[game_edu] game_edu Digest, Vol 48, Issue 7

[Ian Schreiber]

Well, the original question was using these tools to teach Programming, not Game Design, so that wouldn't be an issue in that case. For teaching design, I far prefer to use non-digital media; it lets the student focus purely on design without having technology get in the way or constrain.

--- On Thu, 11/13/08, Malcolm Ryan <malcolmr at cse.unsw.edu.au> wrote:

From: Malcolm Ryan <malcolmr at cse.unsw.edu.au>
Subject: Re: [game_edu] game_edu Digest, Vol 48, Issue 7
To: "IGDA Game Education Listserv" <game_edu at igda.org>
Date: Thursday, November 13, 2008, 7:07 PM

I am reluctant to use specific game-making tools like Unity or GameMaker for
teaching game design out of concern that they are specifically designed to make
games that are similar to what has come before, and so stifle students'
creativity. But I don't have any particular evidence to back up this
concern. What experiences do others have with these tools? Do they influence
students to recreate existing game designs? Is this really a problem?

Malcolm

On 14/11/2008, at 3:06 AM, Rob Holt wrote:


> For Unity, the educational is the same as the retail pricing, & I

> second use of the tool, it is amazing. It imports Maya scenes

> directly, can refresh them dynamically, & can also build for Wii &

> iphone. The UI is written using lots of OSX technologies, & for a

> while I think it is safe to say there will never be a PC or Linux

> version.

> 

> We made this in 2 days. The programmers had never used Javascript.

> 

> http://tojam.ca/games_2008/office_smash.asp   (Graphics Card Intensive)

> 

> JavaScript (& Actionscript which are both EMACS based) is a very good

> base language to teach programming to artists. The Unity

> implimentation allows quick results for a good feedback curve (really

> NOT trying to start a what's the best language thread, I suggest

> reading the last 5 years of Slashdot.org for detailed discussions on

> the best language to begin teaching).

> 

> On the Editor side, I wish GtkRadiant, Hammer or UnrealEd were as

> quick or friendly.

> 

> Robertson Holt

> IADT _ Toronto

> 

> ------------------------------------------------

> 

> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:31 PM,  <game_edu-request at igda.org>

wrote:

>> Send game_edu mailing list submissions to

>>       game_edu at igda.org

>> 

>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

>>       http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

>>       game_edu-request at igda.org

>> 

>> You can reach the person managing the list at

>>       game_edu-owner at igda.org

>> 

>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

>> than "Re: Contents of game_edu digest..."

>> 

>> 

>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>>             IGDA Education SIG

>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>> 

>> Today's Topics:

>> 

>>  1. Re: suggestions for readings? (David Thomas)

>>  2. Re: suggestions for readings? (Kim Gregson)

>>  3. Gamemaker for intro programming; who owns student work

>>     (Lewis Pulsipher)

>>  4. Re: Gamemaker for intro programming;      who owns student work

>>     (Steve Swink)

>>  5. Re: Gamemaker for intro programming;      who owns student work

(carl)

>> 

>> 

>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>> 

>> Message: 1

>> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:48:13 -0700

>> From: "David Thomas" <david at buzzcut.com>

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] suggestions for readings?

>> To: ai864 at yahoo.com, "IGDA Game Education Listserv"

>>       <game_edu at igda.org>

>> Message-ID:

>>      

<737c06080811110948m21e9d98dt240ce9c7913a5ff2 at mail.gmail.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>> 

>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Ian Schreiber <ai864 at yahoo.com>

wrote:

>> 

>>> As for the division between "play" and "fun,"

I'm not familiar with any

>>> readings that make explicit distinctions between the two, but

I'll go out on

>>> a limb and say that play is an activity, and fun is the result of

(or

>>> emotional reaction to) an activity, so the two terms describe

different

>>> things and can't be directly compared. But that's just my

reaction.

>>> 

>>> - Ian

>>> 

>> 

>> Can you play and not have fun? Sure.Can you have enjoyable play and

not have

>> fun? Maybe.

>> Can you have fun and not play? Of course.

