:d courses i n management iching paradigm, whereas ) introduce other kinds o f ; potential i n and between available games at hand,
Chapter Ten
fessor i n Digital Learning le can be contacted at this
lean's OfEce o f Education
I
Lessons Learnt from a Decade of G a m e Development for Higher Education in Harald W a r m e l i n k , G e e r t j e Bekebrede, Casper H a r t e v e l d , Igor Mayer and Sebastiaan Meijer
n, Denmark, H e can be
I heory
Practice
-I
I I
'''o/eplai
/
Introduction The city o f Delft, on the West coast o f The Netherlands, is k n o w n for its blue pottery, the murder o f W i l l i a m o f Orange, the painter Johannes Vermeer and many other famous historical figures and events. D e l f t is less well k n o w n for transforming its university education into learning through games. Yet, during the past decade. D e l f t University o f 171
Chapter
Ten
Technology ( D U T ) has developed many games "in house" and used them w i t h i n several o f its engineering curricula.
This chap university tea
Between 2001 and 2011, a growing number of researchers, teachers,
ment and app
students (Masters and PhD), and designers at D U T gradually became
students lean
involved i n gaming. This emerging "gaming group" produced many digital
W e look back
and analogue games w i t h a focus on university education. The games
distilling som
were often developed f r o m simulations, following the well-established
W e specifical]
simulation gaming or gaming/simulation tradition (Duke, 1980; Duke
(or should hav
& Geurts, 2004).
in curricula, a
Such games are often based on models o f real-world socio-technical
Before we dis
systems; that is, systems i n which technology as well as organisation
educational m
and management play pivotal roles. W e subsequently add principles of gaming, most notably player goals, rules and interdependencies, to incentivise players into action. The result is an artefact that is arguably as much
Game-bas
a simulation as i t is a game, as becomes evident when positioning it on
D U T i n gener
the Simulation T r i a d (Wills, this volume). O u r games typically have a
the manageme
handful o f roles and quite a high number o f problems and rules.
private environ
W e l l over a thousand D U T students have played the games i n a
the design and
variety o f engineering-related courses including project management,
2008; Russell, i
spatial planning or port management. The students come f r o m different
and logistics, er
faculties, including Architecture and Civil Engineering, and mostly f r o m the Faculty o f Technology, Pohcy & Management ( T P M ) .
I n our educ; gaming plays a
The core gaming group also originated and resides i n the T P M faculty.
rience the usef
I t now consists o f twelve j u n i o r and six senior researchers working in
the real world \
various departments o f the faculty, as well as a flexible production team
teacher or extei
of twelve young and dedicated game developers. This is o f course not how
cycle, we use gs
we started or even what we envisioned a decade ago. W e went through
they can learn, ]
enough success stories to stay motivated but we also experienced quite a
should be, an i
few painful failures. I n current game design literature (e.g. D u k e &
methods and m Geurts,
2004;
other stages; mc
Harteveld, 2011) little attention is devoted to the practical issues of
a subsequent t h
developing and applying games i n higher education. Cermak-Sassenrath
games into a cui
and Walker (this volume) are among the few who shed light on how an
1. Sensitising
educational institute changes organisationally when applying games or
sensitise st
principles of play i n a curriculum. W e therefore suggest that our specific
a large infr
lessons learnt w i l l be o f value to anyone who is interested i n developing
students w:
and using games i n their own curricula.
later i n the
172
A
in nouse and use d t h em
Decade
of
Game
Development
in
Delft
This chapter is practical i n nature w i t h a strong emphasis on how university teaching is transformed through games (that is, game develop-
f o f researchers; teachers,
ment and application) and what we can learn f r o m this, rather than how
: D U T gradually became
students learn f r o m playing games (that is, game use and effectiveness).
Lp" produced many digital
We look back on our experiences to reveal and self-evaluate our approach,
t y education. The games
distilling some best practices i n game development for higher education!
ving the well-established
We specifically pay attention to three issues: what role technology has
t i o n (Dukc; 1980; D u k e
(or should have) when developing games, how games are to be embedded i n curricula, and what i t means to manage a game development project.
