The Game Learner

The further into the process of designing the Exploring the CEE (working title) game, an orientation game to our Flexible Learning Solutions team, the more complicated it seems to get.

I’m hamstrung by a few aspects but they mostly all come down to my use of FPS Creator.

I’m something of a newb in my use of FPS Creator, the game creation software that I’m using for this and my knowledge of the underlying scripting that can be used to create interactions between the player and other characters. I know very little about 3D modelling (although my colleague Bec seems to have worked this out thankfully) and while I’ve played my fair share (perhaps more than my fair share) of games, the principles of game design themselves are relatively new to me.

The initial intention of this game was to serve a prototype to get a feel for game design, so I’m regularly having to remind myself that it’s better to do something simple well than to over reach. The game is also intended to act as a promotional tool for our area, a way of showcasing some of our knowledge base, the resources we have available to teachers and the ideas that we can help them with.

In my initial design process, I was heavily focussed on the information landscape that I was building – largely influenced by the very interesting writings of Fabice Florin from the early 1990s. It was all about using metaphors and creating virtual spaces with strong logical connections to the information. Using our building and our office seemed pretty sensible in this regard. I was also quite determined to have a very open and democratic information landscape that allowed the user/player to be as free in the way they accessed the information as possible. (Much in the sandpit genre of games – like the Grand Theft Auto series). The player could theoretically choose only the aspects of the game that interested them specifically by moving to that part of the space. (Of course, even in GTA you have to complete certain missions to move the story along).

The more I work with FPS Creator however, the more I wonder how much I’m going against the nature of the programme – and the genre.

FPS Creator is a very nifty piece of software for what it does – allowing game making novices to build 3D games where they run around in first person perspective, shooting enemies to progress to the end of the game. Taking the shooting out of the game to make Exploring the CEE is slightly subversive as it is, repurposing the whole experience, but I’m just now realising that the First Person Shooter genre is much more geared towards a heavily linear storytelling experience.

Some of the limitations of the FPSC software are that it struggles with large rooms with a lot of entities (furniture, characters, objects like cdroms and folders) as it favours a series of smaller rooms with more twists and turns. Interaction is predominately with weapons and enemies, so conversation and collaboration are low on the list of priorities for most users of the software – however this would be the area of the game that would be the most useful for our particular needs.

We had been thinking about some scoring systems to help measure player progress – rising student grades and student satisfaction levels – however, again, being designed for FPS’, it’s all about diminishing health and ammunition levels.

It allows for players passing over particular parts of the map to trigger audio/video/graphic files and some of the FPSC community (a lively modding scene) have devised basic scripts to enable simple conversations between the player and non-player characters – although these don’t have the depth that we would really want in our game.

Players can also trigger audio/video/graphic files by interacting (passing over/close to) game objects such as folders, cdroms and the like. This appears at the moment to be the extent of which we can work with this game. (I may learn more in time but I have to come back to the do something simple well principle).

After chats with members of our team, where I laid out the driving game elements that I’ve come up with so far (mentioned previously here) , we’ve come up with some possible models for the game play to follow. None seem perfect but offer some options at least.

The background story, of the player being a teacher trying to improve their existing, (boring) course – Theory of Occupational Health and Safety- in pursuit of the coveted Teacher of the Year award. The player is in direct competition with a colleague – the slightly annoying Peta Perfect.

The game map is a representation of the campus here at Southside – the FLS team is located in A block which is connected to the players dept in D block by a large corridor. This corridor takes about 40 seconds to cross at present, which could be seen as dragging somewhat, particularly if the player needs to go back and forth.

1. Sandbox style talker:

Talking forms the only interaction in this game – there is a relatively large collection of NPCs who just have one conversational audio file associated with them, triggered whenever the player stands next to them. Some (but not all) of these NPCs will have helpful information pertaining to the Flexible Learning Solutions team and when they give this information out, the player’s score is increased. One of the player’s main goals here is 100% completion.

The score issue here is a problem as it falls outside the functions of the software – it may be possible to have particular useful objects appear or doors unlock (which the player would need to be made aware of) once the player has spoken to the NPC. What purpose these objects have or where the unlocking doors lead is uncertain.