>> 

>> So why do play and fun stick together as much as play and games (or

fun and

>> games for that matter)?

>> 

>> I think something else that complicates the "fun" concept is

that from what

>> I've been able to dig up so far, the term fun is pretty new.

It's not an old

>> word by any measure, and the way it is used in, at least North

American

>> contexts, is something different than "fun as amusement" of

the past 200

>> years.

>> 

>> It's a bit out of my area, but I am led to believe that the

meaning of the

>> word as we use it in English might be more an American concept, and

one that

>> has filtered out into other languages. I would certainly like to hear

from

>> my global friends on that assumption.

>> 

>> Sorry to tack this problem onto this particular thread. But I stumped

at the

>> moment on the fun concept and wonder either a) what I am missing or b)

if

>> there is actually a real problem here!

>> 

>> -- David

>> 

>>> 

>> -------------- next part --------------

>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

>> URL:

<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081111/600a3ecc/attachment-0001.htm>

>> 

>> ------------------------------

>> 

>> Message: 2

>> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:46:17 -0500

>> From: "Kim Gregson" <kimatiu at gmail.com>

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] suggestions for readings?

>> To: "IGDA Game Education Listserv" <game_edu at igda.org>

>> Message-ID:

>>      

<1441945f0811111046h7b39d18au2ca0e9547534bb99 at mail.gmail.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>> 

>> I see fun as an effect. In the case of my class eventually we want to

>> consider fun an effect of playing games. Entertainment, enjoyment, and

>> engagement are effects, too that we might see from media use, and we

have to

>> consider how all the effects are related. There's a developing

field of

>> study looking at  entertainment as a media use effect that I think

will add

>> a lot to the discussion too. Play is something people do. Games are

one kind

>> of thing (concept) people use to play

>> 

>> When we study other media effects, we consider a variety of factors

that

>> could affect the "fun" effect, including

>> - characteristics of the "media user" (in this case, game

player) - past

>> experiences, psychological factors, reasons for using the media, how

they

>> felt when they started using the media, genre they typically prefer,

how

>> they evaluated the media before we started (had they heard lots of bad

>> reviews for instance), how much time they have to spend on media use

>> - characteristics of the "media" (in this case the games) -

quality of the

>> media, difficulty of use, what does the user do with it (watch vs

interact),

>> content (really gory/bloody, sexual references, violence, characters

that

>> look like the user..)

>> - characteristics of the environment (in this case where the games are

>> played) - is the computer fast enough, does screen size matter, does

>> fidelity of the audio playback matter, does the temperature of the

room

>> matter, the comfortableness of the couch/chair matter.

>> 

>> We look at the effect too because there's usually a range of

responses in

>> that effect (in our case from not fun at all to so much fun I'm

going to

>> explode<G>) - how we measure comes from how we define it, how we

>> differentiate it from other effects.  We have to see if there are

physical

>> results of having fun as well as emotional results since physical

effects

>> would be easier to measure.

>> 

>> In my mind this is not something to be solved in a semester - lots of

good

>> questions and issues being raised right here and they've made for

>> interesting reading. But lots of questions can be raised, relevant

>> literature can be identified and summarized, some variables can be

examined,

>> perhaps a list of variables to consider in the future can be created.

>> 

>> I'd love to get  with people from a lot of different fields to see

how they

>> consider "fun" Probably they could suggest still other

variables and

>> measurement techniques. As David mentions - the idea of having fun is

pretty

>> new (maybe it's related to a certain amount of economic excess

that allows

>> for free time) but we know that games have been around longer than

recorded

>> history. Maybe the history and econ folks can shed some light; i need

to

>> track down some other email lists and get them in on the

conversation<G>

>> 

>> A lot of my research has been as a media effects person. So that's

my hammer

>> and fun is my particular nail today.

>> How else can we consider fun besides an effect or outcome? We need

some

>> different lenses to look at it I think.

