Oh my! Where did you find this game?!

I agree and I think that having the action cards and the element of luck, so that a victory is a mixture of both skillful card play and some luck of the draw.

I always fall asleep if I watch a movie on a Friday night. Sometimes it is better to keep the brain active and play some games, sometimes I want to zone out and go with the movie.

Wow, I would be surprised to - Uno was a staple in the homes of my family and friends.

I've never played with 10, I don't know if i would find that fun...i would be waiting around too long for my turn. What was playing with 2 people like? With the reverse cards, I feel like there wouldn't be as much randomness. How long did games last?

Is this what encouraged your playfulness? Do you think the people you're playing with and the environment you're playing in enhances this?

Even though these aren't necessarily games, there are still elements of play that have been present in these interactions!

Just keeping the game 2 denominational has limited the movement in-game significantly, from 3D games that are becoming the norm.

This makes good use for communication to share and explain tactics and develop a good mix of items to support roles on a team.

Watched the trailer for this game - seems like communication would be key as enemies seem to atack in swarms.

Interesting twist, I like that the idea that staying alive longer comes with enemies that are harder to kill and deliver more damage.

Appreciate the screen cast!

Do you think this is due to it's alpha stage or part of the design experience? Did you like this?

That's a lot to learn and remember! I would probably quit this!

What is MMO?

Is this common for video games now-a-days? Smart design to offer up personalization for what players prefer.

What do you think is the biggest thing you've learned so far?

I used to watch my bro play this back in the day. As an observer, it was more interesting to watch over some other games. I think I liked the adventure :)

Do you think that the cognitive skills associated with designing civilizations in Civ 2 could be similar to the skills needed to design games in general? Or, do you see these as separate?

If you could change / add one thing about the tutorial to make it more effective, what would it be?

Do you think if the tutorial was better, you wouldn't have felt as overwhelmed by all the icons, status bars, and screens?

I think that when there is a little consequence for not being successful the game lends itself to experimentation more and has less of a need for tutorials because determining how to play is part of the fun. Where as if the consequences of failure are higher, like starting over at the beginning of a level, it is frustrating to not know all the rules beforehand.

My partner works late evening early night shifts and basically goes to bed when she gets home. she loves calming low key puzzle games to refocus her mind away from work so she can go to sleep. Do you think I should suggest this game?

This seems to tie into the discussion of vision in action video games from the Bavelier article this week, but I like the contrast of how non action games can tie into vision in a similar way.

There was a point in my life where I had all the time in the world. But now, time kind of limits my raid exploration. 2 hour blocks of time are typically required in GW2.

It's interesting how this seems to be my experience in Guild Wars 2. I'm starting to dislike Raids a lot in that game due to our gated they are. I wonder how they can fix these?

Hahah..what a name!

Most of my groups in MMO's have always consisted of "PUG" groups. My problem with guilds is that I don't want to just be someone at the bottom of the guild while a few players make all of the decisions.

I'm running into the exact same problem. Sure I've posted and interacted with a few others, but I'm struggling to find a ton of benefit from it.

Is this in the virtual world or build it in real life?

Meeting the student where she is at.

Cool, I did not realize there was a spectator mode, what a great way to observe how others are playing.

This seems to encourage the development of a skill set to use in many situations, rather than memorizing what buttons need to pressed to pass a level.

Also a chance to reflect on how these behaviors helped the player be successful.

Cool, that presence make the interaction more meaningful.

I think that there is huge potential with augmented reality, along the lines of Pokemon Go. Museums, schools, libraries and other learning institutions could set up "hot spots" thought out a city and connect with users at those points to share content.

It seems like scenarios could be developed in a story mode where real life inspired problems need to be addressed and solved.

These games give a low threshold for accessing the basic concepts from the fields they represent.

I think this fits with the idea of employing simulations to scaffold student learning.

This is a great refining question to delving deeper into ideas raised by the In-Game, In-Room, In-World article.

Does this game give a score at the end? Do you think a score would encourage play among your students or have the opposite effect?

I recommend updating this post with your student's thoughts once you do.

LOL

This game sounds complicated! Is it like Bejeweled? Is it possible to pop every balloon? Does anything happen?

I'm wondering why the authors didn't do anything to try and get more diversity into this study?

How can we encourage this among those that may not understand video games?

I'm not familiar with what a preservice teacher is?

A much larger sample than some of the studies we've seen recently.

Do you agree with this? I definitely think it's greater for motivation than actual improvement.

I think if you're enjoying what you're learning, there isn't any reason you shouldn't be able to get a "good grade."

Did you find anything particularly interesting about one subject over the other?

this is a good rule to have. would make a more coherent discussion space.

Seems the acceptance you felt in the community is giving you more reason to stick with the game.

Good question, different devices seem to have a large affect on mobile game play or aesthetics.

seems like a great entry into the online community.

I have always been suspicious of the game play of mobile games where I play against another person but not in real time. I feel like I am playing a bot of some sort that is masquerading with a user's profile. Interesting that this game has made the play real time, feels more authentic.

Could you look for other articles for the next cycle that look at more recent t recesses of The Sims and do some comparing and contrasting of the results?

My brother had a Sims console game in the early 2000's and it blew my mind that he would barely worry about the main game missions to just create and expand his world. This was my first exposure to game modding as game play.

Have you seen any evidence of this "traditionalists" in your explorations of the your Sims affinity space.

Sounds like a solid plan moving forward - you've identified a game, related affinity spaces, and some literature - time to dig deep!

This echoes Gee from C1.

Is this Price's observation or your analysis of her article based upon what we read during C2?

Great decision, and thanks for mentioning here.

This charitable attitude seems to be a good way to quickly become a valued member of this LBP community.

Wow great personal experience to help reassure use newcomers to game level design.

I am so bad in the affinity spaces I inhabit. Always reading never contributing.

I don't have an active hyperlink here. I don't know if you had intended for this to link to the article or not.

Reflection could give these gamers a chance to think about how these skills could be transferred to debates in different settings.

Shows that there is passion in these players and that passion has empowered them to participate in discourses.

I like this is a very cyclical list, when you get to explore it is trime to re-engage.

It is good to see the educational thinkers applyed in discussions of learning tehcnologies. Something I don't do enough. Thank you for the example.

Sean is pretty active on Twitter, you might consider sharing this with him (Constance just moved to a new university/job, and wouldn't likely respond via a social media platform like Twitter).

A reflection of affinity space participation, and the multiple settings and social relations that surround and support ongoing game play.

Is it ironic given what we've been reading in our course to date?

Where? Some context here would be useful

players who posted to WoW forums?

What is the foundation of these studio habits? Can you tell us a bit more about this?

Constance, as I likely mentioned elsewhere, was my boss at UW for a number of years when we ran the Games Learning Society Conference and Playful Learning initiative. Sean does great game-based learning work (and also came through the GLS crew at UW). Good friends and colleagues.

All links that discuss the "nice guy" idea that he is talking about.

Anyone a fan of this show? I have never seen it.

Interesting! Do you have a link?

I struggle with TW too and had to deactivate FB because of this very reason. I was finding myself getting stressed out for reasons out of my control and then going down rabbit holes and wasting time where my time could be spent doing more productive things. As someone who works in the social media realm (without any real passion for it), I empathize with you. However, I do feel that it does have it's benefits. It's just finding what works right for you-- that's the tricky part.

Love this!

100% agree. Great connection on how games can improve learning outcomes more effectively than traditional schooling.

I browsed around the site a little. Is anyone able to write post for the "learn" section or is this only for experts or admins to write in?

Have you visited the Community section yet? Looks to be the most similar to traditional forums. I would be interested to hear about the interactions in there vs. your blog. I'm sure that's a future post though...

Did this bother you? Does this limit the potential community or make it feel more close-knit?

I saw some of your photos posted on Twitter. Great work!

Do you know how users are discovering your blog? Is it through Twitter or website search?

Do you think there are instances where Edutopia may not be a good learning tool?

What are the types of social and emotional support you or the students are looking to gain from Edutopia?

Great overview of your affinity space. Are you working with your students in the tool? Or, how are you utilizing Edutopia to deepen your understanding about play, games, and learning?

well stated

Depends on how you define success. I would say that the model has been passable at best. It has been, in general, the only model we have had.

In what ways does this make you uncomfortable? Do you think this is a conscious choice by designers or do games inherently have some learning involved (learning the rule system, etc.)

Even if you don't have the latest tech, just allowing them to create art projects around their interests is great!

I think Yes and No. Assassin's Creed is the perfect example of a game that could be used to teach history. Obviously it has it's flaw and not 100% accurate, but they've done a great job of capturing the historic settings and making me interested in history. On the other hand I get bored of the Oregon Trail type games.

What are some preconceived ideas that have shifted so far in our course?

Interesting observation. What has happened that made this connection for you? Are these digital or physical games or both? Now I'm curious!

