Games & Learning Porfolio INTE 5320 Kirk Lunsford Introduction The following portfolio is a select sample of work that was produced during the Games & Learning course INTE 5320 with Associate Professor Remi Holden during spring semester 2016. Works featured include blog posts, play session reflections, annotations via hypothes.is, and finally, an example of a brief game based learning proposal.
Contents I. Top Play Journal Entry II. Top Four Responses to Peer’s Play Journal III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis IV. Shared Play Session Reflection V. GBL Learning Experience Proposal
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
I. Top Play Journal Entry
http://us.battle.net/hearthstone/en/media/#wallpaper
Crafting Accessibility and Affinity Spaces, What I Learned by Playing Hearthstone
I chose to highlight the Hearthstone play journal blog entry for many reasons, but primarily to share what I learned about crafting a game and the value of affinity spaces to learn how to play a game well, or competitively. I learned that this game is relatively easy to play, however at a certain point the player inevitably hits a brick wall and must turn to affinity spaces to come up with deck crafting strategies. Or, risk being so frustrated the player quits. I made it over the “curve” and turned to affinity spaces to learn how to play the game competitively. The affinity spaces I participated in were both nurturing and essential to understanding game mechanics and strategies better. Expert knowledge is pooled (Gee 2008), game decks are curated by professional players. Newbies have opportunities to try these decks out and critique their play experience. This is the most critical example from Gee and Hayes that was experienced in the affinity spaces associated with Hearthstone. I discovered that I have never played a game that required reliance on the affinity space and much as Hearthstone. “Of course, we will argue that a principle of good metagame design is involving players as designers. That is, most positive social engagement in and around games involves, in part, players acting and thinking like designers.” (Gee 2008) We can see this come to life in HearthPwn and Icy Veins simply by scanning the landing page. There are forums for each class, recent discussions highlighted, top decks, contests, videos, and the like, all created around this deceptively simple game. This proves that people don’t necessarily need 3D worlds with multitudes of levels and systems to mod a game to engage people in the activities that Gee would call big “G” “Games” or “Games+”. Contrary to what we have learnt in cycle two readings regarding The Sims. The real key to success is just making games accessible on many platforms, easy to play, and easy to strategize or craft play experiences that can be played in 15 minutes or 3 hours. That’s what Blizzard proved to us extremely well with Hearthstone. I would definitely give it a “Games+” rating! Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
II. Top Four Responses to Peer’s Play Journal
The selected top for responses to peer blogs are chosen because of the connections to literature and theory as well as profound play experiences. In each play session shared, there were aspects of games and learning I have never thought of before. For example, Robert shared a game where mob mentality has an opportunity to rule the play experience. Susannah shared playing chess with her boyfriend, which of course, has many implications for meta-game relationship scenarios. Susan share her experience with Smash Up which demonstrated a game steeped in nerd and gaming culture. All of the commentary shared helped shape the way I see others as observers and participants in game scenarios. These blog posts were critical in shaping my learning this semester.
CAN CHESS MAKE OR BREAK A RELATIONSHIP? SUSANNAH SIMMONS
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
Play Journal Cycle 4 Robert F Piper
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
Play Journal: Kingdom Rush Frontiers
Lainie Hoffman
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
Play Journal: Smash Up
Susan V. Laws
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis
Annotation via hypothes.is this semester was one of the greatest challenges and greatest rewards. The best benefit to using hypothes.is was the ability to directly express inquiry and discussion to the highlighted text in the document freely. This was more engaging than perhaps a Canvas discussion, but the “open” quality made it somewhat less mentally freeing because of self doubt or wanting to look “smart.” Overall, the peer interactions and inquiry changed the way I looked at discovering critical concepts in course literature. Additionally, I discovered a few ways to be more “loose” with annotation rather than Canvas discussion because of the nature of the medium. However this took some getting used to, the experience ultimately changed the way I imagined theory, literature, and peer interaction as it comes together. Nurturing Affinity Spaces and Game-Based Learning
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis Gamestar Mechanic: Reflections on the Design & Research of a Game About Game Design.
