The Three Levels of Game Design

I had an interesting meeting with Emmett Tomai, who teaches computer gaming in the Computer Science Department here at UTPA. He had some interesting insights into the history of gaming, including educational gaming, as well as the benefits and limits of educational gaming. We agreed that games designed for educational purposes can be divided into three types.

“Activities” 

These are often modules that provide an activity that reinforces memory of a more traditional lesson, either online or f2f. Very common in elementary school. Here’s the link to just one of the companies that design and sell such simple “modular” games: http://www.abcya.com/

“Distraction” or “Entertainment”

These might be modular or be a long game. The idea of these sorts of games is that there is learning—and there is a game associated with that learning that makes it less boring due to the entertainment value of the game. Think, “A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.” The learned in these sorts of games is not intrinsic to the game universe, but a byproduct. City Witness, http://www.medievalswansea.ac.uk/en/, is an example of this sort of game. There are rich resources in this game. They are not required, however, to actually play the game. The instructor must step in to use these resources for deeper learning. In the game itself, players ask witnesses preloaded questions. The historical and cultural significance of those questions and answers is enriched by the added materials, but is not necessary to playing the game itself.

Here’s how an instructor might have students play the game, which allows five different answers to the basic, “What happened?” question. Then, do research in those materials in order to support their choice, either in an essay or a classroom debate.

“Interactive”

I don’t have an  example of this level of integration between a game and learning, though I keep looking. In this level of gaming, the learning and the activities are intrinsic, that is, one cannot play the game without learning, and learning means learning how to play the game as Gee insists. Players would advance through more and more difficult levels, and resources such as those in City Witness would be required more and more as players advanced through each level. The activities are not tacked onto learning, neither is the game a distraction to keep students going while they learn. I'd love to see this game developed.