This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

technsolution

reflexive journal (Bobbie Mendez)

Does designing games constitutes a form a scholarly activity? That is a difficult question to answer. It seems that "games" is a term that needs to be define more precisely. In other words, it seems that it can be defined in many different ways. Is the word "game" being used in relation to "work?" Is there a relationship between work-and-play? There seems to be a whole sub-set of ideas one can consider. If it is "playing" as it relates to a work, then it is not "play" or not a game, but practice. Then, the word "game" would be more appropriately called "practice" for the real world. And the word practice is not as fun sounding as the word game, right? However, all aside.

In Reality Is Broken, Jane McGonigal, does make some good points about "games" as it relates to making our daily life better. If one can make an activity fun and engaging to produce a positive outcome, why not incorporate it? The benefits is that one can do an activity that is a game, but use the skills learned to practical life applications. For instance, learning how to fly an airplane without having to actually fly a plane. The downfall, is that games or computer-simulators are not the "real" thing. And if one becomes more and more invested in them, one can lose sight of what is real (and what is actually physically possible) in the real world.

South Korea is a power house when it comes to gaming, but at what prize? Does one lose valuable skill if one does engage in "gaming." THere was a report by NPR, which stated that many of South Korea's young population are obese and engage over the internet. Many of their adolescents are obsessed with gaming to the point that they have very poor skills interacting with anyone in person. I suppose this is a cost of gaming, and if society deems this lose to be justifiable for skills gained in "gaming" Then, I suppose it is o.k.

Gaming might be a great "pedagogical means for effecting social change," but what happens when one does not have computer? Or, gaming have devastating effects that we cannot yet see? What does it say about competition and fair-play. What if one becomes too competitive to the point of circumventing the rules of fair play. Does it means because it works on a few students that "gaming" needs to be incorporated to every child? Can there be students that do better and become better members of society without gaming? If gaming becomes an effective means is this the only means to learn? We might argue that we would use gaming as one tool to be used as an effective means to create effect change in society. However, it also seems that everyone might see it as a panacea to all cultural and societal ills.

Bobbie

July 29th, 2013

This page has paths:

This page has replies:

I do believe that avatars can potentially challenge existing social hierarchies. By avataring oneself to look something that one is not, like a 'king" or "queen." At the same time it can re-enforce existing prejudices.
Turkle, Barad, Dibbell, Gaboury and Nakamura mist like see these experiences as rewarding and eye opening.

I have to say that I have been spending more time in figuring what is what, rather than typing my thoughts. BB blog to me is better just because I am familiar. I believe is a good system. Instead of inventing the wheel every time. Can programers use old methods. And here is the "rub" if we do are we not enforcing "old thinking and approaches?" By the way, it's Shark Week.
Contents of this reply:
1. reflexive journal (Bobbie Mendez)
  Does designing games constitutes a form a scholarly activity? That is a difficult question to answer. It seems that "games" is a term that needs to be define more precisely. In other words, it seems that it can be defined in many different ways. Is the word "game" being used in relation to "work?" Is there a relationship between work-and-play? There seems to be a whole sub-set of ideas one can consider. If it is "playing" as it relates to a work, then it is not "play" or not a game, but practice. Then, the word "game" would be more appropriately called "practice" for the real world. And the word practice is not as fun sounding as the word game, right? However, all aside.
  In Reality Is Broken, Jane McGonigal, does make some good points about "games" as it relates to making our daily life better. If one can make an activity fun and engaging to produce a positive outcome, why not incorporate it? The benefits is that one can do an activity that is a game, but use the skills learned to practical life applications. For instance, learning how to fly an airplane without having to actually fly a plane. The downfall, is that games or computer-simulators are not the "real" thing. And if one becomes more and more invested in them, one can lose sight of what is real (and what is actually physically possible) in the real world.
  South Korea is a power house when it comes to gaming, but at what prize? Does one lose valuable skill if one does engage in "gaming." THere was a report by NPR, which stated that many of South Korea's young population are obese and engage over the internet. Many of their adolescents are obsessed with gaming to the point that they have very poor skills interacting with anyone in person. I suppose this is a cost of gaming, and if society deems this lose to be justifiable for skills gained in "gaming" Then, I suppose it is o.k.
  Gaming might be a great "pedagogical means for effecting social change," but what happens when one does not have computer? Or, gaming have devastating effects that we cannot yet see? What does it say about competition and fair-play. What if one becomes too competitive to the point of circumventing the rules of fair play. Does it means because it works on a few students that "gaming" needs to be incorporated to every child? Can there be students that do better and become better members of society without gaming? If gaming becomes an effective means is this the only means to learn? We might argue that we would use gaming as one tool to be used as an effective means to create effect change in society. However, it also seems that everyone might see it as a panacea to all cultural and societal ills.
  
  Bobbie
  July 29th, 2013

This page has paths:

This page has replies:

I do believe that avatars can potentially challenge existing social hierarchies. By avataring oneself to look something that one is not, like a 'king" or "queen." At the same time it can re-enforce existing prejudices.