Pluses: Simple goals and activity 
Minuses: Don’t know how to implement the scoring system for 100% completion. Seems slightly passive.  

2. Two level game:

This option breaks the game into two separate activities – the player firstly has to identify all of their teaching needs that can be supported/enhanced by the FLS team by moving around D block only (A block is locked) and talking to their colleagues. Each colleague – six in total – has information that relates to one aspect of FLS team expertise.
This would require a system for tracking the fact that the learner has interacted with each of the 6 respective colleagues which then enables them to exit via the door to the corridor to A Block. (This would use a “Win Zone” which tells the game that they player has completed the level and moves on to the next one.)

In the second (A Block) level, the player begins at the entrance to A block and finds the FLS office. They would then interact with the FLS team members in a similar way to the first level. Moving up to the characters would trigger a cut-scene animation which would feature a conversation between the player and the FLS team member about the options that FLS has for supporting them with their relevant issue.

It may be that the FLS team member directs the player to access/use an object located in the FLS office. This could include a computer terminal which has a screen-capture video of FLS website, a folder with a text-based list of workshops or how-to guide resources, a cd-rom showcasing previous projects or potentially other objects.

The player “wins” by completing these 6/12 interactions, which unlocks a door and gives them access to the Teacher of the Year trophy – awarded to them in another cut-scene animation.

Pluses: avoids the A/D block trudge, simplifies the maps, talking to FLS person and interacting with object model is good (could be used in any of these)
Minuses: does it suggest that FLS can’t help teachers find solutions ourselves? can the player interact with the FLS office objects independently? 

3. D block to A block and back again (and again)

This is the initial model I had in mind but the drawback is the time that the player needs to spend between missions traversing the corridor between A and D block.

The player has full access to the entire building and after the initial cut-scene animation that sets up the story, can either explore D block and interact with (get information from) their colleagues (and perhaps students?) OR go directly to A block and explore the FLS office.

They would generally need to activate a mission by speaking to one of their colleagues but it would be nice if they could also do this by speaking directly to the FLS team member. (The gameplay mechanics behind this however make it more complex that I’m currently able to do). There would also be freely accessible FLS resource objects around the FLS office (the cdroms etc mentioned in option 2). There could also be an FLS pamphlet or CD-Rom available in the D block offices of the player in the first place.

Given the limitations of the gameplay options, the player would probably have to trigger the mission by speaking to a colleague and then go to A block to complete it. If they speak to the wrong FLS member, it would be nice if they could say (for example) – sorry, I’m Bec and I support graphic design – you’re looking for Colin. (This is more than I can currently do at the moment though.)

As speaking to colleagues would be optional in this case, it would only be by interacting with the FLS team members that the player would access special items OR unlock doors to give them access to the winner’s trophy.

Pluses: Full sandpit style gameplay
Minuses: Fair bit more complicated to make work, A/D block trudge, door unlocking option – is it contrived?

4. The Linear approach.

The FPS genre is conventionally a very linear one and this would entail redesigning the whole map so that each task would logically (and physically) come after another.

This runs counter to one of the main purposes of the game, which is to provide a relatively realistic orientation to the FLS team and their physical location.

On a practical level, it would work similar to option 3 but mean that particular colleagues wouldn’t be available to trigger the next mission until the preceding one had been completed. Likewise, the appropriate FLS team member wouldn’t be available either. (and I’m not overly sure about how to do any of this just yet). The player would need to be made aware upon completion of a task that they now have access to another colleague and task. This would offer a sense of progress but could make the trudging back and forth between A and D block frustrating or contrived.

One option for the physical space which could work would be a corridor with doors (see through doors?) which unlock on the completion of tasks and allow progress toward an always visible trophy room.

Pluses: More suited to the genre and so presumably to the software
Minuses: Less realistic, much more back and forth activity 

General random thoughts and ideas.

Maybe one of the FLS team members is actually embedded over in D block in the first part of the game.

Can the player “win” the game without having to speak to all of the FLS team – what if they are only interested in two components?

I would like to see intermittent cut-scene animations showing that Peta Perfect is making progress, earning points/objects/unlocking doors and gloating to the player. This would be to spice up the sense of competition.