•eal-world socio-technical r as well as organisation
Before we discuss our games, we w i l l explain our vision o f using this educational method at D U T .
quently add principles o f erdependencies, to incent that is arguably as much It when positioning it on ir games typically have a ablems and rules,
Game-based Education at D U T D U T in general and the T P M faculty i n particular, focuses primarily on the management o f technology-based societal issues i n both public and private environments. M u c h of the research and teaching is concerned w i t h
e played the games in a ng project management, (ents come f r o m different neering, and mostly f r o m mt (TPM).
the design and management o f "complex infrastructure systems" (Mayer, 2008; Russell, this volume). This topic is relevant to areas such as transport and logistics, energy markets, urban planning and sustainable development. I n our education, we t r y to bring real world cases to life. This is where gaming plays an important part. Through gaming, students can expe-
:sides i n the T P M faculty, r researchers working i n flexible production team This is o f course not how
rience the usefulness or meaning o f theories, methods or skills w i t h i n the real world without the risk o f negative consequences for the student, teacher or external world. I n terms o f Kolb's (1984) experiential learning cycle, we use games to give students a "concrete experience" f r o m which
le ago. W e went through
they can learn. I n our view, to foster this learning a game is not, and never
; also experienced quite a
should be, an isolated educational method. Lectures and other course
3uke &
other stages; most notably reflection on the experience and formulation o f
methods and material are needed to assist students move through Kolb's Geurts,
2004;
0 the practical issues o f
a subsequent theory. W e propose four specific rationaks for embedding
tion. Cermak-Sassenrath
games into a curriculum:
'ho shed light on how an when applying games or ; suggest that our specific 1 interested i n developing
1. Sensitising: a game is used at the beginning o f the course to sensitise students to the p r o b k m situation: for example, managing a large infrastructure project. Based on this concrete experience, students w i l l get a better understanding o f the theories discussed later i n the course.
Chapter
Ten
2. Exploring: once students know about a problem a game can be
downloa
used to explore its different dimensions; for example, how the
or a trail
complexity o f a large infrastructure project can influence manage-
usually II
ment. N o w theory comes first and students w i l l experiment w i t h how i t takes place i n a simulated real-world case. 3. Practising: often theories or skills need some practice for learning
One excelleni I n this compi students have
to take place. H o w does one practise "project management skills"
port extension
as a university student or, more specifically, the "planning and
infrastructure
management o f an off-shore w i n d farm"? A game provides an ideal setting to apply and practice such knowledge or skills safely.
This game 2011 we have supported, five
4. Proofing: less common but intriguing is the use o f a game to assess
the complete p
students. Performance i n the game is an indication o f how weU a student has acquired relevant knowledge and/or skills. I n terms of game technology, the variety of games that we have developed and used is significant. W e apply four main forms o f games; 1. Analogue games: games that do not make use o f computers or
D U T ' s Po W e base our I structed and a
computerised simulations. Players may use all kinds o f game para-
thirteen games
phernaHa, such as blocks, maps, boards, cards, dice, pawns and
were acquired r
chips, and may communicate face-to-face.
far f r o m exhau; or used f o r adv
2. Computer-supported games; a computer system (that is, a set of stand-alone computers or a local network o f computers) may handle difficult and time-consuming calculations or feedback about the consequences o f the players' individual and collective decisions. Players do not necessarily interact w i t h the computer software. Some k i n d o f support desk might take care o f it and provide the results. 3. Computer-based games: players interact directly w i t h computers. Players make their choices, take actions, make decisions and get feedback through the game's digital user-interface. Multiple computers are connected i n a network to allow multiplayer game
education were we gathered me 1. The types above 2. The games 3. Budgets an 4. Total devel 5. Involved de 6. In-game an
play or to keep track o f scores and performances. Computer-based games are usually played i n one half-day session at one location.
Our purpose is i tant to keep in m
4. Distributed/online games: players use their own personal or work computers to play the game. A single player game can be
technology, curr gives an overview
A
Decade
of
Game
Development
in
Delft
downloaded of otherwise distributed to the players at home, work or a training location. W h e n it is a multiplayer game, the players usually log in, communicate and collaborate through the internet. One excellent example is called " S i m P o r t - M V 2 " (Bekebrede, 2010). I n this computer-based game, used for sensitising as well as exploring, students have to learn about the planning and exploitation o f a major port extension project. The complexity, extensiveness and duration o f this infrastructure project can hardly be taught i n any other way. This game is one o f many we have used. I n fact between 2001 and 2011 we have used seventeen games: four analogue, four computersupported, five computer-based and four online. Here is a closer look at the complete portfolio.
