The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Games have been renowned for being fun and exciting. They involve gamers participate in some kind of activities and basically they help people relax and forget about their worries at least for a few hours. So it does come as a surprise that some games are not only beneficial to us in a way that they distract us and involve us in their storylines, but they also help us acquire certain knowledge on the topics touched in the game. Now people may argue that many games only give us knowledge that is only really relevant within the concerned game. All RPG's and most adventure games provide the player with heaps of information about the dark forces, magic, background stories and the like. Basically there would be no use for that information at work, in school or at home (unless you want to be a know-all and run a help desk at lunchtimes so your mates can get help on games). But there are titles that prefer to stick with factual records and events to create a more believable environment.
It is pretty straightforward to understand that there is no need for educational games on consoles for two reasons A) there is specific PC software for that and B)Its going to attract less customers than a half-rushed Army Men Game...Games are supposed to be fun; people do not want to be reminded of studying or engaging their brain in any way. They just want to switch their thinking devices off and simply stare at the silver screens for the duration of the evening. This is probably why games that try to incorporate educational methods pretty much without having any storylines or action to it, get big fat scores of 1 from magazines.
But what about the games that are originally based around a winning formula and then try to take account of certain issues that are likely to teach the gamer something without actually making them throw a game in the bin. Admittedly, this is not an easy thing to do and at times things can go horribly wrong for the developers. If they decide to go for too much information and for little gameplay, the game will become a sort of an interactive book. If it has too much action and not enough information, people will complain about a weak plot and little facts to work with. So the balance needs to be exactly spot-on in order to avoid gamers getting confused and overwhelmed with the information at hand.
Info (be it real or totally fictional) can be passed on to the gamer in a number of ways. This may be done using a narrative, which can consist of FMVs or some ways of character interaction (Codec in MGS2). This is naturally the most popular way of moving the story forward and making the gamer aware of the plot. This is basically when the player does not get a chance to shape the plot the way he would like to. He may be left guessing what is going to happen next and imagine the following scenes but he hasn’t actually got an upper hand in what is about to happen. It is like watching a film after reading the book of the film. A film only portrays the director’s view of events; you may think that the scene at hand happened in a different place in different circumstances. This is why some films may disappoint fans of books.
Another way of presenting the information is just having it there. This could be achieved by just providing the player with a brief, a location and then the player is welcome to shape the story in any way he likes. Presently, this only works well with strategy games, where players are able to choose what kind of a player they will be-will they be the all-conquering pirate type, or the friendly ambassador type? The player does not just play a chunk of a pre-set code and watches another predictable cut-scene. Developers are now trying to incorporate similar features into their games and try and relate them to real-life issues.
Now you may think I went off-topic there, but infact I was contemplating that the types of presenting the data can make for a totally different game. Lets look at the popular Civilisation series…The game provides the player with a number of options which in itself are pretty useful to look into. The games featured a short profile on every playable character that provided the gamer with useful information on their personality, tactical knowledge in the like. The player had to read the info to be more successful at the game, and at the same time memorised the interesting facts that were presented to him. In similar fashion, the game taught the player about different terrain types and ways of producing goods. Whereas it was essential info in the game itself, who says it cannot come in handy during a geography lesson in school. And the best thing about it all was, that the information never seemed to be pointless and boring. The player was quite happy to sit through tutorials or discover more relevant facts because it benefited the gameplay and didn’t take any fun out of it.
Games like this are not entirely based (meaning they have not been edited so that they look more like documentaries) around the facts of the real world. They are games that fall under certain genres and the information used to either educate or inform the players is of course optional. On the other hand we have games such as Dynasty Warriors series. They are based in environments that require certain background knowledge in order to achieve the required effect. The game is totally based around factual events and again the research done by the development team has been input into the game. Ok there are a number of cut-scenes to help the story rally along but the top-notch action manages to balance out the information on the dynasties involved in the war and numerous tactical plans.
Some games manage to do something much more important than passing on certain facts about something or another. They introduce a different culture to the players in other parts of the world. The best example of that is definitely the Madden, NHL and NBA series. Considering that neither American footie, ice hockey or basketball can exactly be considered UK’s national sports, they more or less introduce the activity to the players. In my opinion the people of the world should not be slagging games like that for “stealing” their children from them, because these games may encourage youngsters to take up new sports. Yes after playing a basketball game, there is every possibility of the child saying “Ah, that look pretty cool. I think I will have a go at that”. For all we know games may help raise Olympic champions and celebrities. Same goes for music and rhythm games. They also may introduce the culture of a country to our homes. Not only do we find out about the given country, but we get introduced to various fun and exciting things to do!
So after all games are not bad for us. Maybe some titles could corrupt young kids or scare them to death, but there games are supposed to bring fun to our homes. And if the developers also consider the needs of gamers, thinking about their education and that by making a fun game they can also pass information along that may come useful in one situation or another. Games can teach us a lot just like books and documentaries do. If adults just move away from an image of games being evil, brain-shattering, conscience-corrupting types of media, we can all live happily knowing that games are good for us in more ways that one.
It is pretty straightforward to understand that there is no need for educational games on consoles for two reasons A) there is specific PC software for that and B)Its going to attract less customers than a half-rushed Army Men Game...Games are supposed to be fun; people do not want to be reminded of studying or engaging their brain in any way. They just want to switch their thinking devices off and simply stare at the silver screens for the duration of the evening. This is probably why games that try to incorporate educational methods pretty much without having any storylines or action to it, get big fat scores of 1 from magazines.
But what about the games that are originally based around a winning formula and then try to take account of certain issues that are likely to teach the gamer something without actually making them throw a game in the bin. Admittedly, this is not an easy thing to do and at times things can go horribly wrong for the developers. If they decide to go for too much information and for little gameplay, the game will become a sort of an interactive book. If it has too much action and not enough information, people will complain about a weak plot and little facts to work with. So the balance needs to be exactly spot-on in order to avoid gamers getting confused and overwhelmed with the information at hand.
Info (be it real or totally fictional) can be passed on to the gamer in a number of ways. This may be done using a narrative, which can consist of FMVs or some ways of character interaction (Codec in MGS2). This is naturally the most popular way of moving the story forward and making the gamer aware of the plot. This is basically when the player does not get a chance to shape the plot the way he would like to. He may be left guessing what is going to happen next and imagine the following scenes but he hasn’t actually got an upper hand in what is about to happen. It is like watching a film after reading the book of the film. A film only portrays the director’s view of events; you may think that the scene at hand happened in a different place in different circumstances. This is why some films may disappoint fans of books.
Another way of presenting the information is just having it there. This could be achieved by just providing the player with a brief, a location and then the player is welcome to shape the story in any way he likes. Presently, this only works well with strategy games, where players are able to choose what kind of a player they will be-will they be the all-conquering pirate type, or the friendly ambassador type? The player does not just play a chunk of a pre-set code and watches another predictable cut-scene. Developers are now trying to incorporate similar features into their games and try and relate them to real-life issues.
Now you may think I went off-topic there, but infact I was contemplating that the types of presenting the data can make for a totally different game. Lets look at the popular Civilisation series…The game provides the player with a number of options which in itself are pretty useful to look into. The games featured a short profile on every playable character that provided the gamer with useful information on their personality, tactical knowledge in the like. The player had to read the info to be more successful at the game, and at the same time memorised the interesting facts that were presented to him. In similar fashion, the game taught the player about different terrain types and ways of producing goods. Whereas it was essential info in the game itself, who says it cannot come in handy during a geography lesson in school. And the best thing about it all was, that the information never seemed to be pointless and boring. The player was quite happy to sit through tutorials or discover more relevant facts because it benefited the gameplay and didn’t take any fun out of it.
Games like this are not entirely based (meaning they have not been edited so that they look more like documentaries) around the facts of the real world. They are games that fall under certain genres and the information used to either educate or inform the players is of course optional. On the other hand we have games such as Dynasty Warriors series. They are based in environments that require certain background knowledge in order to achieve the required effect. The game is totally based around factual events and again the research done by the development team has been input into the game. Ok there are a number of cut-scenes to help the story rally along but the top-notch action manages to balance out the information on the dynasties involved in the war and numerous tactical plans.
Some games manage to do something much more important than passing on certain facts about something or another. They introduce a different culture to the players in other parts of the world. The best example of that is definitely the Madden, NHL and NBA series. Considering that neither American footie, ice hockey or basketball can exactly be considered UK’s national sports, they more or less introduce the activity to the players. In my opinion the people of the world should not be slagging games like that for “stealing” their children from them, because these games may encourage youngsters to take up new sports. Yes after playing a basketball game, there is every possibility of the child saying “Ah, that look pretty cool. I think I will have a go at that”. For all we know games may help raise Olympic champions and celebrities. Same goes for music and rhythm games. They also may introduce the culture of a country to our homes. Not only do we find out about the given country, but we get introduced to various fun and exciting things to do!
So after all games are not bad for us. Maybe some titles could corrupt young kids or scare them to death, but there games are supposed to bring fun to our homes. And if the developers also consider the needs of gamers, thinking about their education and that by making a fun game they can also pass information along that may come useful in one situation or another. Games can teach us a lot just like books and documentaries do. If adults just move away from an image of games being evil, brain-shattering, conscience-corrupting types of media, we can all live happily knowing that games are good for us in more ways that one.
Page:
No because I am waiting for more replies to my post so I can argue with them or consider tghe points made by the poster. You can see many people do a thing called POP, including notables and many respected regulars. You are letting all this get to your head.
You should worry about your own posts rather than other peoples. Have you read mine? Doubt it...Have I read yours even after you had a pop....Yes
You should worry about your own posts rather than other peoples. Have you read mine? Doubt it...Have I read yours even after you had a pop....Yes
Triple_H wrote:
> POP....come on few more replies...please?
ie. this can be classed as spamming
> POP....come on few more replies...please?
ie. this can be classed as spamming
Excuse me?
stop spamming u hypocrit! no one replied to my good post!
POP....come on few more replies...please?
Thank you Spike. Your point about war games is a good one. I was actually gouign to mention that in my original posts but then forgot about it. If the player is surrounded by a realistic environment that has existed some time before we were born, they are able to find out about that particular era. For example in MOH you may be required to memorise speicific battle locations such as Omaha Beach and the way you progress into the levels also represents the rality of what happened in real life.
Thanks again
Thanks again
Good post there mate, and i am very impressed with the points you have made that there is not really much i can add to that. I have to agree with pro evo and say that we don't really learn much from games these days, although through certain ways, whether it be cutscenes or whatever we do we don't come out like we would from some games thinking "i have just learn't something from playing that game".
Although sometimes that is not the case, games such as operation flashpoint and medal of honour give you a feeling of what it was like during wars and you might even learn a little too, i think the main trouble with educational games is that a developer would have to make it fun but also make you enjoy the game as a whole.
As you have mentioned MGS2 i would like to follow on a little..its great the way that MGS has used that to get the information across to us, but one problem remains, there was too much of it and people don't like to get bored, people want to play the game, don't get me wrong mgs2 is great but i'm sure a lot of people wished that the codec talk was cut down a bit more.
Again,Good post!
Although sometimes that is not the case, games such as operation flashpoint and medal of honour give you a feeling of what it was like during wars and you might even learn a little too, i think the main trouble with educational games is that a developer would have to make it fun but also make you enjoy the game as a whole.
As you have mentioned MGS2 i would like to follow on a little..its great the way that MGS has used that to get the information across to us, but one problem remains, there was too much of it and people don't like to get bored, people want to play the game, don't get me wrong mgs2 is great but i'm sure a lot of people wished that the codec talk was cut down a bit more.
Again,Good post!
Is that all I get for my hard work??2 replies??? I shouldn't be surprised I guess....Long posts la-di-da....
True, unless developers can really disguise the educational info well, people will be wary of the rest of the content the game offers. I mean be honest, the educational but is likely to make the headlines first. Daily Mail will be on the case immediately praising the video game industry and stuff...
Yeah, i suppose on some grounds that games do influence and teach people certain things. One game that has recently tried to do this is MGS 2 with its phylisophical views on life and death, through out the game you are told to respect life and any gamer playing that must take some notice to what is being said, i know i did, it even made me think about if for some time.
Other examples that you have used such as the sport games i too agree with, before the NHL games i had no idea about the rules of the games are even the teams that were out there. Now that i have owned one of these games i have a little better understanding of the game, and the same can be said for many sports, even the olympic type games that we have seen.
But that is where i think that teaching in games ends, i doubt there could ever be a really succesfull game that involved such things as maths or science within the game, foremost because i dont think that the developers would have the confidence to do it as it would be a mighty risk, and also i feel that if the younger gamers (which they would obviously be aimed at) found out that these games main aims were to learn them things then they would instantly not play them, no matter if they were fun or not. Most young people want to steer clear of learning at the best of times, and if they found it in there games, then im sure they would just give up on them.
But it all depends on how the developers tackle this idea....if they ever do.
Other examples that you have used such as the sport games i too agree with, before the NHL games i had no idea about the rules of the games are even the teams that were out there. Now that i have owned one of these games i have a little better understanding of the game, and the same can be said for many sports, even the olympic type games that we have seen.
But that is where i think that teaching in games ends, i doubt there could ever be a really succesfull game that involved such things as maths or science within the game, foremost because i dont think that the developers would have the confidence to do it as it would be a mighty risk, and also i feel that if the younger gamers (which they would obviously be aimed at) found out that these games main aims were to learn them things then they would instantly not play them, no matter if they were fun or not. Most young people want to steer clear of learning at the best of times, and if they found it in there games, then im sure they would just give up on them.
But it all depends on how the developers tackle this idea....if they ever do.
Page: