I could go on and on), let me get to my point of sharing my ideas for a high school program with Sujata (and now with you as well).

Our school district (Bernards Township Public Schools) has been talking about creating a STEAM program in middle and high school (with plans of bringing the ideas to the elementary school as well).  The ideas I outline below are primarily my own, but based on our recent STEAM committee meeting I will certainly be blending ideas that our district is considering.

I love the Academy model.  My daughter is currently attending a half day program at our county Vo-Tech program.  She is in the culinary program.  Vo-Tech has had it's struggles over the years as it has often been perceived as a program for kids who may be underperforming.  There, let's see the elephant.  However, i believe the model is so wise and should be experienced by all students.  Vo-Tech allows students to pursue an area of interest in an authentic environment.  

Creating an Authentic Learning Environment

I think that it is time to throw away the model where learning takes place in 40 minute segments, 8 or 9 periods a day with some reinforcement taking place in the form of homework.  This is counter to how I (dare I say we) learn.  For those of you who have followed any of my work, I continually speak about the Studio Environment I try to create for my students.  I am still confined to the 40 minute class model, but by providing choice in learning through a quest based program I have seen my students break free from learning only when they are with me.  In fact, even when they are with me, much of their learning takes place without my instruction.  

Learning Spaces vs. Classrooms

If I were tasked with creating a school program (or a school for that matter), learning spaces would be at the center of the physical plant planning.  A classroom with desks in rows and the teacher in the front of the room.  Puh-lease!  In the sixties they tried to create something akin to learning spaces through an open floor plan.  Sadly, when you visit most of these spaces you will say how the file cabinets, bookshelves, etc have been used to break the spaces back up into what looks more like a traditional classroom.  Perhaps the idea was ahead of it's time but also didn't quite meet the true needs of a learning space.  The idea was to foster large group learning and interdisciplinary study.  Not a bad idea, but clearly there were issues.  We can learn from this.  In an academy situation, the learning spaces would be more aligned to the learning themes.  My vision would be to have large spaces that create the studio environment I talk about. Resources should be available for students to utilize for project / problem based learning tasks.  I will touch more on this in context...

Production, production, production, and embracing failure!

Students need to be creators, not consumers of content.  Well, there is much great content that they should be consuming, but only when done so in context.  Have you ever watched a kid learn outside of school?  As a parent of two girls, I have been amazed to see how my daughters go right to youtube to learn how to do things and then proceed by creating original projects only to return to youtube to share their newfound knowledge.  I teach video game design and development.  My students are ALWAYS creating.  If I can quote President Obama, leading up to Computer Science Education Week last year he said, "Don't just buy another video game, Make one!"  Music to my ears.  With this in mind, we need to tap into student passion.  Students should be encouraged to pursue their interests.  We can tie this into the curriculum and meet learning goals through the process.  As for failure, I was glad to see that the Incubator School vision includes "generate fresh ideas, collaborate, tinker, text, execute and learn from their mistakes."  This statement really gets to the heart of learning from failure without using the word failure :)  

The learning environment, as I envision it would have a beautiful space with technology, related resources, equipment, etc.  I believe it would be very important to showcase the work through the production of video and images throughout the projects.  The process should be documented by students in an audio / visual diary which can be shared in parts of it's entirety.

Co-Learning

Another philosophy on teaching and learning that I am committed to is the idea of being a co-learner with our students.  I believe that one of the primary goals of education is to teach students how to learn.  How better than to allow students to see us in the role of learner.   I LOVE to learn.  I am always learning.  I love when my students come up with a problem that I don't know the answer to and we can conference regarding possible solutions and we can engage in learning together.  

Creating and nurturing a community of learners

I am a firm believer that schools should be at the center of the community.  Students should want to spend time at school.  Schools should be open to students after the last bell has rung (that's if we have the need to have bells at all, but you get the idea).  Community members should be stakeholders in the school and the school community should be stakeholders in the community.  The incubator is all about entrepreneurship so it would only make sense for the school to reach out and provide services for businesses and members of the community.  Community members should be clients and should feel invested in the school community (and vice versa).