‘Gamification Is Bullshit’
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis “Mobile inquiry-as-play in mathematics teacher education”
In-Game, In-Room, In-World: Reconnecting Video Game Play to the Rest of Kids’ Lives Reed Stevens
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis A User-Centered Theoretical Framework for Meaningful Gamification
Your Princess Is in Another Castle: Misogyny, Entitlement, and Nerds
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
III. Ten Annotations Via Hyphothesis Using a studio-based pedagogy to engage students in the design of mobile-based media
Using a studio-based pedagogy to engage students in the design of mobile-based media
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
IV. Shared Play Session Reflection Shared Play 2: Exploding Kittens How would you describe the social context of Exploding Kittens, and how did this inform what it meant to play? Location / Setting: Meeting room at UC Denver counseling offices (where Susan works) 5pm-6:30pm. One large grouping of tables, relatively private with few other people around. Few interruptions. Susan was moving between her work station and the conference room where the game was held. Players: Susan, Susannah, Lainie, Brian, Remi, Kirk, T. Vail (remote Google Hangout), Robert (remote Google Hangout). Teams: Lainie and Susan, Remi and remote players. Susannah, Brian, and Kirk all solo. Game familiarity: Lainie and myself have played the game before although limited amounts of experience with the game. The rest of the players were new to the game. We watched a video by the game creators on how to play the game on Remi’s laptop prior to play as well as reviewed the printed rules that came with the game. Game set up: The game essentially played as five players with one deck. We separated a two deck build out to play for 5 players. Each player recieved 4 cards and a “diffuse” card. There were 4 other diffuse cards reshuffled into the deck. There is a draw pile and a discard pile. Drawing or playing an action card, such as attack, would end the turn. Brian started first because he has the most impressive beard and perhaps most intimidating odor as well. We didn’t try to measure his spleen (see rules). We moved in turn clockwise from Brian. How did the social context inform play? Playing the game was mostly private (no on-lookers or other outside influencers) so it seemed like most people were relatively comfortable being playful, loud, and humorous. For teams perhaps it was a little different negotiating cards to play in a turn? The cards are very illustrative and some have potentially offensive graphics and descriptions. This was due to some of the NSFW (not safe for work) cards being shuffled in because of a borrowed deck. For the most part this was deemed funny but maybe a little uncomfortable due to location and school based play session. Perhaps this was a little distracting for some, which could affect how cards are played. However, due to this, the game had a more adult orientation and it felt like we were being “bad,” which of course, is more playful. What - if anything - did you learn during this particular play of Exploding Kittens, and what lessons (more generally) does the game teach? Surprisingly, we only managed to make it through one complete round of Exploding Kittens, although, the box shows “can be played in 15 minutes.” We did spend a lot of time negotiating the rules, such as attack cards. There was some conversation about: When does a turn end? Can we combine cards with the discard pile to make a set to be played as doubles or triples? When the exploding kitten card gets repositioned in the draw pile, can you cheat such as taking cards or manipulating the order of other cards? It’s also hard to hide your cards all the time especially the one that you drew. People are looking for the exploding kitten when people draw so eyes are focused closely on this action. It’s also possible to draw the exploding kitten and act like you did not. It could be repositioned in the deck with a “shuffle” card or some other action. There are many ways to cheat so we did discuss this during the play session. In fact, Brian mentioned he did look at other players cards, and I have to admit, if someone tilted their fan of cards my direction it would be hard not to glance at it. Why? because it’s in my advantage to know how Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
IV. Shared Play Session Reflection many diffuse cards they have. I can perhaps pick one up with a “favor” card or a combination of cards with the same icon. Aside from the likelihood to “cheat,” the game teaches patience and probability. If a player chooses to play several cards on their turn, and you know they still have a diffuse, its more likely that you can pick a diffuse card from their hand with a favor or combination play on your turn. There is strategy in knowing when to play cards, against whom, and when to collect or hoard cards. When a player has a diffuse card they are more prone to draw, if they do not, they may skip, attack, or try to take cards from other players. Critique Exploding Kittens: What established constraints, or “game mechanics” (such as specific rules systems), inhibited alternative forms of learning or creative expression? Yet why do these constraints matter? The way the game is played is pretty fun. When it gets down to it, a player wants to draw from the deck or take cards from other players to try to get a diffuse card but there are consequences. You could draw an exploding kitten or request a diffuse card from a player, through playing a combination, but they may not have one thus wasting a combo play. There is risk involved with the penalty of being removed from the game. This risk is highly motivating because it’s probably more boring to not play. However due to the removal of players from the game before it’s end, it could be incredibly dull