DUT's P o r t f o l i o o f Games W e base our lessons on a database i n which we systematically reconstructed and analysed our historic portfolio. This database consists o f thirteen games that were developed (mostly) "in house" and four that were acquired ready-made f r o m other developers. This set of examples is far f r o m exhaustive. Other games w i t h a non-educational objective and/ or used for advanced, professional learning and training outside formal education were excluded f r o m our analysis. To analyse the relevant games we gathered metadata on six factors, namely: 1. The types of curriculum embedding and technology use noted above 2. The games' start and end year o f development and use 3. Budgets and costs 4. Total development time 5. Involved developers and sponsors 6. In-game and learning objectives O u r purpose is to identify and reveal salient insights, which are important to keep i n m i n d for the discussion on the development issues of game technology, curriculum embedding and project management. Table 1 gives an overview of the seventeen games i n our portfolio. 175
Chapter
Ten
Game name
I n - g a m e objective
Explicated learning
Application
objective
o f the game
I n s i g h t i n t o the
Sensitising, exploring
Game name
i n course Sim'MV2 &
Plan, b u i l d and
Electricity Market Simu-
manage a p o r t exten-
complexity o f p o r t
sion project
planning
F o r m a c o n s o r t i u m to
I n s i g h t i n t o and
Sensitising,
(EMSG)
Ventum
tender, p l a n and b u i l d
t r a i n i n g o f project
practising
Tramtunnel
Online
an offshore w i n d f a r m
management skills Sensitising
by Erasmus
SimPort-MV2
Ventum &
Construct.it
Redevelop an existing
I n s i g h t i n t o and
urban p o r t d i s t r i c t .
t r a i n i n g o f skills
lation Game
(Designed
University Rotterdam)
for construction
Shark w o r l d
management DUBES
Redevelop an existing urban neighbourhood
Insight into imple-
(Designed by
Sensitising
R a n j Serious
mentation o f
Gaming)
sustainable u r b a n
Cartonia
development Sieberdam
C o m e to an agree-
I n s i g h t i n t o and
Sensitising,
m e n t about renovating
t r a m m g or skills f o r
practising
(Designed by Erasmus University
a railway area d i s t r i c t
policy m a k i n g
G l o b a l Supply
A s a d i s t r i b u t o r , stay
Insight i n t o and
Chain Game
ahead o f c o m p e t i t i o n
t r a i n i n g o f skills
by managing a global
f o r supply chain
(Designed by
management
TopSim BV)
(GSCG)
n e t w o r k o f suppliers
TopSim
a n d customers Patentopolis
Team-Up
G e t the highest
Table 1: TJoe Game I n s i g h t i n t o and
Sensitising
revenues by managing
t r a i n i n g o f skills f o r
your patent p o r t f o l i o
patent management
Clear the puzzles
T r a i n i n g o f team role
Practising,
as a team as fast as
competences and
proofing
possible
assessment o f team
A
Adrift
Road Roles
Come to stakeholder
Insight into and
Predominam
From Table 1 it for "sensitising" s learning objective
role performance Containers
Rotterdam)
Sensitising
Sensitising
type o f learning
agreement about a
t r a i n i n g o f skills f o r
So a gap seems
plan f o r b u i l d i n g
process management
the designers and
an i n l a n d container
and interactive policy
volume) also ider
terminal
making
T r y to get the best
E x a m i n i n g the conse-
Sensitising,
tender f o r road
quences o f d i f f e r e n t
exploring
maintenance
tendering procedures
tion model for g; exploring (SimPo Ventum Online, only one for prool
176
A Application
Game name
Decade
In-game objective
o f t h e game
of
Game
Development
in
Delft
Explicated learning
Application
objective
o f the game
i n course
i n course Sensitising,
Electricity
M a k e the most p r o f i t
I n s i g h t i n t o invest-
exploring
Market Simu-
as a company by
m e n t behaviour i n
lation Game
p r o d u c i n g and selling
electricity markets
(EMSG)
electricity
Sensitising, practising
Sensitising
Tramtunnel
Plan and b u i l d an
I n s i g h t i n t o and
(Designed
underground tram
t r a i n i n g o f skills f o r
by Erasmus
line
policy m a k i n g
Sensitising
Ser
University Rotterdam)
Sensitising
Shark w o r l d
Plan and b u i l d a shark
T r a i n i n g project
Sensitising,
(Designed by
aquarium i n C h i n a
inanagement skills
practicing
Sensitising
R a n j Serious Gaming)
Sensitising, practising
Sensitising
Cartonia
Establish a company
I n s i g h t i n t o and
(Designed
i n the packaging
t r a i n i n g o f skills f o r
by Erasmus
i n d u s t r y and make
policy m a k i n g
University
this profitable
Rotterdam) TopSim
M a k e a profitable
T r a i n i n g o f busi-
Sensitising,
(Designed by
company
ness and personal
practising
TopSim BV) Tabic 1: Ue
Games
competences Used in BUT
Curricula
Sensitising
A Predominant e
Application
Practising, proofing
From Table 1 i t becomes clear that the predominant use o f games is for "sensitising" students about a topic relevant to the course. Explicit learning objectives behind the games promise a different, more complex,
Sensitising
type o f learning - such as better understanding o f a particular theory. So a gap seems to exist between the explicated learning objectives o f the designers and the way teachers use it. Henriksen and Lainema (this volume) also identify this gap i n their discussion o f the 1-24 applica-
Sensitising, exploring
tion model for games and experiential learning. W e do use games for exploring ( S i m P o r t - M V 2 and Road Roles), six for practising (Ventum Ventum Online, Sieberdam, Shark World, Team-Up and TopSim), but only one for proofing (Team-Up). 177
:
Chapter
Ten
A Potpourri
of
Name
Ambitions
T o illustrate the differences i n development o f the games, Table 2 lists
Electricity
Cc
the type, the order o f magnitude of the development cost, and the general
Market
(21
composition o f the project team, for each game i n our portfolio.
