The semester is over and class is thusly over as well, so I’m collecting my posts from here and adding them to my personal blog over here.

Obviously there will be no further posts here from here out…

The audio files for my final project are available from here.

Audio track format for narration:

• “Lead in” directions: these are the directions you receive after skipping tracks, because they’re the first part of the audio. They will inform the player to do one of several tasks to determine the change in direction, some examples being:
  • think of a number - if it’s odd, turn left, etc.
  • if you can turn right, go right. if not, go forward.

  Some mapping will have to be added: right or up, left or down, forward. The possible directions to turn are slightly limited, so this rule helps to compensate for the number of directions or possible ways of movement. The fact that this audio occurs at the beginning of the track allows for more use of the shuffle function: you can tell the player to skip 4 tracks and follow those instructions. The instructions will always be random. It’s like rolling dice.

• Storytelling: The next part of the audio will consist of the “storytelling” element that connects the player with the game world. The story will be able to be told in any order (shuffled) and possibly in more than one tense - see previous notes on present-tense storytelling. Included here could be some kind of task for the player, but I haven’t given it much thought yet.
• “Lead out” Directions: These directions end the track and tell the player how to continue. They instruct the player to skip to another track, or to skip a certain number of tracks. This way the number of possible combinations of directions is greatly multiplied, increasing the chances that you won’t (hopefully) get the same track multiple times in a row, etc.

Other considerations:

• The “Ending:” I haven’t figured out how the game will end yet. I could include one track which excludes the “lead out” directions, thus ending the game. This would make the length of the game entirely random - you might play through 3 tracks before the game ends, or you might play through for hours before you come to it. I haven’t decided the importance of this yet. It would make sense, as the game is primarily about random decisions and this would make the game entirely random.

Movement:

The rules for movement in the game are relatively simple: walk straight ahead (or along a curve) following a path (sidewalk, hallway, etc.) until you come to an intersection.

An intersection is one or more of the following:

• a doorway
• an intersection in the path - the sidewalk or hallway branches in several directions
• a stairway/elevator

When you reach an intersection, you stop and skip to the next track in the audio. Since the beginning of each track will be some directions (”turn right,” or “think of a number. if it’s odd, go left,” etc.) regarding movement.  Follow these instructions.

Some notes:

• basic directions: forward, left, right, up/down (stairs/elevator)….thought about adding reverse but it doesn’t really make much sense - you could get “stuck” if you’re told to go back a step and you’ve reached the beginning.
• basic rules: walk forward until you come to an intersection. what defines an intersection? a point where you can turn left/right or go up/down, etc. stop at the intersection and skip to another random track to determine which way to go.
• how does the game end? when you get sick of it? if the tracks are shuffling there can’t really be an “end.” maybe one is randomly an “ending,” although that wouldn’t work because it could accidentally be the first track.

Some things to do:

• finalize “rules” for movement/turning vs. shuffle function
• script out speech for audio tracks
• figure out how a story fits into this, or how to break it up so it can “randomize” and still loosely make sense

1. Describe 4 different ways that the game generation is different from the baby boom generation based on attitude and behaviors.

1- Pervasion. The sheer numbers of game systems produced and purchased makes it almost certain that although not every child may own a game system, they have experienced it in some way. Games are literally everywhere, selling in massive numbers. They have proven their staying power through the many various incarnations they have seen from the Atari and its fellows of the early 80’s and prior to the advanced systems of today, so the number of people exposed to this type of entertainment is huge. The article states that professionals over the age of 34 are unlikely to have grown up with games other than part of a fad, but those under 34 were twice as likely to have been exposed to video games. In this way, video games have developed and maintained a vast audience. The game generation differs from the baby boom generation in its size and the way it has been so deeply pervaded by gaming.

2- Life Experience. For members of the game generation, they have only experienced a world with games. Born after or around the creation of video games, and grown up during the prime of their development, members of this generation have never known anything but a world with games. The game generation has therefore fed on the positive aspects of technology - like storybooks, board games, and other toys traditionally experienced by previous generations, video games were a commonality for this generation. Through widespread availability, the majority of children experienced video games in some way, and so video games had a hand in shaping memories for many members of this generation.

3- Technology-Friendly Mindset. Raised on a developing form of technology intended as a form of entertainment, kids of the game generation are far more comfortable with the constantly evolving technologies that continue to further pervade our lives. Early experiences with video games like the NES built interest among children who would later grow up and adopt newer advancements in video games as the technology matured. As video games are sort of a parallel and sometimes and overlap with other technologies like computers, their comfort level allowed them to experience other areas of technology. This brings us to today, where twenty and thirty-somethings who played games as kids are in positions to change technology as we see it. With the maturation of the children of this generation, we’ve also seen other advancements like the changes that accompanied the “Web 2.0″ movement. Cell phones and iPods and other gadgets are commonplace. It’s possible that they’re equally responsible for the tech-savviness of young children today as well: there are even cell phones made especially for children now. Members of this generation are unafraid of new technology and the possibilities that surround it. Previous generations are less likely to be so open and adoptive of new technologies because they haven’t experienced them in the same way children of the game generation have. They have no personal or emotional ties to the technology, and don’t understand it in the same way.

4- Bleeding-Edge Lifestyle. In technology-related fields (computer science for example) the term “bleeding-edge” refers to the absolute newest technologies - often things so new that they aren’t quite perfected. I feel that this term describes this generation well because of the way technology has advanced as a result of their work as adults today. An example of this could be social networking sites like MySpace or Facebook. Sometimes started as college projects, these websites were completely unheard of a few years ago, and are now extremely popular with millions of members. At the same time, they are imperfect because the system can be abused (underage users/child predators, people who don’t understand the system or put information online that could potentially harm them, etc.) as solutions haven’t been developed due to the infancy of the system - it’s so new that nothing like it has existed before, and solutions don’t exist yet. These types of new products (especially on the internet) are appearing all the time, and constantly changing the way we do things. Previous generations were more traditional in their approach to change - new versions of the same products. This generation innovates and looks for totally different ways of accomplishing a task.

2.  Based on statements made on their web site, how does the Go Game foster corporate team building and how is their process “unique”?

According to their website the Go Game fosters corporate team building through the experience shared by the players. “Players will realize the magic power of the team, getting to know and depend on one another as never before. Each course features diverse challenges for all personality types and thinking styles, so players will have the opportunity to show off their own unique talents and abilities.” By placing players in unusual, puzzle-solving situations, they force teams to discover what one anothers’ abilities are and how they best work together. They also state they they are different because “While other companies offer paper based scavenger hunts, we are the only game in town to use wireless-web technology. ” They also mention their use of technology (digital cameras, cell phones, etc.) and inclusion of actors in the game.

3. How does Seriousity leverage game-based models in conjunction with “gamer generation” attitude and behavior to make work both fun and efficient?

Seriosity’s “Attent” system leverages game-based models along with “gamer generation” attitude and behavior to optimize efficiency and make work fun by balancing game elements with work elements. The Attent system is fairly logical: spend credits to maximize the attention your message will receive. The system is simple and does exactly what it needs to do - prioritize email importance. The concept of using credits doesn’t complicate the e-mail process much beyond an extra click or two, and doesn’t take much time to do. It uses “gamer generation” attitude to accomplish its task by applying a new method to a long-standing problem.

4. As most of you are the “gamer generation”, do you agree or disagree with what is stated about attitude and behaviors in “Got Game”? And how do you feel about using game-based models and injecting play into the workplace?

I agree with most of what is said in “Got Game.” Games in general, whether they’re electronic or not, tend to promote the idea that “winning is good and losing is bad,” so you generally want to be the winner and reap the benefits. This isn’t necessarily an entirely bad way to approach life or problems. It makes sense to want to achieve the best possible outcome in whatever you do, so that seems logical enough to me. I also feel that game-based models and play in the workplace are a good idea, if implemented properly. I like Seriosity’s approach because it achieves the task well while also “blending in” with the environment. It’s not excessively playful, and it doesn’t distract from the primary task, but still adds a playful element to an ordinary task. I think these types of implementations for small tasks  such as email priority will become more and more prevalent. I think play itself could be a useful addition to the workplace, especially in areas where tasks are extremely repetitive.

“Playdate”

“A White Heron”

The Dionaea House 

Adventure Playgrounds: The Coolest Places You Probably Never Played As A Kid

Reminded me of one of the articles in a previous reading assignment.

Lame SL project update comic 2.

metafiction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafiction

hypertext: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertext