Intellectual production #2 – revised

Digital Games & Learning: Reviews of Research

Original submission: Intellection production #2

Checa, D., & Bustillo, A. (2020). A review of immersive virtual reality serious games to enhance learning and training. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 79(9-10), 5501-5527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-019-08348-9

Summary: Through this literature review, authors Checa and Bustillo (2020) sought to identify the standards of virtual reality and serious games (VR-SGs) in learning and training. The authors noted that previous reviews focused on either learning or training, and with their broader review they would examine how VR-SGs can be used in both areas to enhance knowledge acquisition and skill development.

Overall, the authors found that using VR-SGs for learning and training were more effective than using traditional methods. VR-SGs are more practical and learner-centered, whereas traditional methods are typically more abstract and controlled by the teacher.

However, due to limitations of available studies, further study is needed to fully understand the effectiveness of VR-SGs in learning and training, such as whether they are more effective in enhancing learning or training, what designs are effective in which contexts, and how VR-SGs can support learning experiences as a whole.

Research methods: The analysis was mixed methods, using quantitative data to summarize distributions of the factors and qualitative data for user satisfaction. Studies were identified through two databases plus VR industry sources. Of the 11,183 articles identified, those that did not fit their aim and criteria were filtered out, resulting in 135 articles analyzed for this review.

Critical evaluation: While the review provided a good summary, more details are needed to support its findings. The database search did not include alternate keywords such as “immersive” and “development”; alternative keywords could have resulted in additional studies that altered the findings. No information was provided on design; an analysis on the designs, perhaps using Fullerton’s (2019) concepts of game structures and elements, would have provided context on effectiveness. The article also did not detail the approach to interpreting the studies, such as coding protocols to analyze user satisfaction; this information could have strengthened the authors’ arguments.

Powers, F. E., & Moore, R. L. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. TechTrends, 65(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00606-8

Summary: Through this scoping review, authors Powers and Moore (2021) scoped available research on the use of failure states to support game-based learning, and reviewed this research to identify the benefits and drawbacks to these states. The authors noted that while there was extensive research on game-based learning as a whole, there had yet to be a focus on failure states specifically, and with their review they would examine the scope, severity, and use of failure states in game-based learning.

Overall, the authors found that an ideal risk state, where meaningful representations of failure are supported by corrected feedback, can improve engagement, learning, and retention. In addition, learner anonymity can mitigate negative perceptions of failure.

Research methods: The authors reviewed literature to determine the research questions, and identified potential articles by searching specific and related wildcard keywords in databases. Of the 985 articles identified, those that did not meet the criteria of the review were filtered out, resulting in 14 articles for this review. The analysis was primarily qualitative, with the use of two rounds of coding to identify themes.

As for limitations, the authors acknowledged that through use of a scoping review, their research criteria and search may have limited the selection of articles for this review, which may have affected their findings. Future reviews should use additional alternate keywords and search in additional databases.

Critical evaluation: While the article answered its research questions using thorough research methods, it could have been strengthened by also examining the effects of these failure states in social contexts within and outside of the games. This would have better positioned the findings in the greater context of the world, building onto Gee and Gee’s (2017) argument that learning through games is influenced by and influences the player’s experience of the world.

References

Gee, E., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as distributed teaching and learning systems. Teachers College Record, 119(11). https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711901202

Fullerton, T. (2019). Game design workshop: A playcentric approach to creating innovative games. Taylor & Francis.

Powers, F. E., & Moore, R. L. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. TechTrends, 65(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00606-8

February 5, 2023February 6, 2023

Intellectual production #8

Game Design 101

1.3: Your life as a game

List five areas of your life that could be games. Then briefly describe a possible underlying game structure for each. (Fullerton, 2019, p. 9)

These are the games I play concurrently.

