When Your Homework is to Make Good Games

Over on Wired's site, Chris Kohler has up a great pair of features on the growing role that game design is having in education. He had the opportunity to sit down with Mr. Henry Jenkins, one of the foremost authorities in the US on games and learning, to discuss the future of game-creation education. Schools all over the country are adding game design, art, and programming courses to their curriculum, and the article also mentions several high profile foreign programs opening in the near future. While the article is primarily about education programs, Kohler also had the chance to do a one-on-one interview with Mr. Jenkins. The piece has several interesting insights into how games and learning fit together as well as they do, as well as more details on the proposed Singapore/MIT game lab. Says Jenkins, "Some have said that the games industry has become so risk adverse that only a Miyamoto or a Wright can break through the formulas and generate truly original approaches to game design. Many observers have said we need to step outside of that system and provide some place where interesting new game prototypes can be incubated."

Goes both ways

[Fried-Psitalon]

Fair enough, but it's awful hard for people to make games that step outside of the typical when people are very, very shy of BUYING games outside the typical. Seriously - look at the top ten best selling games in the last few years; most of them are part of a series.People don't like taking risks on new games that could rule or stink at the prices involved in that kind of gamble.

People will mindlessly spend money on a game they are pretty sure is good, rather than take a risk on something that might not be. We all play it safe with our cash. Want proof that anything with a sequel on it will be bought, regardless of how much crap it is?

Mario Party.

'nuff said.

Re:

[robbiethefett]

or, how about an example of the exact opposite? like the wii. i guess the fact that its selling like hotcakes means no ones willing to spend money on it since it's new and unproven. i guess the ps3 is selling so well because of it's a member of a series.. oh wait.. its not selling, i forgot.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Both Sony and Nintendo have standing reputations that correspond nicely to their sales figures.

Sure, I'll buy a new Final Fantasy game because I trust Square/Enix to make a quality game. The same game released by anyone else I might be a little cautious about. This has nothing to do with Square/Enix taking risks and experimenting; I simply trust the brand. I have limited time to play games, so I try to make sure that games I play will be worth the time I spend.

Re:

[spun]

It doesn't help that there aren't any real unbiased sources for game reviews. The whole industry is so incestuous, no one can trust what anyone says about a game. People would take more risks if they had better information.

Re:

[bovilexics]

While this may have some small amount of truth to it, there is much more to it than that. It's not the case that unbiased reviews don't exist. Problem is that people don't pay attention and still by the same recycled titles that they are comfortable with. Don't blame the press for people being sheepish. There have been quite a few instances recently where MANY review sources were raving about a given title and no matter how much they attempted to get the word out it just didn't do any good. So don't te

Re:

[Tronster]

look at the top ten best selling games in the last few years

From some reading on a (hopefully accurate) Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org]. Top 10 PC:

1. The Sims (16 million)
2. Diablo II (15 million)
3. StarCraft (9.5 million, includes StarCraft: Brood War)[3]
4. Half-Life (8 million)
5. World of Warcraft
6. Myst (6 million)
7. The Sims 2 (5 million)
8. The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (4 million, including Xbox release)
9. RollerCoaster Tycoon (4 million for the original in North America alone)
10. Half-Life 2 (4 million)

That's 4 out of 10 that is a sequel. But on the console it's a different story.

1. Super

Re:

[Fried-Psitalon]

Come now...
The Sims (16 million) - okay, probably not a sequel, but Maxis didn't put "Sim" on it by mistake
Diablo II (15 million) - sequel
StarCraft (9.5 million, includes StarCraft: Brood War)[3] - you mean "Warcraft in Space?" isn't a sequel? Granted, great game on its own right, but it was originally purchased because of the "Craft" and Blizzard's name.
Half-Life (8 million) - not a sequel
World of Warcraft - See "The Sims." Blizzard named it what they did for a reason.
Myst (6 million)

Re:

[blahplusplus]

"People don't like taking risks on new games that could rule or stink at the prices involved in that kind of gamble."

