On an earlier posting, Melissa was commenting on the fear of bullying. This emerged out of a mini-debate we had in class about whether or not bullying in a virtual environment could be likened to bullying in a real
environment (e.g. school playground etc.)This discussion was part of a larger discussion of whether or not a virtual environment can be a 'safe space.'
With all of the fears and paranoia about internet predators, why would a person want to use a virtual game environment as medium for working with at-risk youth?
This is where the distinction between a Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game (MMORPG) and a Multi User Virtual Environment (MUVE) is important to distinguish. I don't think it would be wise to have anybody going online with teens from our afterschool programs. This would be like saying that anybody can come into a community center; or that any kids can play basketball - Of course we don't do this!
Milbrey McLaughlin's seminal report called Community Counts: How Youth Organizations Matter for Youth Development (ANYBODY in youthwork needs to read this doc.) illustrates this clearly. She says, "Urban youth, especially, put security at the top of the list of requirements for a community-based youth organization they would attend with confidence. Adult leaders of the urban youth organizations we studied understand that the 'boundaries' most significant to their members are not census tracks or attendance areas but gang boundaries. They take special care to ensure the safety of their members." (Mclaughlin, 15)I think that it is possible to create a secure space which helps to ensure safety without regimenting the activities which take place in the virtual space. I think that it is important that this game design be structured in a way that it encourages youth to play out their moral decisions so that they can experience the full consequence of the decisions which they make in life.
What do you think?
14 comments:
Melissa:
Okay I understand where you are coming from now. There are a lot of problems I have heard about and seen from online chat rooms as well, but in my experience with MMO's (I've played 4 of them now) I have never seen this type of abuse. I am not saying that it doesn't exist at all, I'm sure that it does. I just don't think there is much of it out there.
On top of that there is a better system in place in MMO's to prevent and stop this. In all the games I have played you can flag a GM (Game Master) anytime you have a problem within the game. (Could be anything to a problem with gameplay to problems with other players within the game.) At this point the GM would moderate any problems with players in anyway they would see fit. And usually a GM will have the ability to check chat logs to obtain information on what exactly happened.
But to talk a little more generally about MMO's now....
The key to a good MMO is interaction. Without players interacting with eachother, the game would be pointless and most likely boring as well. The more restrictions put on this interaction between players will make the game more boring. (I've played MMO's that involve only communication to interact, to games that let me kill any other player I wanted to.)
But to get back to the point, I really don't see bullying being a huge issue with this project. In my four years of MMO's I have seen none at all.
Honestly my biggest concern is with addiction to these types of games. I have heard of and seen a lot of crazy things because of people being so wrapped up in a virtual world. Since this game would be developed for a certain group, maybe making the game accessible during certain times would help?
---
I don't think it would be wise to have anybody going online with teens from our afterschool programs.
---
Maybe only allowing teens to have the game would help to control the environment that is created for them?
Chris,
Thanks for your comments - and insight into MMOGs. We really appreciate you readily joining into the debate!
I agree with your suggestion to have a GM, but also potentially additional sub-game masters - being youthworkers who are going online with their teens.
Jim Gee talks about these being 'cognitive apprentices' - based on language which emerges out of constructivist education material - particularly the work of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger (See 'Situated Learning' and 'Communities of Practice.')
How controlled would you think this environment should be?
Do you think a MUVE would work better than an MMOG?
I think the interactive element is an important point. Some designers call this 'game playability.' In otherwords - If it's not fun, people will not want to play it!
This is a serious design issue that needs to be explored in greater detail. We'll need to talk more about this.
I think your question about addiction is a valid - and important - question. Addiction is never something which is good. However, I think that it is important to navigate through the various debates on video game addiction. There are many conflicting views - even among top medical practitioners.
I'll try to post some of these important links. In the meantime, if you (or anyone else) has some interesting information, please send through the links and I'll post them.
Steve
Chris,
On your second posting - Could you clarify what you mean? Are you saying that they should be able to play games without any interaction? Or are you saying the opposite?
Could you elaborate on your thoughts?