- Speed cleaning: A timed mini-game challenge where the player cleans up their home. It’s a slightly different challenge with every game, and the cleanliness of the home at the end of the game translates into the amount of health available for the next mini-game. (I like to have all the chores done before I start my workday, which means I speed-clean for about 10 minutes every morning. I find that the cleaner my apartment is, the better I feel about starting my day, which then translates into my ability to focus at work.)
- Taking care of houseplants: A slower-paced but continuous game where the player maintains the health bars of numerous houseplants. This includes activities like watering, dusting, rotating, and repotting. If the player is not attentive enough, it will be reflected in the health bars for the plants, and the plants will visually droop and turn yellow.
- Enrolling in courses: A speed game where the player must attempt to, as fast as possible, refresh the course registration page at a certain time and enrol in courses with limited spaces. If the player fails at enrolling in a course, they can add themselves to the waitlist and hope that a spot becomes available if another player exits the course. This incredibly nerve-racking game is available twice a year. The next round happens on February 13, 2023.
- Making money: A game where the player gains currency by completing quests as part of a guild. The quests are typically cooperative play. If the player is kicked out of a guild, they must find another guild to continue gaining currency. The currency is used to acquire items such as food, clothes, and a home, all of which are critical to the wellbeing of the player’s character. Additional currency may be used to acquire other inventory and power-ups; however, currency does not allow the player to acquire additional lives. The player can also use the currency to acquire entrance to the ‘education’ quest; upon completion of the ‘education’ quest, the player’s knowledge stats increases, which allows the player to take on more challenging quests at their guild and increase the amount of currency they acquire through completing these quests.
- Taking care of myself: A Tamagotchi-like–but much more complex–game where the player has to monitor their character’s wellbeing bars and take action as needed. These bars include hydration, hunger level, stress level, physical health, and quality and quantity of rest. If the player fails to address an issue with one of the bars, it negatively impacts all of the other bars, as well as the available resources to play all of the other games above.

Reflection/thought for my group project: These activities seem more fun to me as games than they actually are in real life. I wonder if it is because the idea of games implies that the game can be reset if the player is failing, and the player could try again with the knowledge and skills they built in their last round. This makes me think about how we can leverage “failure states” in our group project to enhance learning (Powers & Moore, 2021, p. 615). (This exercise also reminded me of the /r/outside subreddit.)

2.3: Objectives

List five games, and in one sentence per game, describe the objective in each game. (Fullerton, 2019, p. 34)

- Gran Turismo 7: Win driving races to earn increasingly higher-performing cars
- Awesomenauts: Get to the enemy team’s base by destroying their defenses, while protecting your own team’s defenses and base from the enemy team
- XCOM: Defend earth from alien invasions by managing the defense organization and commanding its soldiers in combat
- Overcooked: Prepare food ordered by customers, either by working collaboratively with other players or controlling two characters at the same time
- Pokemon Yellow: Catch Pokemon and use them in battle to earn badges and become the best Pokemon trainer

Reflection/thought for my group project: As I look at these objectives, I see that these games, as with many other games, focus on solving problems, building skills, and improving as the player progresses. How might we design for progression in our group project, ensuring the progression is “challenging … but achievable … to the players” (Fullerton, 2019, p. 68)? How will this be reflected in the objective of our game?

2.8: Story

Have any stories within a game ever gripped you, moved you emotionally, or sparked your imagination? If so, why? If not, why not? (Fullerton, 2019, p. 46)

(Meta Quest, n.d.)

The plot of Elixir, perfectly supported by its interactions, stuck with me. Elixir is a virtual reality (VR) hand tracking game, which means the player interacts with the game using the movement of their hands. In Elixir, the player is a human who is starting a role as the apprentice of a sorceress, and the sorceress guides the player in using magic with their hands.

Elixir was my first hand tracking game. I found the hand tracking to be seamless (i.e., not buggy, no lagging), which enabled a fully immersive experience where I could focus on the story.

(Vizm, 2021)

I was beyond fascinated when I learned to use fire and electricity with my hands, and shocked when my fingers briefly turned into tentacles–it all felt so real. After my first time playing, I recall being momentarily confused when I remembered I couldn’t do magic with my hands in real life. It made me think of Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy as “contributors to performance” and how VR can be used in training to “buil[d] muscle memory” (Bandura, 2012; Farrell, 2018, p. 26). In my mind, I had learned to do magic.

Reflection/thought for my group project: How can we “integrat[e] [our story] with play … [to] create powerful emotional results” and increase immersion (Fullerton, 2019, p. 46), so that our players can focus on the story and the learning?

3.3: Interaction patterns

For each of the interaction patterns, create a list of your favorite games in each pattern. If you can’t think of any games in a particular pattern, research games in that area and play several of them. (Fullerton, 2019, p. 64)

Note: If a game has modes in multiple patterns, I listed it under my favourite mode.

Single player versus game

(Gran Turismo 7, 2023; Grand Theft Auto V, 2023; Beat Saber, 2023; Meta Quest, n.d.; XCOM: Enemy Unknown, 2023; RollerCoaster Tycoon (video game), 2023; Pokemon, n.d.)