We could have a guide/mentor character that offers updated information on visits. (there is a script available in the game that allows for up to 3 sets of conversation files to be played – when the player returns to the character. This isn’t context sensitive however. Guide figure may offer advice on gameplay – eg – by touching the folders/cd-roms/etc, you can access information.

The player would have an opportunity for discovery learning in the game space before the opening cutscene animation which sets up the story. They find themselves alone in their office which is shared with three other teachers. They can wander around the office but not leave just yet.

Their colleagues’ desks in the office have some interactable objects on them – folders which can be triggered by moving close to them. When they move close enough to the trophy on Peta Perfect’s desk, they trigger the opening, story-establishing animation clip.

These are the actions that the player can do:

• walk in any direction
• stand on or near objects
• jump
• crouch
• open doors
• trigger audio/video/graphics by standing near/on objects and people.
• roughly move objects by walking against them.

The player needs to make things happen, not just be caught up in an extended series of movies.

Purpose of an Orientation game – to learn about:

• Who is in FLS
• Where FLS is
• What we do/know
• What resources we have available (physical resources – toolboxes, handouts, software cds)
• What workshops we run
• Accessibility through on-campus presence

There is also an optional level available at the start of the game which offers training in navigating a 3D space in a First Person Perspective game.

Pixelate – a 28 y.o Swedish guy has posted a series of 4 really interesting Flash based games on the Kongregate web site that explain the underlying concepts behind games. They are called Understanding Games and are an interesting mixture of multimedia presentation with gameplay aspects that really are well worth checking out.

Some of the core elements covered in the first game are:

• Rules define the possible actions of the players
• Rules apply to all players and have to be made clear and intelligible to them
• Rules are fixed and you cannot change them to your own advantage
• No game can be played without the interaction of the player
• The outcome of the game has to be uncertain otherwise it loses it’s appeal
• The way that game elements are represented (i.e realistic vs abstract) influences the way we think they should act
• A more realistic looking game (e.g Rockstar Table Tennis vs Pong) should allow for more realistic play

The main points of the game are summarised at the end and are all well worth considering when thinking about using games.

It’s a little odd seeing yourself in a game as a 3D character. Our resident graphic designer and 3D champ Bec has been busily working away on the models of the team for the CEE project (happy Len?) and here’s me.

It uses the .x format (which ties in to Microsoft’s Direct X) and uses a .dds file for the texture. It’s set in FPS Creator.
Bec used a nifty shareware app called Milkshape to create the model.

(This is around version 12 – there were some odd problems with the model appearing teeny tiny and then being stuck in the floor for a while)

For the sake of comparison, this is a pic of me taken a little while back.

An earlier 3D version made more use of the existing character’s hair and made me look somewhat creepier – so it seemed only right to create a clone army of myself at the time.

Well, it’s the beginnings of one anyways – I’ve gotten a little stuck.

I’ve been working on a game to be used as an orientation to the services of our team – currently known as the Flexible Learning Solutions team. It’s being built using a nifty piece of software called FPS Creator (First Person Shooter Creator) which allows you to create first person perspective 3d games with a mostly drag and drop interface.

Here are a couple of walkthrough videos that I’ve made about it so far.

I’m now trying to document the whole game so I have a better idea of exactly what it is that I need to complete it. I’m using the suggested Game Design Document from The Computer Game Design Course book that I’ve mentioned here before.

This is what I have so far.

Exploring the CEE

Producer: Flexible Learning Solutions

Version 1.0

Chief editor: Colin Simpson

Game concept:

A first person perspective exploration of the services of the Centre for Education Excellence – first stop, the Flexible Learning Solutions (FLS) team.

Game synopsis:

You are a teacher at the Canberra Institute of Technology, vying for the teacher of the year award against your arch-rival Peta Perfect. Use the skills and resources of the FLS team to enhance your teaching, improve your students average marks and satisfaction with the course and win the trophy.

Gameplay elements and features:

• complete 3D version of the CEE building at Southside.

• Relevant, real-world CIT based scenarios

• interact with 3D models of FLS team members

• learn all about flexible learning and how it can work for you

• watch videos, read guides – all inside the game

• you decide the best path to take

Market consideration: CIT teachers and staff

Platform: PC

Story synopsis:

It’s the first day back at CIT of the new year. Classes start in two weeks and tells you and your office-mate, Peta Perfect, that this year’s Teacher of the Year award will be decided based on student satisfaction and marks.