The problem is not with gamers, it's with how much games cost. Games have not seen any significant cost reduction at all at RETAIL when they are first released. THIS is the barrier to why "games don't sell", games cost too much to make and are in fact to expensive to buy unless it is a killer AAA title, if you wnat people to buy more games. 1) Figure out a better business model 2) Outsourc

Re:

[AikonMGB]

The parent brings up an important point about a user's tendency to avoid risky game purchases, but just a thought to add to that.. I would venture that a large number of gamers out there wouldn't hesitate to download the latest <insert genre> game just to see if its any good; if its not, they don't buy the game. But if it IS good, how many of those gamers are then going to turn around and buy the game now that they've already downloaded it? Barring, of course, subscription-based games like WoW or othe

Re:

[__aaqvdr516]

I don't believe it is "enuf said". I'm not a Mario Party fan...but to call them crap is just not true. They're just not YOUR personal cup of tea. They're not doing much in the way of innovation in that series either, but they do tweak them a bit every release.

Shareware

[MikeFM]

This used to be addressed through offering programs as shareware. Make the first program free and easy to get and then make money by selling new installments.

RIP Clover Studios

[DarkJC]

It's true that the industry is very risk averse. Besides the big names (Miyamoto and Wright), every once in a while a studio comes around and creates some very fun and very unique games. Clover Studios for instance, their most recent title of note being Okami.

Unfortunately it appears that making great games isn't enough for the industry, as Capcom shut them down just recently. At least TeamICO (the ones behind ICO and Shadow of the Colossus, arguably two of the best games ever made) is still going strong

Might need to change the attitudes, not process

[BShive]

I'm taking some game design classes at my local college (totally unrelated to my 'real' job). This semester we're actually developing prototypes, and everyone submitted proposals for ideas (over 20 in all) that ranged from the 'been done' to unique to zany.

The overwhelming favorite idea?

A destroy everything FPS with "BIG EXPLOSIONS". Oh, and hell is involved too.

To me the whole process just highlighted everything wrong with the industry. If the folks IN the industry (or at least want to be) aren't even interested in other ideas, what hope is there? You couldn't get any more cliche, yet they're willing to devote large quantities of time to adding this to their portfolios.

Games for homework

[totallyscrewed]

I do skasoftware.com [skasoftware.com], and I'm also a student at SUNY IT doing an MS in CS, and I always try to make up creative ways of turning projects into games. It makes the semester go by a lot faster. On my site, Supreme Earth Champion, Dead Pako, and Zomberman were all homework assignments (that I got A's on, mind you!)

No wonder the average American is a moron...

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

...growing role that game design is having in education...

Yippee - like physical and health education continue to have a growing roles in education? No wonder the average American is a moron...

The continued dilution of higher education

[kmweber]

American higher education is turning more and more into nothing more than a series of vocational schools with fancy buildings.

People are going there just to learn skills to get jobs rather than to learn for the sake of learning--which is what it's supposed to be all about.

I blame the G.I. Bill. It wasn't until after WWII that this started to be a problem.

Re:

[reanjr]

I don't know about you but I can't afford $72,000 for the "sake of learning" (average cost of a bachelor's in the U.S.). The internet is free and has much more available. If I am going to drop that kind of money I need to be purchasing something more than lectures amongst 300 other students.

Re:

[praxis]

You are correct, the internet is cheap and is a good resource for learning. I will disagree with you that your college tuition only gets you lectures with 300 other students.

Given that you go to a respected school, you get a lot more. Those other students become your colleagues in your field. The professors that teach those classes are respected members of their fields. The social networking possible at a university is one of the biggest oppertunities you will have of your life. The other big take away

So what's it all about ?

[Romwell]

I have taken a game-making course in SUNY Stony Brook. To put it simply: it was great. All the instructor needs to require is, literally, make students do a good game. They do the rest. With a little pressure, a lot of cool things are created (also, that's the idea of a make-a-game-in-12-hours contests, isn't it ?)

*Henry* Jenkins?

[TheObruniSpeaks]

It was my understanding that *Leroy* Jenkins was one of the foremost experts on games in the US...