Link(s) to game page(s): Gran Turismo 7, Grand Theft Auto V, Beat Saber, Elixir, XCOM, RollerCoaster Tycoon, Pokemon Yellow

Multiple individual players versus game

(Kahoot, 2023)

Link(s) to game page(s): Kahoot!

Player versus player

(Awesomenauts, 2023; Jackbox Games, n.d.)

Link(s) to game page(s): Awesomenauts, Quiplash 2

Unilateral competition

(Bomberman Party Edition, 2022)

Link(s) to game page(s): (N/A)

Multilateral competition

(Fall Guys, 2023)

Link(s) to game page(s): Fall Guys

Cooperative play

(LittleBigPlanet 3, 2023; Overcooked, 2023; Streets of Rage 2, 2023)

Link(s) to game page(s): LittleBigPlanet 3, Overcooked, Streets of Rage 2

Team competition

(Mattel, n.d.)

Link(s) to game page(s): Pictionary

Reflection/thought for my group project: It looks like I gravitate towards ‘single player versus game’ games, followed by ‘cooperative play’ games. How might this influence my perception of games, and how can I be more mindful of this perception as I approach the design of our group project? How will we design our game to support the greater “distributed teaching and learning systems” (Gee & Gee, 2017, p. 1), especially considering the interactions of players within and outside of our serious game? In other words, how will we intentionally define the context of our game?

3.9: Resource Types

For each of the resource types just described, create a list of your favorite games that use resources of that type. If you can’t think of any games that use a particular type of resource, research games that do and play several of them. (Fullerton, 2019, p. 85)

Resource	Example
Lives	LittleBigPlanet Bomberman Streets of Rage Super Mario Land
Units	Overcooked (single player)
Health	Awesomenauts XCOM Pokemon Yellow (health of Pokemon)
Currency	Awesomenauts
Actions	XCOM
Power-ups	Gran Turismo (tuning cars) LittleBigPlanet (e.g., boost boots) Super Mario Land (e.g., mushrooms)
Inventory	Gran Turismo (acquiring cars to use on specific tracks) Pokemon Yellow (e.g., Poke Balls, potions) Grand Theft Auto V (e.g., cars, outfits)
Special terrain	RollerCoaster Tycoon (certain rides can only be built on certain terrains)
Time	Overcooked

Reflection/thought for my group project: As I’m looking at this list, I realize it reflects my preferences in real life. I don’t have the patience for turn-based activities and I don’t appreciate time constraints; I enjoy power-ups that enhance my life (e.g., smart lights, voice-activated trash cans, automatic soap dispensers) and I’m intentional about how I build my “inventory” (e.g., work, school, home). How might my preferences influence my approach to our group project? What are the preferences of my group members? How might these preferences show up in our discussions on game design?

References

Awesomenauts [Image]. (2023, January 23). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Awesomenauts&oldid=1135264586

Bandura, A. (2012). Social cognitive theory. In P. A. M. van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology: Volume 1 (pp. 349-373). Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n18

Beat Saber [Image]. (2023, February 2). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beat_Saber&oldid=1137028349

Bomberman Party Edition [Image]. (2022, September 10). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bomberman_Party_Edition&oldid=1109472645

Fall Guys [Image]. (2023, February 2). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fall_Guys&oldid=1137041790

Farrell, W. A. (2018). Learning becomes doing: Applying augmented and virtual reality to improve performance. Performance Improvement, 57(4), 19-28. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pfi.21775

Fullerton, T. (2019). Game design workshop: A playcentric approach to creating innovative games. Taylor & Francis.

Gee, E., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as distributed teaching and learning systems. Teachers College Record, 119(11). https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711901202

Gran Turismo 7 [Image]. (2023, February 5). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gran_Turismo_7&oldid=1137575656

Grand Theft Auto V [Image]. (2023, January 23). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grand_Theft_Auto_V&oldid=1135299753

Jackbox Games. (n.d.). Quiplash 2 [Image]. https://www.jackboxgames.com/quiplash-two/

Kahoot [Image]. (2023, February 2). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kahoot!&oldid=1137098441

LittleBigPlanet 3 [Image]. (2023, January 16). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=LittleBigPlanet_3&oldid=1134069778

Mattel. (n.d.) Pictionary board game for kids, adults and family night, drawing game [Image]. https://shop.mattel.com/products/pictionary-gmt97

