OK, maybe I was a little hard on “Games for Change” in my post from all the way back in week 1.
Apparently, back then, I was an “expert” who was certain that video games would never be effective in bringing about social change. There was no way true gamers would be interested in Flash Player computer games with a message. I was so naive.
Armed with all the knowledge I have absorbed through this class and Spreadable Media, I gave the site a closer look. I discovered couple of things.
For one, the games don’t have to be extremely graphically stimulating or have multilayered plots to be interesting. The most effective and addictive ones, I thought, were the simplest. For instance, I got hooked on Code Fred: Survival Mode, where you play a guy who gets lost in the woods and you have to regulate his vital functions to keep him alive. I was stuck on the part where you have to deliver glucose to his muscles (or something) when I realized, “Hey, I’m learning something.” And, of course, I had to make it to the end. I think the success of these games really depends on how well they can rope people in while covertly teaching them something.
I don’t think the people behind Games for Change are looking to hook into the hardcore gamers who wait in line all night to purchase the new Sony Playstation. Although this is the biggest market for video games, I’m skeptical that these gamers would be interesting in games like “Depression Quest” or “Sweatshop.” Rather, Games for Change is looking for a different, niche audience that enjoys gaming on a smaller scale and actually wants to learn something. Is this possibly one of the crucial “surplus audiences” the authors of Spreadable Media were talking about?
Most of the game probably won’t create social change on their own, but I think they can be effective in at least getting people talking about an issue. And isn’t that how a movement is started?
I have to disagree with you on what gamers will find interesting. Although yes there is a niche out there that only want to play the triple A games like Call of Duty or Halo, there are plenty more who are just out there looking for some kind of challenge. It is as you said it’s not the graphics or the content of the game it’s how immersive the game can be. This is what Games for a Change is really looking for finding a game that people will get hooked into and then without even realizing it, learning something. Some of the games I have spent way to much time on have been these in browser flash games, forget that paper I have to write I have to finish level 6 of this tower defense game i’m playing, has happened far too often to me.
Part of why so many people play games is to relax and take the opportunity to turn their brains off for a little while. With that in mind, I wonder if the games on Games for Change are really going to be that effective in generating change. In the case of Games for Change I think the games themselves need to be as or more intriguing than the subject matter of the game. It’s a little bit of a chicken or egg question: is it the subject matter (social issue) that will draw people in, or is it the structure of the game?
Hopefully you won’t stop the flow of such magical material! ταχυδακτυλουργός για παιδικά πάρτυ
μάγος για πάρτυ
woww Your shifted perspective and willingness to explore the potential of games for change showcase the transformative impact of learning and critical thinking. It’s an insightful journey from initial skepticism to a more nuanced understanding of the role that games can play in driving social change. 🎮🌐 Thanks for sharing