for losing players if the game moves slowly. This is magnified with large group play. In all instances of this, losing players would probably be looking at their phone, or having other conversations outside of the play of the game. In this sense, learning about how to play better or “who’s winning” may be inhibited because the losing player is probably no longer fully engaged. Playing the game quickly may be more fun for players out of the game. Or, perhaps there are other opportunities for losing players to stay engaged like keeping track of who still has a diffuse or trying to look at other players cards. This could be detrimental to other players still in the game if they express information that could otherwise be secret or hard to track while actively playing. The losing mechanic ultimately has potential to create problems for the game yet it makes the game more fun in a risky sense because the penalty is high. From our second or third cycle of course readings: What one reading - and specific idea - do you find most relevant to playing, and perhaps learning with/from, Exploding Kittens? And why? “We will show how actual game play is shaped, sometimes in very consequential ways, by people and material resources present in the room but invisible “in-game.”” Stevens, Reed, Tom Satwicz, and Laurie McCarthy. “In-Game, In-Room, In-World: Reconnecting Video Game Play to the Rest of Kids’ Lives.” The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. Edited by Katie Salen. Although the reading selection refers to multiplicities of virtual video game worlds with physical environments, I found this concept of the game being shaped by other people or resources present (visible or invisible) to be a factor in the game. Throughout the play session myself and Lainie offered advice on how the game should be played at various times. This was because we both have played the game before, although we considered ourselves relatively new to the game. We referred to the game rules many times to confirm how we should play the game. This perhaps, shaped game play in a positive way by acting as a guide to explain the rules. Although it’s possible we could have manipulated other players by our interpretation of the rules. The rules weren’t overly complicated so it’s reasonable one could assess the validity of our expression of the rules. The possibility to “cheat” is also high and potentially “invisible.” We had several decks available while playing so it could have been possible for someone to take a card, i.e. a diffuse card, from the deck that was not a part of the game. Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
IV. Shared Play Session Reflection Also on a couple of occasions, players shuffled the deck under the table or with their back turned. Perhaps to hide where the exploding kitten was placed or maybe to take a diffuse card, or something else? Like any card game, there are many other ways to “cheat” or gain advantages that may not be readily “visible.”
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
IV. Shared Play Session Reflection
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
V. Affinity Space Summary
Reflecting upon the affinity space project for Unity Community, I experienced many things through participation. Through observation, I was able to notice how members engaged the space, and who was contributing the most, and how they were contributing. When I contributed to the space, I was able to see what members actually responded to best. I also noticed personal growth in myself. I learned some interesting things about game design, focus, time management. These are all things I can relate to as student and professional worker interested in games and gaming cultures. As I experienced personal growth by participation in the affinity space, it became clear to me the value of learning in an informal setting such as an affinity space. Perhaps the most valuable characteristic of nurturing affinity spaces I experienced was a connection to John Sealy Brown and personal trajectories by committed involvement in an affinity space or informal setting. I shared this connection with the space, although I don’t think it was so relatable to them as their focus was on games. I hope a few members did watch the video I linked and appreciated some connection to their personal learning. The affinity space presentation can be found here: Unity Community Affinity Space Project Presentation
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
V. Affinity Space Summary - Commentary
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320
VI. GBL learning experience proposal
If I was given the opportunity to create a game based curriculum I would love to learn how to use Unity 3D, and their educator toolkit, to design a game creation based curriculum. There could be different types of focus per curriculum and given time. I can see several key distinct learning areas with specific outcomes provided by Unity 3D: Area 1: Scripting in Game Development Learning outcomes: Assess program code, identify script types, understand programing terms Area 2: Game Objects and Assets Learning outcomes: Understand game objects, utilize models, distinguish components Area 3: Assembling a Game Level Learning outcomes: Understand UI components, examine lighting situations, understand video game art The “new literacies” involved with making a game or game assets and exploring an engine are by far possibly the best way to engage learners in 21st century skills and knowledge. I believe it’s becoming more common for students to accept game creation as well as playing games to be incorporated into curriculum such as seen in games like Minecraft. I would like to develop more skills and knowledge in the means for game creation in order to pursue this, and my involvement in the affinity space project fueled this interest.
Kirk Lunsford | Games & Learning Portfolio | INTE 5320