You have a friendly rivalry with Peta, who has won the TOTY award for the last 2 years running and you would also like to make some parts of your subjects more engaging for your students.

One of your colleagues asks you to do a quick favour for them and collect something from the Flexible Learning Solutions team while you are visiting the Centre for Education Excellence at the Southside campus. From here you start to get an understanding of the ways FLS can help you to enhance your teaching by interacting with the FLS team members and carrying out tasks.

Each FLS team member has expertise in a particular aspect of flexible learning and the more FLS team members you talk to and the more tasks you complete, the higher your student marks and satisfaction levels get and the closer you get to the Teacher of the year award.

Can you get there before Peta Perfect does though?

Look and feel:

Exploring the CEE has a fairly naturalistic look and feel, attempting to replicate the actual environment that the CEE is found in as closely as possible, while incorporating some changes to the space to enhance navigability.

The space is well lit and walls around each team member’s area are colour coded with subject matter related icons for easier identification. These colour/icon combinations are also used to make objects in the FLS office (such as folders or cd-roms) more easily relatable to the respective subject areas.

Game objective:

The ultimate objective is for the player to be more familiar with the services and information provided by the Flexible Learning Solutions team.

In the game, the player’s goal is to win the Teacher of the Year award.

Game mechanics:

Players are able to increase their score for student satisfaction and grades by interacting with FLS team members, gathering information, completing tasks within a certain time and correctly answering questions.

Menu systems:

Exploring the CEE features an opening menu allowing the player to begin a new game, load a saved game or exit. This menu can also be accessed at any point during the game by pressing the ESC key and during the game it includes the option to save the game or return to the game.

Controls:

This game uses conventional computer game controls, namely the keyboard and mouse. The player uses the mouse to control the camera (their view of the 3D environment) and the keys to move through the space and interact with objects.

In-game information:

A HUD (head-up display) provides information about the players current student marks and level of student satisfaction. During tasks it will also display time remaining or number of objects obtained/required.

Character movement and interaction:

The specific keys used for the character to move and interact with objects/other characters are:

• A = left

• W = forward

• S = back

• D = right

• Space = Jump

• C = crouch

• T = open chat window

• Enter = Use/Interact with object

The player can trigger certain actions (such as picking up an object or playing an audio/video file) by moving close to the object.

Character health and power:

Characters in this game can’t be hurt and have no specific powers. They accumulate points for student marks and student satisfaction based on the completion of tasks and these points are displayed in the HUD.

Camera systems:

The camera view is controlled by the player using the mouse. It offers a 360 view of their environment in any direction. It maintains a fixed perspective (i.e no zooming).

Gameworld:

Game activity takes place in the A block building of the Southside campus of CIT. In attempting to keep the game environment as free as possible and offer the player the widest range of choices, it uses a sandbox model of gameplay, in which the player is (mostly) able to choose their own tasks from a collection.

Game physics:

The player is able to walk at a modest pace, jump up onto tables and across approximately 3 metres. Inanimate objects can be set to be static or active – static objects don’t move if push while active objects do.

Non-player characters:

These represent CIT teachers (and students ?) as well as members of the FLS team.

Head of Dept

Peta Perfect

Colleague teacher (how many? – up to 6?)

Student(s? – how many?)

Colin

Marg

Bec

Helen

Aaron (or Dan?)

Len

Equipment and effects:

Folders containing information about the 6 specialisations of the team

CD Roms which trigger movies/audio files

Trophy

Key to open doors to rooms containing the bonus points?

Animation sets:

Machinima movies setting up story and interactions between the player and the FLS team members.

Opening movie – rivalry between player and Peta Perfect is established, Teacher of the Year conditions set out by Educational manager.

You can also read a little more about the underlying educational design theories in the document attached to this post, which was a uni assignment last year.

I have a few problems at this point. I’m very mindful of the need to keep this game relatively simple, as it’s as much of a learning experience for me and the team in game design as anything. I haven’t figured out where to physically locate the player’s character – the offices used in the video are actually those of our Curriculum dept. I’m leaning towards putting the teacher (and the teachers colleagues) in another building – though I don’t know if it’s connected to us or not.