Meta Quest. (n.d.). Elixir [Screenshot by Jocelyn Chan]. https://www.oculus.com/experiences/quest/3793077684043441/

Overcooked [Image]. (2023, February 3). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Overcooked&oldid=1137301481

Pokemon. (n.d.). Pokémon Yellow Special Pikachu Edition [Image]. https://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-video-games/pokemon-yellow-special-pikachu-edition/

Powers, F. E., & Moore, R. L. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. TechTrends, 65(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00606-8

RollerCoaster Tycoon (video game) [Image]. (2023, January 8). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RollerCoaster_Tycoon_(video_game)&oldid=1132448680

Streets of Rage 2 [Image]. (2023, January 31). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Streets_of_Rage_2&oldid=1136745637

Vizm. (2021, March 19). Elixir VR hand tracking full walkthrough [no commentary] 1080p 60fps [Screenshots by Jocelyn Chan]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mQjhq1Zk2M

XCOM: Enemy Unknown [Image]. (2023, January 16). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=XCOM:_Enemy_Unknown&oldid=1134028860

January 29, 2023January 29, 2023

Intellectual production #2

Digital Games & Learning: Reviews of Research

Summary: Through a review of studies on virtual reality and serious games (VR-SGs) in learning and training, the article seeks to identify the factors and standards of VR-SGs. The authors noted that similar reviews were narrowly focused, and with their broader review they would identify recommendations for further study.

The factors and findings included: target audiences included students of all ages and professionals; a prevalent topic was medicine; the most common displays were Oculus Rift and HTC Vive; the preferred typology was interactive experiences, which balances cost and effectiveness; and the average number of test subjects in studies on learning was greater than those on training.

The authors argued that VR-SGs, compared to traditional methods, were more effective in improving learning and training through “greater engagement, interest, and motivation” (Checa & Bustillo, 2020, p. 5514). Assessing the factors on larger scales would help determine the full potential of VR-SGs.

Research methods: To identify studies for this review, the authors searched databases SCOPUS and Web of Science. They also considered articles cited in these studies and additional VR industry sources. Of the 11,183 studies identified, they filtered out those that did not fit their aim and criteria. This resulted in 135 articles analyzed for this review.

Critical evaluation: While the article summarized factors and standards, more details on the methodology would have provided critical context to support its arguments. For example:

- The database search term was limiting, and did not include alternate keywords such as “immersive” and “development”. An explanation on the intention would be helpful.
- The article did not reference the reliability and validity of the studies. It also did not detail the approach to interpreting the studies, such as coding protocols. This information was necessary to support the analyses on design and “performance evaluation” (Checa & Bustillo, 2020, p. 5514).

Powers, F. E., & Moore, R. L. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. TechTrends, 65(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00606-8

Summary: The article examines the effect of failure on participants in game-based instructional interventions. Specifically, the authors sought to determine the scope of existing studies on the use and severity of failure states to support learning, noting that while there was extensive research on game-based learning (GBL), there had yet to be a focus on the use of failure within GBL.

The findings included the effectiveness, representations, and perceived risks of failure. In terms of effectiveness, findings suggested deliberate failure can improve engagement, learning, and retention. Representations of failure, or “unit[s] of failure” (Powers & Moore, 2020, p. 619), can take forms such as “degradation of character health, … points, [and] time” (p. 619). Risk was reviewed on a spectrum; too little risk lacks meaning and too much risk causes frustration, whereas ideal risk supports learning with meaningful failure that leads to corrective feedback. Another key finding was that learner anonymity can mitigate negative perceptions of failure.

Research methods: The authors reviewed literature to determine the research questions, and identified potential articles by searching specific and related wildcard keywords in databases. Articles that did not meet the criteria of the review were filtered out, resulting in 14 articles for this review. The authors then identified themes through two rounds of coding and summarized the findings.

Critical evaluation: The article answered its research questions and its methods seemed thorough. However, it could have been strengthened with a summary of any correlations and alternative hypotheses.

Related to the key finding around anonymity, it would be interesting to expand the research question to include the effects of failure in social contexts. Whether the games reviewed were single- or multiplayer, they exist in what Gee and Gee (2017) refer to as “distributed teaching and learning systems”, and it would be worth examining the role failure plays in the broader contexts of learning interactions.

References

Gee, E., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as distributed teaching and learning systems. Teachers College Record, 119(11). https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811711901202

Powers, F. E., & Moore, R. L. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. TechTrends, 65(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00606-8