Celebrating all Stakeholders

Another critical piece is to make sure that good work, effort, thinking, etc. is celebrated. In order to create a truly engaging and inspiring learning environment it is important to recognize all stakeholders.  Often this piece is overlooked, but as my #ECET2 and connected educator friends know, it really should be at the center!

So, Sujata, to answer your question... I envision (as you mentioned) strands that allow students to choose an area of study, thus creating a number of schools within the school.  I love the idea of students being involved in the leading of the school.  This can be achieved through the design of their own projects.  Collaboration should be at the core.  Students should be able to find their niche within a project area.  In my class, students often come to find that they prefer graphic design or sound engineering over the game programming.  This can work out perfectly and if this helps a student find their passion, I say YAY!  The learning space is so important. The space should include availability of a wide variety of resources and when those resources are not available there should be an opportunity for students and teachers to be creative in terms of reaching out to the community.  I hope you find some of my ideas to be in line with yours (I have a feeling you will).  Your tweets inspired me to put many of my thoughts in words.  Thank you for that.

Serious experience in games

This post has been in my draft folder for ages - I actually forgot it was there for a while but I finally came back and finished it off.

 

So, I've been thinking more and more lately about game-play that is engaging but not exactly your traditional idea of "fun". Tim Marsh calls this sort of thing "serious experience" and points out it can be quite a good way of raising awareness and getting people to think about various topics. In terms of the recent competition that I organised for CHI+MED, I was hoping that some of the entries would go in this direction, and it was something I think the winner - Nurse's Dilemma - managed to achieve. I'm probably going to say a bit more about the competition and the judging process at some point but for now I want to focus more on the commercial games I've been playing and how they've been able to provide compelling game-play that deals with serious topics in different ways.

Possibly the first example I came across, quite a while ago now, was Hush (below). Hush was created back in 2007 by USC game design students Jamie Antonisse and Devon Johnson. Set 1994 Rwanda, during a Hutu raid on a Tutsi community but instead of being a soldier, the player takes on the role of "Liliane", a mother trying to hush her child to sleep. If the lullaby falters, the baby begins to cry, and the Hutu soldiers will discover their hiding place. This is a short but tense rhythm game that is effective in conveying a sense of dread - playing it not only affected me on an emotional level but made me want to find out more about the context it was set in. Hush has been described by Jonathan Belman and Mary Flannagan as providing "a viscerally engaging experience of the value of empathy" and critiqued as a vignette by Ian Bogost.

More recently, I played Papers, Please, after downloading in on Steam. This is a rather different sort of game, set in a fictional eastern European country where you play a border control officer. Game-play consists of checking an increasing number of documents and making sure there are no inconsistencies between the information they provide and what people say. It's a difficult game but after you get the hang of the initial mechanics, it's strangely compulsive. At the end of each day you get a summary screen where you realise your wages don't exactly go very far (see below). So before you know it, you start to appreciate the "I was only following orders’ defence” as you struggle to provide for your family. There is humour here but the intriguing narrative and game mechanics create an experience that got me thinking about another controversial subject matter - immigration, on the side of both the immigrants and border guards!

The last game I'm going to mention is Gone Home. There has been some debate over whether this is an actual game or not, but it felt like a game experience to me and one I was definitely engrossed by. You play Kaitlin Greenbriar who returns home one stormy night in the summer of 1995, after a year abroad to find there is no one home. Apart from a cryptic note from her sister Samantha, it's not clear what's happened so all you can do is explore the big old spooky mansion your family moved in while you were away to find out what's been going on. Note: spoiler alert below!

The strength of Gone Home is in it's narrative and I'm a sucker for a mystery that needs solving... Plus, I knew enough about the game to know zombies weren't going to jump out at you or anything. That said, the Fullbright team did a great job of creating a sense that something was about to happen...  I have never come across a game that even attempted to deal with a direct LGBT storyline, let alone one that managed to do it in such a sensitive way. Perhaps I'm biased, but the narrative resonated with me in a personal way that's just not happened when I've been playing a  game before. Playing it made me very glad that there are people out there who are experimenting with games as a medium and tapping into a broad range of human experience.