I may also need up to 6 colleagues for the teacher to have as starting points for the tasks, which begin when they come over and talk to the FLS team members. Where to put these teachers – and perhaps a student might be nice as well – is another question. How does the teacher get from their office to our building? I’d like to keep it naturalistic, so walking from a connecting building sounds reasonable.

The question of how the teacher accumulates their score is another big one – are they given an object (eg a folder or a key – which might open a previously inaccessible area) on completion of a task or is the score just automatically incremented. (Which I’m not 100% sure I can even do in the game software anyways).

How in depth do the scenarios behind the tasks need to be. I can see the value in having them reflect the actual reasons that teachers might come to us for help but these may be relatively complex to explain while still keep the momentum of the game moving.

What are the best ways to present information to participants in these games – given that this is a showcase, I guess we’ll try a little bit of everything to see what works best.

Lots of things to consider really.

Exploring the CEE design statement

I went out and treated myself to an Xbox 360 during the week and based on the growing mountains of praise, the first game I bought was the Valve bundle The Orange Box. This includes Half-Life 2, a couple of extra HL2 episodes, Team Fortress 2 and most importantly of all, the game I’ve been hearing oodles about, Portal.

This is quite simply one of the most brilliant, entertaining and enjoyable games I’ve ever played. It’s not a long game – I got around 8 hours of gaming out of it but every moment is better than the last. It’s set in a slightly futuristic lab complex where you are asked by a friendly sounding computer voice to complete a series of puzzles using a portal gun that you use to move between otherwise unreachable areas.
If you complete the tests, there is the promise of cake at the end.

This video should give you the gist of how this works.

The writing of this game is simply superb – your only interaction (as it is) is with the computer voice running the tests and some other robots along the way. There is a bitingly dark and funny edge to the whole experience which grows the further through the tests you get – a very corporate “you’re very important to us but this test will probably kill you” kind of thing. The strength of the computer character goes to show how important this is in making a good game.

The puzzles themselves get progressively more mindbending and force you to think about using space and physics in your environment in ways I’ve never had to before in a game. (Not that you need to be a science nerd or anything).

Most of all, it’s just a lot of fun and even the end credits are entertaining, with a specially written song by the computer that sums everything up nicely.

It’s not surprising that this game is popping up at the top of best games of 2007 awards all over the shop.

Best of all, I haven’t done the bonus levels yet.

The Game Career Guide is a sister site to Gamasutra, a fantastic resource all about building games.

One of the highlights of the site is the Game design post-mortems, where you get the benefit of months of sweat and coding all condensed into a few pages that offer up useful ideas, areas to avoid and lessons learnt about the design process.

The latest game post-mortem features a Flash-based casual game built by students at Carnegie Meillon, called Skyrates.

They started with one idea which quickly evolved as a result of wide feedback from user/testers on a forum that they had initially only set up for bug reports.

This is what the game was about in essence:

Skyrates set out to be a persistent multiplayer world in the context of a casual Flash game. The game is set in a world of floating lands. Players travel from skyland to skyland in WWII-inspired aircraft. The real-time flights typically last a few hours. By queuing up a sequence of actions, players can keep their characters moving for days without further interaction. Everyone who interacts with the world earns gold and has a chance to upgrade his or her plane.

Find out more on the site here.

Slashdot is widely considered the place to go for geek discussion about all matters I.C.T related. There have been a couple of discussions up there recently about games in education – what makes the work and what makes them fail. I think it’s well worth getting the perspective of players and there are a range of interesting points raised.

The first discussion was sparked by an article on Slate called World of Borecraft which bemoaned the way that “serious games” suck the fun out of the gaming experience. A counterbalancing article on the excellent game development site Gamasutra called Who says games have to be fun? adds some interesting insights into games in education and activism.

Slashdotters observed that:

• “If games aren’t fun, people won’t play them… we find games fun because we are learning and constantly challenged”
• “the much more obvious common denominator is: rewards. Give players their favourite rewards often. It doesn’t have to be big rewards, it just has to feel like having achieved something. And keep doing it. That’s what makes games fun.”
• “…the entire concept of play is based on learning. Just look at animals playing. Now look at kids playing. They are learning everything from refined motor skills to problem solving to empathy, character judgement, following directions, cause & effect, etc etc etc etc. “

The second discussion came in response to an article about the failure of a university developed game called Arden: World of Shakespeare. Among the criticisms (from the game’s own designer) included the fact that the game simply wasn’t any fun.