Simulation Game
Name
Type
Development
Project team
Tramtunnel
Shark W o r l d
Di,
Cartonia
An
costs ( i n € k ) Sim-MV2 & SimPort-
Computer-based
> 100
1 P h D student; 2 BSc
(2D)
& > 100
graduate projects; 1 research assistant; 1 f a c u l t y member
MV2
onl
and i n p u t f r o m client Ventum &
Analogue &
Ventum
distributed/
Online
online ( 2 D )
Construct.it
Computer-based (3D)
DUBES
< 20 & 50-100
game company
50-100
external game company
1 researcher; 1 P h D student;
Several f a c u l t y members i n
Computersupported ( 2 D )
2 researchers i n i t i a l l y ; 1 BSc
20-50
collaboration w i t h a consultancy company
Sieberdam
Distributed/
TopSim
graduate project; external
50-100
E x i s t i n g case was i m p l e m e n t e d i n an existing l e a r n i n g
online
environment > 100
1 f a c u l t y member; 1 P h D
Co sup
Table 2: Type, Costs c
Table 2 shows th quite low, at least "serious game" de^ tion cost o f enter of our analogue i €50k. Budgets are
Global
Distributed/
Supply
online ( 2 D
student w i t h i n p u t f r o m other
making or buying
C h a i n Game
Online)
P h D students; several M S c
supported games,
(GSCG) Patentopolis
Analogue
< 20
Team-Up
Computer-based
< 20
(3D)
Containers
Computer-
Adrift
supported
20-50
graduate projects
buying a licence c
1 P h D student
(re-purposed) ent(
5 students d u r i n g game devel-
repeated use, sma
o p m e n t p r o j e c t course; D U T
W i t h a standard!
game t e a m later i m p r o v e d i t
expected and have
Several f a c u l t y members
Finance
(Excel, V i s i o and A r e n a ) R o a d Roles
Computer-
< 20
1 P h D student; 2 M S c
Strateg.
In many cases, we including D U B E S
supported
students d u r i n g game develop-
(Excel)
m e n t project course; i n p u t
sity funds to proi
f r o m experts
supported develop: Ventum Online). 5
178
A
Name
Decade
Type
of
Game
Development
Development
in
Delft
P r o j e c t team
costs ( i n € k )
games, Table 2 lists
Electricity
Computer-based
cost, and the general
Market
(2D)
ur portfolio.
20-50
1 f a c u l t y member; 1 P h D student; improved by external
Simulation
game company
Game Tramtunnel
A naJogue
< 20
Erasmus U n i v e r s i t y Rotterdam
student; 2 BSc
Shark W o r l d
> 100
Cartonia
Analogue
< 20
mt f r o m client rchers i n i t i a l l y ; 1 BSc
R a n j Serious G a m i n g
online
te projects; 1 researcfi I t ; 1 f a c u l t y member
Distributed/
Erasmus U n i v e r s i t y Rotterdam
TopSim
Computer-
License
supported
te project; external
T o p S i m B V (Tata Interactive Systems)
ompany ircher; 1 P h D student;
Table 2: Type, Costs and Project Team of Games
Used in DUT
Curricula
al game company 1 f a c u l t y members i n
Table 2 shows that the development budgets o f many o f the games are
oration w i t h a consul-
quite low, at least i f compared to the budgets available for commercial
:ompany
"serious game" development, and even more so i f compared to the produc-
i g case was imple-
tion cost of entertainment games. The development budgets for most
d i n an existing learning nment Ity member; 1 P h D It w i t h i n p u t f r o m other cudents; several M S c
of our analogue or computer-supported games were around or below €50k. Budgets are mainly set to cover hours spent on design and testing, making or buying artwork and software programming for the computersupported games. This might be considered rather high compared to
ate projects
buying a licence on the market for a commercial-off-the-shelf game or
) student
(re-purposed) entertainment game. However, w i t h many students and
ents d u r i n g game devel-
repeated use, small licence fees for an education game quickly add up.
nt p r o j e c t course; D U T
W i t h a standardised learning product you might not get the quality
team later i m p r o v e d i t
expected and have few possibilities for modification,
al f a c u l t y members
Finance
Strategies
I n many cases, we developed games w i t h the support of research grants :> student; 2 M S c nts d u r i n g game develop-
including D U B E S , S i m P o r t - M V 2 and Road Roles. National or univer-
project course; i n p u t
sity funds to promote the use o f I C T and games i n education also
experts
supported development o f several games (Sieberdam, Construct.it and Ventum Online). Some external clients supported development, such as 179
Chapter
Ten
the Port o f Rotterdam (SimPort-MV2) or consortia o f universities or other educational institutions (Cartonia). Some games had no real need
Patentopolis
or client at the start and hence no budget, but just seemed like a game w o r t h bringing to life. A good exampk is the game V e n t u m Online. H i e development of Ventum Online started in 2001 and lasted u n t i l 2005. I t
Containers Adrift
was the first project where we t r k d to involve game technology, specifically i n the f o r m of a Flash-based graphical user interface and web-based, multi-user gameplay, to create a new generation o f games. W e had virtually no budget and nobody waiting for it and most o f the software was developed by a student during his internship period. Ventum Online
Hidden
Costs
The development o f Ventum Online suggests that i f you include hidden
Sim-MV2 OJ
E
ro ^
Sieberdam
costs the total cost for a game can be much higher, possibly by a factor of two or three. The "hidden costs" are due to some o f our games emerging f r o m a mixture of personal and organisational ambitions - P h D research, education, training, public relations, show cases, hobbyhorses and pet
SimPortMV2 Road Roles
projects, where personal time is not costed. Moreover, the games need to meet the demands o f a university environment - qualky, originality and innovativeness - rather than cost-efficiency. I n addition hours spent on the development o f games by researchers, kcturers and interns are considered part o f their regular work activities - teaching or research. A lot of work also was done by relatively low-waged students and interns.
Teani-Up
The cost of two games went through the roof: the Global Supply Chain Game and S i m M V 2 / S i m P o r t - M V 2 . Both o f them were core
2000 2(
parts of P h D research into gaming for k a r n i n g and poUcy making. The P h D students involved spent much o f their four-year research period
Figure 1: Time
Lint
conceptualising, developing and subsequently validating and studying their games (Van Houten, 2008; Bekebrede, 2010). I n both research projects the eventual games kick-started the development o f modular and
The Life Spar
flexibk game engines - basic software systems w i t h w h k h more games of
Figure 1 shows t
a similar genre could be developed easily. These game engines d i d indeed
to-live" (the tota
k a d to the development o f a suke o f similar games for higher education
early games, l i k
as well as other k a r n i n g contexts. Therefore, looking back the costs and
olis are still in u;
effotts
were discarded
seem w o r t h w h i k . The games are stfil being updated and played
and the projects had several spin-offs.
least three or fo
A
Decade
of
Game
Development
•
Patentopolis
n
in
Delft
development = game use
- game not sed anymore
IC
( ) • Z I
I
I
I
\
L
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year
Figure 1: Time
Line for Development,
Use and End of Use of Gaines
The Life Span Figure 1 shows the hfe cycle of our games, I t shows that our games' "timeto-live" (the total time up u n t i l application) varies markedly. Some o f the early games, like Cartonia, Ventum Online, Tramtunnel and Patentopolis are still i n use, although most o f them are played sporadically. Others were discarded after some productive years, Most were i n service for at least three or four years. W e attribute the short life spans to two issues. 181
Chapter
Ten
Some games were gambles, turning out to be something o f a failure m the eyes o f the teachers or designers because they were not engagmg and/ or not leading to the desired learning outcomes. Other games were abandoned because the users or owners left D U T and no one else wanted to champion them.
I n terms of ^ games. M o s t gan ronment or a sin O n l y four games ronment at one S i m p o r t - M V 2 a: systems perspect
Game D e v e l o p m e n t Issues Following our reflections on the game portfolio we now discuss three important game development issues: the role of technology, curriculum embedding, and project management. From this discussion we can derive several lessons relevant to game development i n higher education.
not necessarily ir include a three-d the game play. A quickly evident f notable exceptio puzzle world coi to collaborate ai
The Roie of Technology
uncertain workii
Over the past years we have seen a shift f r o m analogue to computer games. This was occurring i n line w i t h the increased capabilities and
Curriculunn En
reduced costs of computer game technology - game engmes and game development software. However, the shift towards computer games is not final. I n fact, the real long-runners in terms of use are the analogue games (see Figure 1). I t was and is relatively easy to take them o f f the shell and r u n them in class, as long as teachers know they exist how to r u n t h e m O f t e n the k a r n i n g objectives of a course do not necessitate computer games, especially i f they revolve around social interaction. Computer games such as Containers A d r i f t and D U B E S have been played w k h many generations of D U T students. But the computer models and interfaces became out-dated, unstable and impractical and the early generation o f computer-supported and computer-based games required a face-lift after some years of use. These sophisticated games can take a day or so to r u n and the knowkdge and experience on hmv to do so also disappeared after some time, as explained earlier. The most successful ones - V e n t u m and later S i m M V 2 - were replaced by new versions that incorporated new state-of-the-art technology and had improved game play following several years o f experience. The analogue game V e n t u m became the computer-based V e n t u m Online, and the hmited version o f S i m M V 2 became the success story that is now the commercial servke S i m P o r t - M V 2 . 182
Apart f r o m Shat games were play Conversely, Shai Online, Sieberds f r o m other locati even i f they were As indicated might be due tc applications thes objectives o f the a focus on gaini certain course oi games are applie course's content Port Developme because the coui the game but n although Ventu: about project an
A
Decade
of
Game
Development
in
Delft
I n terms o f graphics we see h m i t e d diversity amongst computer games, M o s t games include a two-dimensionally rendered virtual environment or a simple combination o f texts, graphics and static imagery. O n l y four games included a three-dimensionally rendered virtual environment at one point i n their development (Team-Up, Sieberdam, S i m p o r t - M V 2 and Construct.it). The reason lies i n our multi-actor systems perspective that calls f o r a graphical user interface that does not necessarily include a three-dimensional environment. W h e n we d i d include a three-dimensional environment, i t d i d not have a clear role i n the game play. As a result, i t also d i d not contribute to learning, as was quickly evident f r o m student and teacher evaluations. Team-Up is the notable exception because the three-dimensionally rendered abstract puzzle w o r l d contributes to the main goal o f the game: learning how to collaborate and communicate as a team w i t h i n an u n k n o w n and uncertain working environment.
Curriculum
Embedding
Apart f r o m Shark W o r l d , all games were multi-player by design. Most games were played at a single location at a specific moment i n time. Conversely, Shark W o r l d and three other computer games (Ventum Online, Sieberdam and Global Supply Chain Game) could be played f r o m other locations (including home) and at the players' own discretion, even i f they were multi-player i n nature. As indicated earlier, most games were used for "sensitising". This might be due to inexperience w i t h or unawareness o f other possible applications these games have. M o r e likely i t is related to the c u r r i c u l u m objectives o f the courses at the Faculty o f T P M which happen to have a focus on gaining insight into a topic. Whatever i t may be, w i t h i n a certain course or curriculum, two particular uses emerge. Firstly, some games are applied w i t h i n a course because the game's domain fitted the course's content very well - for example, S i m P o r t - M V 2 used w i t h i n a Port Development course. Secondly, games are applied w i t h i n a course, because the course content fits w i t h the topic of, or the theory behind, the game but not necessarily the domain o f the game. For example, although V e n t u m O n l i n e and S i m P o r t - M V 2 were applied i n courses about project and process management i n large infrastructure projects. 183
Chapter
Ten
the games' domains are actually concerned w i t h w i n d f a r m and p o r t development, respectively.
Project Manj
As discussed earlier, and i n agreement with O ' N e i l et al. (2005), we
A l l games were de
support the proposition that games themselves are not sufficient to guar-
The specialists vver
antee learning. However, elements exist i n games that can be activated
O f t e n they were st
w i t h i n an instructional context to enhance the learning process (Garris et
of engineering and
al, 2002). This key element is concrete experience, As W o l f e (1997) notes
design projects has
learning outcomes are affected by the instructional strategies employed, and
f o r students (in ter
teacher must support the process of reflection and theory building based
games were develoj
on the experience, as discussed by Henriksen and Lainema (this volume).
partners
who eitl
The games are often played by relatively small groups o f students. I n
knowledge. Road ]
some learning contexts students take on interactive and practical assign-
a company special!
ments (for example, presentations and discussions) i n groups o f up to
of developing gam,
50, usually after one or more plenary lectures. O u r games are designed
able to develop gan
to support unique workgroup forms, because they are played at D U T
curricula.
as a single physical location, I n hindsight this may have influenced their design, since i t was an implicit requisite. Given the dominance of workgroup-playable games, i t is not surprising
Designing game; prototype to a full) enough to r u n i n ed
to find that most of our games take slightly less than a f u l l day to complete.
most o f the money ]
Getting students to a specific location to set up and play a game over
opment o f the gam(
several days or weeks is hard to organise. I n those cases where game play
the games a few tii
did indeed last several days or weeks, the specific game could be played
or requested, especi
f r o m home or any other location.
example, SimPort-fv
I n addition to these practical reasons for finishing the game i n one
Various ways exist tc
workday, there were reasons f r o m the perspective o f game design. The
to innovation i n de;
older games were mostly round-based (Thiagarajan, 2003; De Caluwé
is an important resc
& Geurts, 1999) and immersion i n the game arguably increases i f i t is
teachers and researcl
played for several consecutive hours instead of roughly one hour each day
"junior colleagues" h
over several days or weeks. The few times we set up a longer-running role-
in higher education,
playing game that was "asynchronous" and "distributed", hke Sieberdam,
students or started
our experiences i n terms o f student-player involvement and performance
skills they gained as
were not as positive. Designing a game to be engaging enough for students to play it for weeks on end is a great challenge. I n post-game questionnaires, students have generally agreed that
Conclusions
gaming is an interesting and valuable educational method and that the
Based on our exper
specific learning objectives were reached (Bekebrede, 2010; Gasnkr,
as recommendations
2008; Van Houten, 2007).
educational institutie
184
A
Decade
of
Game
Development
in
Delf
Project Management A l l games were developed i n teams o f several teachers and specialists. The specialists were not always game design/development professionals. O f t e n they were still students o f game design and development or even of engineering and management. Involving your own students i n game design projects has great advantages for teachers (in terms o f creativity), for students (in terms o f learning) and, o f course, for the budget. M o s t games were developed i n a network context w i t h (external or internal) partners
who either had domain-specific or topic-/theory-specific
knowledge. Road Roles, for example, was developed w i t h the help o f a company specialising i n road maintenance. This shows the advantage of developing games for engineering. I n this discipline, we are often able to develop games for organisations that are also useful i n our o w n curricula. Designing games i n higher education can be expensive. Scaling a game prototype to a fully fledged, playable version that is stable and reliable enough to r u n i n education requires a considerable budget. This is where most o f the money hsted i n Table 2 went. As to the issue o f time, development o f the games generally took up a year or more. A f t e r we played the games a few times, many adaptations and extensions were needed or requested, especially for games that also involved P h D research (for example, S i m P o r t - M V 2 and Patentopolis). Various ways exist to make games development affordable. W h e n i t comes to innovation i n design, research and teaching the "student workforce" is an important resource of institutions i n higher education. For us, as teachers and researchers, the involvement of and working w i t h students as "junior colleagues" has been one of the most rewarding aspects of gaming in higher education. I n the past decade many o f them have become P h D students or started their own business using the ideas, knowledge and skills they gained as members o f the gaming group.
Conclusions Based on our experiences we derive six lessons that others can take as recommendations for developing and applying games i n their own educational institutions: 185
J Chapter
Ten
1, Games can change the organisation of education: The fact that we have been able to reflect on the development and use of no less than seventeen games - primarily w i t h i n our faculty over a tenyear period - shows that we consider games to be valuable assets to the students' learning process. I t also shows that our faculty has changed; using gaming for university learning is now taken sen-
someone tal< and keeping w i l l i n g to in Finding sue! game's origii tually bring
ously by the majority of teachers and studems. A gaming group
5. Make techn
is constantly involved in designing and running games and many
that three-d
teachers have subsequently applied games i n their courses.
essential no
2. Planned versus emergent karning: A k h o u g h games have a general value i n our faculty, i t is often difficuk to plan what games offer specifically. I n many cases, we observed that what the studerrts k a r n differs f r o m the e x p l k k learning objectives. For example, in games where project management skÜls were the mam focus,
attractive, b three-dimer Recently, D three-dimer value i f imn of our gam«
students also unintentionally practised social skills such as negotiation or communication. O n the one hand, we w a m to reach
6. Never devel
welkdefined and, preferably, measurabk resuks w i t h games. O n
the increasf
the other hand we do not want to deter emergent learning because
versions an(
that IS why we use games in the first place. Therefore, when
feel out-dat
it comes to defining learning objectives or evaluatmg k a r n i n g
developed c
outcomes, t r y to t h i n k of and value both f o r m a l and informal,
versions th;
or simply (un)intended, (un)desirable, (un)expected k a r n i n g
for success.
outcomes. 3. Start small: The number of games at D U T was only possible
So what is next? only computer-j
because of the low costs. I f a game is successful it w i l l , or at kast
"no", but we are
should, attract potential investors. The higher education environ-
student's skills,
ment is unique in ks possibilitks to use studems for building
lenge is to devel
prototypes. Starting that way, some games w i l l disappear after a
current and futu
few years, w h i k others w i l l develop into f u l l y fledged versions.
outcomes (see al A second, relate
4 Find a champion: A game for advanced k a r n i n g is hardly ever finished. I t can live on as long as the game's "sponsors" are motivated to keep i t alive, revive or upgrade it, and use and facilitate it. A potentially great game can die before k reaches m a t u r k y when the sponsors lose interest or kave. Once the game project is weU under way k is almost impossible to find another sponsor unless
186
chapter, our gan because the cun insight into a a purposes, teack curriculum obje the spirit of Chi
A
n: The fact that ; and use o f no less iculty over a tenbe valuable assets
Decade
of
Game
Development
someone takes up this role spontaneously. W e recommend
in
Delft
finding
and keeping a "champion", someone - internal and/or external willing to invest time and energy into completing a game project. Finding such a person might be hard. Ideally, the person is the
that our faculty has
game's original conceptualiser, who w i l l feel responsible and even-
s now taken seri-
tually bring the project to a good end.
A "gaming group"
5. Make technology serve the specified learning goals: W e learnt
; games and many
that three-dimensionally rendered virtual worlds are often neither
eir courses.
essential nor beneficial. I t is indeed necessary that a game looks
ames have a general what games offer aat the students £S. For example, e the main focus, kills such as nego'e want to reach
attractive, but our portfolio indkates that one should only use three-dimensional worlds when the learning goals require this. Recently, Dalgarno and Lee (2010) researched the added value o f three-dimensionality i n virtual environments, showing that i t has value i f immersion and a sense o f presence are required. I n the case of our games such experiences have not been required. 6. Never develop for eternity: Gaming technology ages rapidly. W i t h
5 w k h games. O n
the increase of computer games i n the portfolio, the need for new
ent learning because
versions and new features increases. O l d versions can quickly
srefore, when
feel out-dated, w i t h innovations i n graphics and simulation being
Liating learning
developed constantly. Incremental development, and employing
al and informal,
versions that work - even i f not the best ever - has proven a key
;cted learning
for success. So what is next? Are we "fed up" w i t h turn-based games that are at most
is only possible
only computer-supported and played on a single day? The answer is
ll it w i l l , or at least
"no", but we are more and more interested i n using games for "proofing"
education environ-
student's skills, knowledge and attitudes. Therefore, our next chak
its for building
lenge is to develop systematic evaluation systems that can be applied i n
.1 disappear after a
current and future games continuously and consistently to assess learning
fledged versions.
outcomes (see also K r i z and Hense, 2006; De Freitas and M a r t i n , 2006).
tig is hardly ever ponsors" are moti. use and facflitate i t . :hes maturity when ame project is well her sponsor unless
A second, related challenge is more teacher-centric. As discussed i n this chapter, our games have mostly been applied to sensitise students, partly because the curriculum objectives often do not ensure that students gain insight into a certain topic. To apply games for practising and proofing purposes, teachers would also need to be open towards redefining their curriculum objectives as well as their teaching theories and methods, i n the spirk o f Cherry and K h a n (in this volume). 187
Chapter
Ten
About the Authors Harald Warmelink is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management at D e l f t University of Technology, the Netherlands. H e can be contacted at this email:
[email protected] Geertje Bekebrede is an assistant professor in the Facuky of Technology, Policy and Management at D e l f t University of Technology, the Netherlands. She can be contacted at this email:
[email protected] Casper Harteveld is a P h D candidate i n the Faculty of Technology, PoHcy and Management at D e l f t University of Technology, the Netherlands.
Chapter Elev
=rom D
Democi olitics (
H e can be contacted at this email:
[email protected] Igor Mayer is an associate professor i n the Facuky of Technology, Polky and Management at D e l f t University of Technology, the Netherlands. H e can be contacted at this email: i.s.mayer@tudelft,nl
"heory
Sebastiaan Meijer is an assistant professor i n the Facuky of Technology, Polky and Management at D e l f t University of Technology, the Netherlands. H e can be contacted at this email:
[email protected]
Introductior East Politics Teaching politics cult by the shacl values and politic: invalid and subje people and state; (Stover, 2005).