I'm glad that you have found Twitter valuable to your learning. Did you use Twitter prior to this course? What do you love about it / hate about it? I'm curious because I often see the value in Twitter for my coursework but as a general social media practice, it's not my go-to or favorite. It often seems more like a chore to me.

I don't agree with this statement. I do think with solid learning objectives during the development and design of the gamification module, one could have an outcome ore than just following the established paths or arranged narratives.

This is an interesting perspective. Following a story created by someone else.

I wonder if the same effects of raised dopamine would be present if the kids participated in physical activity and not video game play.

That is an astounding number. 5.93mil...I agree, what if we were more productive with our time spent, as not to escape our life/problems, but actually on real life.

I like this term, "living gamefully" seems to empower the person to own their own gaming & life. And it is true; a game a day, helps keeps the doctor away.

I definitely see the coorelation

I've struggled in the past with getting responses from smaller subreddit. I'd like to see how this works for you in your next update!

Were you familiar with Reddit previously? I'd be interested in hearing what you think about the format.

For this reason, I stay away from raids in Guild Wars 2.

I know it's still early on, but I will be interested to see if these always remain thoughtful as your continue to explore. I've seen many nasty posts in the past.

Was this helpful? Did it get you up to speed quickly?

I'm surprised WoW is still going strong after 10+ years. It will be interesting to see how the community is since I last played during launch.

It's bound to happen. I get thumbs downs on my youtube from time to time. Just post stuff and keep posting stuff. You will have more positive than negative responses.

This is what we have the chance to explore in Games and Learning. Can we as educators help?

Yes, I believe they have. I often see video games blamed for violent acts.

This type of research seems to constantly come up, I think there are a number of other issues that often get overlooked such as the child's family conditions.

And I'm pleased to read this!

What do you mean by identity?

As I suggest in the conclusion to Teacher Pioneers which we read during C1, same goes for classrooms and schools. Co-design, distributed power, and agency are really important.

Very similar to the focus on tutorials that we read during C1.

Which is why his design principles are exemplified by certain (digital) games, but are not only afforded by games.

His design principles (which we briefly touched during C1) are also useful, though do keep in mind that features change over time as new technologies and practices emerge.

This was an early piece from Gee about games and learning, I'm glad you read it.

Great connection here to C2 readings about fan cultures and affinity spaces.

Echoes of Gee and tutorials that scaffold familiarity with a new system.

I'm glad you're selecting to read scholarship based upon personal interest and play history - very important.

Yes, common equity-oriented concerns associated with cost, access, and who gets to participate will always confront new technologies (whether VR, Tesla cars, etc.).

This happens to me with research all the time. I wonder about a research question or a method, consider how awesome some study would be... and then after asking around a bit, come to learn it's already been done in X way, by Y people, and that they're now onto project Z. At least you know!

Same with me.

That's helpful, thanks for including. Having not yet read these studies, it would seem (although I'm making an assumption) that data about affect is rather different (though perhaps complementary to) observations of affect described in Stevens and colleagues' ethnography... perhaps?

And this would be evident through some type, or types, of biometric data?

It seems like this is already taking a rather narrow view of game, as something a person plays perhaps in isolation from others? The agency of the "system" seems more important than the player/s.

If you're going to cite like this, may as well go all the way and include the year for APA formatting.

I'm curious - what your interest in this area of research?

Way to read deeply and beyond the required scope of a typical scholarly critique, much appreciated!

I'm curious - what does effective mean in this context?

I appreciate that you're highlighting a limitation of the study. What counts as social dimensions, from either the perspective of K&L or in your opinion?

I'm glad you're reading literature that combines course content with professional interests and responsibilities, great idea.

Caro Williams and I wrote a brief for NCTM in 2014 about video games and math education, check it out here.

Why not? What counts as data? And why wouldn't you have various forms of data to support instructional decision-making? Stories are powerful forms of data, perhaps more so than standardized test scores or whatever so-called "objective" data says something about learning.

And I hope you continue to do so after the conclusion of this course, too!

I'm not sure what you mean by this... can you clarify?

With an article that's a decade old, I'm curious how many of these sites and games are still around.

Statistics such as? And effectiveness as measured by...?

And why might this occur?

And perhaps also the pedagogical practices that usefully enact game-based learning?

In future scholarly critiques, it might be useful to your reader to include article title, author, and citation information.

In other words, could your team have failed?

Yeah, I've thought a bit about escape rooms, and I'm not sure they're games as much as very elaborate puzzles. I'm curious how your experience and analysis squares with my assessment of puzzles vs games from the Conclusion to Teacher Pioneers you read during C1.

Nice connection to the cycle readings.

This is a useful bit of context, thanks for sharing and connecting this professional experience with your coursework.

It's great that you experienced an escape room and included this as your play journal!

Yeah, this is a narrative about capacity building in support of game-based learning, less (perhaps) a recipe for "how to do X."

Likely very similar to our course.

Yup, this article was featured in a special issue on games in higher education. Not sure if you noticed, but I also had an article in that same issue (under my previous name, Holden).

So pleased you read this article! Dani Herro is a good friend and colleague, we've done a bit of work together.

Take to Twitter and crowdsource additional resources, too.

These thoughts address a core concern - what are artistic practices, and what types of games (irrespective of content, and perhaps because of certain play mechanics) support those practices?

Indeed, it seems like any game design platform (we'll read about some during C3) would be quite relevant to arts education.

What does this mean, particularly after reading Stevens et al during C2?

Why? What about your professional practice as an art educator makes this a particularly generative aspect of game play?

this is an interesting bit of context within which to design and implement a game

This is great motivation to select interest-driven scholarship for your critiques.

I'm pleased to learn this, and establishing connections to professional practice is an important element of our course.

according to this study

I'll be curious to read about your responses to C3 readings.

While this is an important finding, it seems as though the core message stands irrespective of the tool. In other words, take out (digital) game and replace with any other tool or instructional method, and the importance of clear instructions and sustained engagement stand.

With this style of research, games are positioned as an intervention to improve, and prove, a very specific idea. There are pros and cons to this type of research.

what a fascinating term having already read, in our course, much literature that suggests games (both digital and others) can, under certain circumstances, be educational experiences and support particular learning practices and outcomes.

What do you mean by this? I'm curious if your thoughts about design will change based upon C3 readings...

Yes, you're making sharp connections here among Gee and Hayes' theory about affinity spaces, and seeing how those types of relations are fostered at multiple scales: a) in individual classrooms and b) among a network of educators who are all experimenting with this platform/tech/approach to learning.

Though it sounds like you were able to make some astute observations of activity.

Would you call this Twitter chat one expression of an affinity space?

It seems that class craft is what some people call a "skin" that provides thematic elements and, in some casts, strategies to continue supporting what educators already do (manage, motivate, engage students).

I'm pleased to learn that you're choosing to play games based upon your interests and then observing learning through an interest-driven lens.

There are so many reasons to guide implementation in your classroom, many of which you can find easily online or via interactions with certain communities on platforms like Twitter. This is also why we have the affinity spaces project, to support people in engaging with activities relevant to their interests and professional practices.

Many people in our course are starting to parse the dynamics of cooperative vs competitive game play, and your summary here contributes some important points to consider.

Observed like the methods Stevens and colleagues employed to study shared activity? And how did their observations demonstrate an "increase"?

This is a really nice complement to Stevens and colleagues' ethnography from C2.

Article? The term does carry different connotations, so specificity in this respect is important.

I'm glad you're questioning this idea, and reading research that suggests learning emerges through social and technical relations, rather than primarily because of what a tool delivers.

How do you know this happens? What are the indicators that suggest such learning in taking place?

Why is it important that these emotions are positive?

What do you mean by this?

A question we'll be engaging all semester, and my conclusion to the book Teacher Pioneers (which we read during C1) begins to provide some answers.

Does this presume that people can't learn from games irrespective of developers' goals? I would suggest many games can teach players something, and some games which are designed according to specific learning principles (such as those outlined by Gee in C1) create conditions where specific learning experiences are more likely - does that make sense?

If you're interested in making your blog posts more multimodal, consider including those videos here as embedded in your posts

yes, L&K's emphasis on new literacies expands upon more traditional notions of reading and writing.

I'm a big fan of L&K and their text is a foundational anchor of INTE 5340 Learning with Digital Stories.

I'm curious what you mean by modern environment... digital aspects? Online only? Something else?

Take your chances, yes, though the risk of failure is not too high-stakes, unlike school.

You've got peers who are also exploring cooperative and competitive game play dynamics, I hope this emerges as an ongoing conversation across our various game play experiences.

Important connections here to Gee's analysis of games and apprenticeship which we read during C1.

This is a nice way of creating a multimodal post, thanks for including this video!

I began playing Magic in middle school, and got pretty serious over a few years, to the point where I was entered in some local competitions, had a few complete sets (I forget what a version of cards was called...), and had developed some pretty serious battle-tested decks. I liked playing Magic a lot.

Perhaps because schools and schooling is, by design, inequitable?

Such as?

How does "thorough engagement" relate to learning?

What do you mean by validity here?