Given the MMORPG nature of Arden, it’s not surprising that a lot of the ensuing discussion revolved around this particular genre however there were broader issues covered as well, including:

• “Once the game stops being fun, the only thing to keep it going is the sense of community with the people you’re playing with. Once that’s gone, people move on.”
• “Whenever a regular MMO changes it’s rules, an almost instant flamewar commences and many people leave the game. If you want people to play your game, and keep playing your game, you will not be able to simply change the rules to test some theory of yours concerning economics… No, you’ll have to be busy keeping people interested, and not randomly changing the rules is one aspect of that!” (This reflects the need for consistency expressed in The Computer Game Design Course)
• “Games on interesting and intelligent topics that encourage the curious player to learn more. You should never ram the educational bit down the players throats.” (This comment from the designer of a Democracy Game)

I’m not sure that this really settles the notion of where fun comes from but it’s clear that if you don’t bring the fun, you lose the gamers.

(Thanks to George Siemens over at http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/ who found these originally and added his thoughts, which include the fact that ” Games fit the typical profile of academic envy, namely the condition where we see many people doing something and desire to then use the same tools or processes for teaching and learning. Sometimes it works very well…other times the effort required exceeds the potential outcome.”)

I’m currently working my way through The Computer Game Design Course, an interesting looking guide to some of the concepts that underpin computer games. I haven’t gotten far through it yet – still looking at game genres and history mainly – but already it’s offered a few insights. The authors seem quite passionate about games and have some fairly strong opinions about what works and what doesn’t (and what have been stupid, stupid decisions).

So far, these are some of the things I’ve garnered.

games are activities which have a set of commonly agreed ways to act in order to achieve an outcome, usually with a winner and a loser

Johan Huizinga – Homo Ludens (1938) –

Play is a voluntary activity or occupation executed within certain fixed limits of time and place, according to rules freely accepted but absolutely binding, having its aim in itself and accompanied by a feeling of tension, joy and the consciousness that it is “different” from “ordinary life”

Rules = Game Mechanics

Most commonly:

• Luck (the roll of the die or the turn of a card)

• Strategy (planning your moves)

• Diplomacy (how players interact and collaborate)

• Resource management (making use of your assets – scrabble tiles to gold)

• Territory control (protecting and developing your area, stopping your opponent)

Goals and rewards: a game has a definite goal that usually allows a player to win.

Many modern games don’t rely on winning as the sole reward but try to include some enjoyment for all players in the process of playing.

Strategy considered more satisfying that luck

Unfold the story as the game progresses

“A common feature of RTS games is a series of stages of progression which a player will have to move through in a set order to get better equipment and skills for his people. This is commonly referred to as a technology (tech) tree”

Total War series (Creative Assembly) renowned for their historical accuracy in settings and visuals and have even been used by makers of historical documentaries to recreate scenes from ancient times.

Game structure is the architecture of the game – how it all fits together, how the levels are laid out and how higher objectives are staged… Some games provide the action in a set sequence of events, with little or no variation every time you play it. Other games leave the player to his own devices and let him find his own way around.

Game structure:

Linear structure – “…They also make extensive use of cutscenes to inform the player of the goals, level layout, level access changes and key points of call necessary to complete the section”

Sandbox structure – “Open-ended, no linear structure, many different opportunities”

Single Player vs Multiplayer vs Massively Multiplayer

Single player – player vs computer – primarily two main components – puzzles and sub-class enemies – opponents wouldn’t be that interesting to play as characters in their own right

Multiplayer – (deathmatches etc) – players all begin with equal skills – can pick up extra tools/weapons and health etc with pickups – may require a degree of teamwork

Massively multiplayer (e.g WoW) – players don’t all begin equal, may have different strengths and skills. “Character power is usually a measure of how long they have been playing rather than actual skill, clever tactics or strategy”

“Puzzles in games maintain a player’s interest because they provide a challenge that they player knows has a solution”

 I’ll keep you posted.