Back

Let's start from the end: often, we want to teach notions, which is not the easiest but can be done with some thought. A recent good example is Pentiment, an engaging mystery RPG deeply grounded in medieval history. Or maybe we want to teach skills, trickier but doable — here's a list of examples https://web.archive.org/web/20230118100105/https://www.fandomspot.com/study-video-games-that-teach-life-skills/

But be too literal, you make a boring game no-one wants to play and re-play. Make a fun game but the gameplay skills transfer badly into real life skills. #TheStruggleIsReal

#SeriousGames "[…] have an explicit and carefully thought-out educational purpose and are not intended to be played primarily for amusement. This does not mean that serious games are not, or should not be, entertaining." https://www.worldcat.org/en/title/serious-games/oclc/586081885 and therein lies the problem:

#SeriousGames can be used for professional training, decision-making support, instruction… but they offer no re-play incentive, and the play context – serious, professional, formal – doesn't typically help. They can be fun if done right, but… you're more likely to meet a #unicorn than to come across a well-executed #seriousGame. It's as if we gave up on trying to make things fun for ourselves and others on the pretense that "this is serious stuff we're doing here." Let's talk about this!

There's an assumption in educational gaming that skills learned in game can transfer out of the game: math game? Math genius! Leadership game? Awesome manager! Problem-solving game? Incredible reasoning skills! There is merit to the idea, but it isn't all so well and good. There is evidence that some skills transfer better than others. In general, higher-order skills like complex reasoning transfer better than more specific skills like flying planes – even though there is surprising evidence…

… of that happening, so… the jury's out? You can find studies that say everything and its contrary, and that's great! It's great because it means the question is open, and there are serious opportunities for research! https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1046878116671057

But back to the point, there appears to be an imbalance between how to make #SeriousGames fun and how to make #EntertainmentGames educational, with the former grabbing all the attention. Serious games are great and have very powerful use cases, but also very specific application domains! I have a nagging feeling that we just went "that's great, serious games will revolutionize education, let's all jump straight into that!" to which the answer is more like… eeeh, maybe? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEmuEWjHr5c

The gaming industry is great at producing games that are entertaining, clever, challenging, with re-play value that allows players to hone their skills and master the game. What it isn't always great at, and arguably shouldn't be, is embedding educational content into games. That's legitimate. But maybe the #SeriousGames community could benefit from taking a page out of the entertainment industry, or even actively collaborate, to create educational games that people actually want to play

… and play, and play again, and in doing so practice skills and learn things. I know what you're thinking, this sounds dangerously like #ImplicitLearning, which hasn't the best reputation in education, mainly because it doesn't seem to produce any learning at all and that's true, but that only means that we need to be smarter than that. There's a whole different discussion to be had here, but the consensus is that making the implicit explicit is part of the key to success.

This thread/rant is getting long now, and it's starting to veer off topic, so I'll wrap up for now and open the floor. I'd love to hear from educators, gamers, game designers, and game researchers. You'll find me here, and thanks for reading!

https://edugames.andreafranceschini.org