This is an open call for educators, pedagogues, subject-matter experts, (video) game designers, and game researchers who want to make good educational video games to build up immunity against disinformation. I also have a budget but I’ll talk about it later.
What do you mean?
Good game
By good I mean… imagine there’s a video game that you want to play. Say, Papers, Please. And imagine that, by playing the game, you develop an intuition that helps you spot discrepancies between hard facts and information offered to you by someone. By making these observations and decisions quickly, imagine you start thinking «what if…?» in your everyday life. And imagine that you had so much fun playing Papers, Please, that you were not thinking «oh, it’s teaching me this and that, fair, lesson learned» and close the game never to re-open it again. Instead, you close the game thinking «Great Scott, I want to play it again!». This is what I mean by good educational video games: games that feel like games, that make you want to play again, and that also teach you things with you barely noticing.
Immunity against disinformation
This is the kind of thing we all know when we see it but we have very little ideas on how to build it up in someone else. The oft-proposed solution is «let’s teach fact-checking to people!» This can be useful, up to a point, but the truth is that fact-checking requires effort and active engagement. One can do it from time to time but they need their fact-checking engine on all the time, otherwise false information can still breach through, lodge itself in the back of their minds, and launch its attack from there. I suspect we need something more subtle, something like a spidey sense, an intuitive awareness that something is off when we see it, a tiny inner voice that goes «danger, Will Robinson!» and «does not compute».
Target audience
This is the trickiest. I see this project in terms of lifelong learning, so the target audience is pretty much anyone that is a potential target for mis- and disinformation. Everyone is different, so it is hard to pinpoint a profile, or identify a group. Everyone responds differently to disinformation: some may be naturally skeptical, but others get caught line, hook, and sinker, because disinformation fulfills a need in their lives and provides them answers to their questions about a chaotic world. However, I want to develop video games that can work for adults who are out of formal education, but that can also be used by people in school. Bottom line: we’ll have to figure this out on a case-by-case basis.
Activities
The objective is two-fold: 1. to develop a video game that stands up by itself as an engaging, challenging, replayable, even fun video game that players will want to play and play again, while exposing them to educational content and enabling them to practice and 2. to develop and validate guidelines for the design, development, and evaluation of educational video games of the likes described in point 1, so that it is possible to develop and share a methodology to produce better educational video games.
To achieve all this, we will need to gather as educators, pedagogues, subject-matter experts, (video) game designers, and game researchers, and work together. To kick-start the process, we will need to engage in two sessions approximately 1-2 hours long – flexible arrangements are welcome, but it is fundamental that educators, designers, and researchers work together throughout the entire process so that each will bring their respective strengths at all times, and improve their understanding of the process.
Initial video game design phase
In the first session, we will
- identify one (or more) problems relevant to the subject matter expertise on hand that contribute to mis- and disinformation, for example through distorting the perception of reality, or interfering with the correct interpretation of information and identification of false and misleading information;
- identify practical skills at both low and medium/high level which, if acquired and refined over time, contribute to mitigating the mis- and disinformation effects – the spidey sense.
In the second session, we will
- put on the table the pedagogical best practices to enable learners to acquire and practice these skills;
- map these skills and practices to video game ideas, identifying applicable game mechanics (both tried and tested as well as new and innovative) and develop our video game ideas in terms of narrative, setting, style, genre, and so on.
By the end of the second sessions, we will have
- an understanding of the educational problem and content that will underpin the video game;
- better overall knowledge of the video game design and development process in relation to an educational problem;
- a Game Design Document – or at least a good draft – that will enable us to implement the video game we will have designed thus far.
Iterative development and refinement phase
A video game developer – or a team thereof – will implement the video game as described in the GDD, and their output will be periodically evaluated by the design and research team to validate or refine the design. Details are vague on purpose as they can vary considerably based on the specifics of each project.
It is not uncommon in this phase to discover that certain design choices work better than others, and the collaboration between the design and development teams should reflect this.
Evaluation
Once a first prototype is ready, we will have to evaluate it to see if it satisfies the requirements. We can perform two types of evaluation.
- By first principles, where the design team play-tests the game and provides an assessment on whether the game implements the skills-mechanics mapping to satisfaction, and so on. This is a pragmatic evaluation done by experts.
- With players, where knowledge of the subject matter can be tested pre- and post-hoc, possibly in a between-group way, and also longitudinally to investigate re-play value and knowledge retention and development.
Every subject and system is a world on its own, so it is possible that other types of evaluation can be meaningful. We will be talking about this, and more, throughout the process. The outcome of every round of evaluation can be used to further improve and validate the video game until it is ready to be released. Further evaluation can also occur after the release.
FAQ
Did you say budget?
I have a small but not insignificant budget so I can pay reasonable compensation and expense claims.
Is this online or in person?
While I believe we work better if sat in the same room, I understand the many reasons for people not wanting to travel. I am happy to do both in-person and online sessions, and even a mix if need be.
Do we come to you or do you come to us?
I am based in Padova, Italy, if you want come to me. But I can travel to you if we can gather everyone somewhere else that is reasonable for me to reach.
I’m a game designer but not a video game designer
Video game design takes a surprising amount from traditional game design, and at the same time they sometimes miss some of the best ideas, so yeah, non-video game designers are welcome!
Sounds like a good idea?
- Educators: this is your chance to help develop that educational video game you always wanted and that your pupils will want to play.
- Game designers: you’ll work with domain experts and game researchers to create a video game of impact on society and education.
- Game researchers: you’ll get to watch us work and tell us how well or badly we’ve done, and develop and consolidate your development and evaluation methodology.
We will all contribute to create a set of guidelines for the development and evaluation of impactful educational video games to help counter disinformation and help other create more, and better, educational video games!