Learning in conference 4.-5.7.2006

In Espoo conference there was some nice informal discussion about the generation of electric games and media. This generation, which is named homo zappiens by Mr Wim Veen, has seemingly different ways to act, play and learn, which was in the centre of discussions. One discussion, partly f2f, partly in web, handled the narrative side of (learning) games.

Tuomo Turja wrote to Mr Daniel Schwarz:
> Your ideas of gaming and learning were inspirating. I was especially keen on the narrative side of gaming. I find it somewhat different to narratives of literature. In books you normally think how the story will go on, when gaming you may even forget the story and concentrate merely to individual sections of the game (battles etc.).

How to help the learning idea to be kept in mind in learning games?

Daniel Schwarz wrote back:
Regarding your question about the notion of narratives in dynamic and interactive environments like computer games:

1. There is always a background story, it frames all the user-actions and game reactions in a meaningful way. The story gives MEANING to the gameplay ( in respect of: goal of the game, challenges and resulting tasks in the game for the player)

2. The speciality of (background)stories in games is: they are so-called task-oriented frame stories which means: there is a main goal of the game that is explained in the frame story and then along the course of the game and gameplay there are a lot of subsidiary tasks that could be also endowed with story elements. These tasks have to be related to the frame story in order to deliver a CONTEXT that makes the gameplay MEANINGFUL.

So, even if you concentrate on a specific battle in the game, the battle needs to be in the meaningful context of the background story: You should know what you are fighting for!!!

The same for learning:
We need to embed learning in the game, so that it becomes crucial for the winning of the game...to put it very simple.
I hope, that helps!

best regards from Cologne,
Daniel

Tuomo goes on, in his blog (this one):

As Daniel Schwarz mentioned above, in the core of learning is meaning: we learn when we are motivated to learn, when we find it meaningful. And the opposite. The same goes with playing: we play when it's meaningful. The meaning of playing is joy, the meaning of (formal) learning is more instrumental. The common thing fo those two activities is curiosity. That is the link to narratives of both e-plays and e-learning.

In the games there's often a mission, a goal that players aim to reach. In many cases the goal is formulated by levels ("at which level you are?") so that the goal is to get to the end of the final level. That is the simpliest way to tell the story of the game - and quite usual, too.