Wright, Betteridge and Buckby (2006) defined a game as “an activity which is entertaining and engaging, often challenging and an activity in which the learners play, and usually interact with others” (p.1). As noted by Prensky (2001), games are engaging and draw people in not only because they are a form of fun and play but also because they are “organized play.” He pointed out six structural elements that make
“fun and play” a game. These six structural elements are:
1. Rules.
Games have rules; otherwise they are “free play.” Rules give limits to the possible ways of achieving goals. Players can not do whatever they want. They follow rules.
2. Goals.
Playing games is a goal-driven activity. Common goals can be, for example, gaining the highest scores, reaching the end, beating down the big boss. Goals presenting to players can be an important element motivating players.
10
3. Outcomes and feedback.
Outcomes arouse strong emotional involvement from players. Feedback takes various forms. It keeps players know what they have done is positive or negative in a game and how do they progress in terms of moving toward their goals.
4. Conflict, completion, challenge and opposition.
Games present obstacles to impede players’ progress.
5. Interaction.
This presents the social aspect of a game.
6. Representation.
This means a game is about something.
Game-based learning takes place, according to Presnky (2001), via the mechanics of feedback. Feedbacks are often provided when players give responses or take certain actions. It is this feature that makes games potentially resulting learning.
Vandercruysse, Vandewaetere and Clarebout (2012), based on a systematic review of game-based learning, discovered seven similar game elements, including enjoyment, rules, goals, interaction, outcomes and feedback, problem solving/
competition/ challenge, and representation/story/fantasy/context. With a purpose of looking into the interaction between game and learning, they further examined how these game elements may contribute to learning. Their results are shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Possible benefits brought by specific game elements proposed by Vandercruysse, Vandewaetere and Clarebout (2012).
Game element Presupposed benefits
fun or enjoyment enjoyment, pleasure, motivation
rules structure
11
(Table 1. continues)
Game element Presupposed benefits
goals and objectives motivation. stimulation
interactive/ interaction being interactive, interact with others outcomes and feedback learning, information about progress problem solving/ competition/ challenge adrenaline, excitement, creativity representation/story/fantasy/ context emotion (enthusiasm), stimulation
Similar to Presnky (2001), they believed that it is via feedback that a game can results in learning. During game play, players often experiences changes in emotions.
While challenges may frustrate players, the researchers believed that the challenges in game environments can lead to tension and focused attention which may benefit learning.
Other researchers discussed how a game environment in general relates to learning process. Pivec, Dziabenko & Schinnerl (2003) noted that several aspects of learning processes are actually supported by games. First, a game triggers active participation. When playing a game, learners are combining knowledge from different areas to choose/generate a solution or to make a decision; in other words, a game motivate learners to actively retrieve their knowledge and recombine it to reach a solution or decision in face with a problem.
Second, learners are encouraged to test the outcomes of their decisions and actions because a game provides an unthreatened environment for learners to do such trials. Learners are also encouraged to do negotiation and discussion with other players when playing a game. Although negotiation and discussion seem only possibly occur in multi-player games or online games, discussion and interaction as a result of game do not confine to multiple-player games or online games. They can be stimulated by a game but occur outside of the game environment. For example, a
12
group of learners playing the same single-player game may still discuss their progress, strategies of advancing the game, or obstacles they can not overcome. This can also form a game community.
Some researchers examined the design strategies used in commercially available games aiming for entertainment, believing they probably have implications for the design for educational learning games. This is so mainly because entertaining games have been observed as successfully involving players and keeping players actively engaged. The underlying designs of popular games have attracted Dickey’s (2005) attention. In his study, he analyzed the strategies and tactics used by game designers in popular commercial entertaining games.
By comparing these strategies with elements of engaged learning, Dickey (2005) firstly found that there are similarities between the two. For example, both game design and engaged learning emphasize the importance of focused goals and challenges. An analysis of game design further reveals the specific strategies to create environment that supports focused goals and challenges. For example, challenging tasks are reinforced by the use of hooks or choices that users must continually make within the gameplay environment. In other words, the analysis reveals the game design strategies embedded in entertaining games can be possible methods to design a learning activity or learning environment (e.g. learning games) that supports meaningful and engaged learning.
Kiili (2004) made the first attempt to propose a model which relates educational theory to game design. His model drew upon experiential learning theory and flow theory. Flow theory explains the deep engagement or the flow experiences generated while playing games, while experiential learning model serves as a basis for combining gameplay with learning (defined as “construction of cognitive structure through action or practice in a game word.”). The model was comprised of an ideation
13
loop, an experience loop, and a challenge bank, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Experiential gaming model. (Kiili, 2004, p.18)
According to this model, appropriate challenges are like blood, pumped by the heart to maintain motivation and engagement of a player. In order to overcome the challenges, players generate solutions in the ideation loop. The process could be firstly unstructured and later refined by taking the constraints and resources of a game into consideration. After solutions are generated, the players test the solutions in the experience loop and observe the outcomes. According to this model, a game should provide clears goals and feedback so that flow experience can be enhanced. Reflective observation may result in the construction of schemata. As the players’ skills improved, the challenge should be also increasingly difficult to keep players in a flow state.
Based on this model, Kiili (2004) also pointed out aspects to be considered when designing educational games.
1. Story telling. Almost every game has a story, though the story could be complex or simple. But, even the story is simple, it sets the background for a game and “its’
meaning in immersing and engaging the player is extremely important.”
14
2. Game balance. This refers to two things. First, the main factor determining the success of a game should be players’ skill level. A better player should perform better in the long run; however, the game should also support not-so-good players in some way. Second, the challenge level should be balanced, and not increase spike irregularly or decrease before the game is completed.
3. Optimizing cognitive load. This entails appropriate instructional design which reduces the amount of extraneous cognitive load, cognitive processing irrelevant to knowledge construction, imposed to players while gaming.