>> 

>> Kim

>> 

>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 12:48 PM, David Thomas

<david at buzzcut.com> wrote:

>> 

>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Ian Schreiber

<ai864 at yahoo.com> wrote:

>>> 

>>>> As for the division between "play" and

"fun," I'm not familiar with any

>>>> readings that make explicit distinctions between the two, but

I'll go out on

>>>> a limb and say that play is an activity, and fun is the result

of (or

>>>> emotional reaction to) an activity, so the two terms describe

different

>>>> things and can't be directly compared. But that's just

my reaction.

>>>> 

>>>> - Ian

>>>> 

>>> 

>>> Can you play and not have fun? Sure.Can you have enjoyable play

and not

>>> have fun? Maybe.

>>> Can you have fun and not play? Of course.

>>> 

>>> So why do play and fun stick together as much as play and games

(or fun and

>>> games for that matter)?

>>> 

>>> I think something else that complicates the "fun"

concept is that from what

>>> I've been able to dig up so far, the term fun is pretty new.

It's not an old

>>> word by any measure, and the way it is used in, at least North

American

>>> contexts, is something different than "fun as amusement"

of the past 200

>>> years.

>>> 

>>> It's a bit out of my area, but I am led to believe that the

meaning of the

>>> word as we use it in English might be more an American concept,

and one that

>>> has filtered out into other languages. I would certainly like to

hear from

>>> my global friends on that assumption.

>>> 

>>> Sorry to tack this problem onto this particular thread. But I

stumped at

>>> the moment on the fun concept and wonder either a) what I am

missing or b)

>>> if there is actually a real problem here!

>>> 

>>> -- David

>>> 

>>>> 

>>> 

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>> 

>>> 

>> -------------- next part --------------

>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

>> URL:

<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081111/eec2699d/attachment.html>

>> 

>> ------------------------------

>> 

>> Message: 3

>> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 19:07:11 -0500

>> From: "Lewis Pulsipher" <lewpuls at gmail.com>

>> Subject: [game_edu] Gamemaker for intro programming; who owns student

>>       work

>> To: game_edu at igda.org

>> Message-ID:

>>      

<790382db0811121607j77564d7ah7f3425a1f6c3f0e8 at mail.gmail.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>> 

>> Do you know of anyone who has used Gamemaker as a principal tool for

>> teaching Introduction to Programming classes (not just for game

students,

>> but for programming students in general)?  It would appear to be an

ideal

>> way to put some fun into elementary programming.

>> 

>> 

>> Going back to the question of who owns student work, the response of

the

>> lawyer who writes the legal advice column for IGDA will be of

interest:

>> http://www.igda.org/columns/lastwords/lastwords_Nov08.php

>> -------------- next part --------------

>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

>> URL:

<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081112/58988df1/attachment.htm>

>> 

>> ------------------------------

>> 

>> Message: 4

>> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 20:28:30 -0700

>> From: "Steve Swink" <sswink at flashbangstudios.com>

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] Gamemaker for intro programming;        who

owns

>>       student work

>> To: "IGDA Game Education Listserv" <game_edu at igda.org>

>> Message-ID:

>>      

<ff1a1b790811121928s57f5fb8aw4a287c6a4613def6 at mail.gmail.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>> 

>> I haven't used Gamemaker, but if I may recommend checking out

Unity, I think

>> it's at least as good an option for putting fun into elementary

programming.

>> Plus, it's a proper 3d engine, has PhysX integration, and has

one-click

>> deployment to web, mac, and PC:

>> 

>> www.unity3d.com

>> 

>> It's what we at Flashbang Studios use for all our games

(www.blurst.com) and

>> I'm currently teaching it to a class of 27 art students. It's

going

>> surprisingly well; the language is similar to Actionscript, but easier

to

>> learn and use.

>> 

>> Also, the Unity guys are young, enthusiastic, and *extremely* open to

>> unorthodox licensing solutions, including extended trials and so on.

They

>> really "get it" in terms of building a user base. I

can't say enough good

>> things about them and the Unity environment.

>> 

>> Best,

>> 

>> Steve

>> 

>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Lewis Pulsipher

<lewpuls at gmail.com> wrote:

>> 

>>> Do you know of anyone who has used Gamemaker as a principal tool

for

>>> teaching Introduction to Programming classes (not just for game

students,

>>> but for programming students in general)?  It would appear to be

an ideal

>>> way to put some fun into elementary programming.

>>> 

>>> 

>>> Going back to the question of who owns student work, the response

of the

>>> lawyer who writes the legal advice column for IGDA will be of

interest:

>>> http://www.igda.org/columns/lastwords/lastwords_Nov08.php

>>> 

>>> 

>>> 

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>> 

>>> 

>> 

>> 

>> --

>> ______________________________________

>> 

>> Steve Swink

>> 

>> Game Designer, Flashbang Studios

>> Coordinator, Independent Games Festival

>> 209 E. Baseline Suite 201 Tempe, AZ 85283

>> 

>> (480) 393-0885, Phone | (480) 626-5992, Fax

>> (480) 353-6763, Mobile

>> 

>> www.flashbangstudios.com

>> www.steveswink.com

>> -------------- next part --------------

>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

>> URL:

<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081112/36e92c3e/attachment.html>

>> 

>> ------------------------------

>> 

>> Message: 5

>> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:31:45 -0400

>> From: "carl" <carl at measurand.com>

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] Gamemaker for intro programming;        who

owns

>>       student work

>> To: "IGDA Game Education Listserv" <game_edu at igda.org>

>> Message-ID: <003e01c94540$5ac4cc00$0a02a8c0 at sage>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>> 

>> - I like unity too. I have tried to contact them about educational

pricing but no reply so far. Do you know if they have educational pricing?

>> 

>> - any idea when their windows version will come out?

>> ----- Original Message -----

>> From: Steve Swink

>> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv

>> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 11:28 PM

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] Gamemaker for intro programming;who owns

student work

>> 

>> 

>> I haven't used Gamemaker, but if I may recommend checking out

Unity, I think it's at least as good an option for putting fun into
elementary programming. Plus, it's a proper 3d engine, has PhysX
integration, and has one-click deployment to web, mac, and PC:

>> 

>> www.unity3d.com

>> 

>> It's what we at Flashbang Studios use for all our games

(www.blurst.com) and I'm currently teaching it to a class of 27 art
students. It's going surprisingly well; the language is similar to
Actionscript, but easier to learn and use.

>> 

>> Also, the Unity guys are young, enthusiastic, and extremely open to

unorthodox licensing solutions, including extended trials and so on. They really
"get it" in terms of building a user base. I can't say enough good
things about them and the Unity environment.

>> 

>> Best,

>> 

>> Steve

>> 

>> 

>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Lewis Pulsipher

<lewpuls at gmail.com> wrote:

>> 

>>   Do you know of anyone who has used Gamemaker as a principal tool for

teaching Introduction to Programming classes (not just for game students, but
for programming students in general)?  It would appear to be an ideal way to put
some fun into elementary programming.

>> 

>> 

>>   Going back to the question of who owns student work, the response of

the lawyer who writes the legal advice column for IGDA will be of interest: 
http://www.igda.org/columns/lastwords/lastwords_Nov08.php

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>   _______________________________________________

>>   game_edu mailing list

>>   game_edu at igda.org

>>   http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> 

>> --

>> ______________________________________

>> 

>> Steve Swink

>> 

>> Game Designer, Flashbang Studios

>> Coordinator, Independent Games Festival

>> 209 E. Baseline Suite 201 Tempe, AZ 85283

>> 

>> (480) 393-0885, Phone | (480) 626-5992, Fax

>> (480) 353-6763, Mobile

>> 

>> www.flashbangstudios.com

>> www.steveswink.com

>> 

>> 

>> 

>>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>> 

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> game_edu mailing list

>> game_edu at igda.org

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>> -------------- next part --------------

>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

>> URL:

<http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081112/a360847b/attachment.htm>

>> 

>> ------------------------------

>> 

>> _______________________________________________

>> game_edu mailing list

>> game_edu at igda.org

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>> 

>> 

>> End of game_edu Digest, Vol 48, Issue 7

>> ***************************************

>> 

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu


_______________________________________________
game_edu mailing list
game_edu at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu



      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20081113/d973bd07/attachment.htm>