Thank you for the insight to MMOG's. I've never really seen one, but from what I heard Steve mention in class about being able to interact with youth from other areas, it made me concerned. I worked in an after-school program for two years, and bullying (on a face-to-face level) was the predominant issue. As a result, the staff members had to take a training course on recognizing, and counter-acting bullying on all levels. Because of this training session, and the tv show's mentioned in an earlier comment, I've become a little more sensitive to the subject. I would just like to say that I have no problem with the youth interacting with each other. I'm actually encouraged by it, because it allows the youth (and us as youth-workers) to experience people from different economic/social/cultural backgrounds whom we might not normally meet in real life. I was unaware of the existence of a GM. This actually helps calm my earlier fears. I guess my main question was who is in charge, and how much can they do? Thank you for enlightening me!
Addiction is another concern that I sort of had in the back of my head, but didn't communicate clearly as a concern. Would we limit how much time the youth can spend with the program, or would that be one of the obstacles they have to face? Is it possible to have their avatar become sickly or something when they begin to spend too much time in the virtual world, and not enough in the "real" world? Or, in my naivete, am I just dreaming up currently impossible scenarios?
Steve, what kind of scenarios could be experienced? You mentioned things like drug use in class. What other life decisions could be made?
Steve,
About the second post I meant to restrict the people we play the game. I am saying we need interaction. But to allow for a safer environment we want to know who is playing the game.
I've got some ideas about this, I just haven't had time to think them through too much. I'll try to post more on this tomorrow. As well as the rest of the questions you brought up.
I'm also looking forward to those links as well. Would be nice to see some of the views on the subject of video game addiction.
Melissa,
I like your idea about negative effects within the game for playing for too long in a sitting. That idea would be something easy to implement, and could add a nice twist to the game as well. Maybe adding an idea of energy or fatigue to monitor how long a character is in the game, and the longer the character is in-game the worse the effects become.
Another idea could be to just limit the time allowed to play. But this idea would constrict a choice that could possibly be made by the player. Melissa's idea would bring in another choice that needs to be made by the player.
Getting in late here Steve. Btw, great blog. Will be checking in regularly from now on.
Let me say first of all that I am totally for any relevant tools that can get kids thinking and video games might be the most relevant tool in the western world. As for online gaming, however, one big problem.
Online gaming isn't something you can participate in for 30 minutes at a time. It's something you dedicate hours a week to. My own experience with urban youth is that the only access they have to the internet is at school (if they're lucky) and at an after school club (if they're lucky), neither of which would afford them hours of online play. With this in mind, I'm not sure that the normal online game would make much sense.
Your vision here is amazing. And I hope you pull it off. But I'm not sure your original vision would have much of an impact on urban young people. That said, there's nothing wrong with impacting suberbia!
Thanks for the report download, btw, I plan on reading it later today.
Hey there Melissa and Chris,
Regarding the time issue:
McLaughlin's article highlights that goal-oriented experiences seem to attract more kids than just simple 'swim and gym' places - where there is no real curriculum.
Games are often used like a gym - It's just a social space where kids can come and play. While this is accomplishing some things, it doesn't become transformational until someone takes that environment and transforms it into a medium which serves as an agent for intentional social change. When I say curriculum, I don't mean syllabus, homework, and an apple for the teacher... I mean an intentional, learning experience. i.e. joining an actual basketball team which is going to play in real games.
When there is this type of 'intentionality' gameplay is not just simply for fun, but it's with an expressed objective. McLaughlin's research thoroughly supports this idea.
So in regard to time, this would need to be well-thought through.
Hi there Tim,
It's good to hear from you after such a long time! I hope all is going well in the UK.
Thanks for your comments too. You're certainly welcome to continue to chip into these conversations and debates. I'm trying to utilize my blog in a reflexive-think-tank kinda way. So, the more diverse the participants, the better.
Regarding the time factor: As per the last comment I made, I am basing this argument specifically on McLaughlin's longitudinal study. I would argue that an intentional, goal-based experience could work. Check out my previous posting (I think it was back in December) on Sasha Barab's design for the Boys and Girls Club. This seems to be working really well in that setting - and that's with kids from lower-income communities.
While there are concerns with a digital divide between kids who have and don't have, this divide has been radically reduced in recent years. (Search for the Kaiser Family Foundation report of media and kids I posted a few weeks back).
With that being said, the reason why I specify that it would be better for this type of game design to be a MUVE rather than an MMOG is because this would be a game which would be played when kids were at an after-school program.
Many of our after-school programs have/or are now installing computer centers via grants like e-quip for success. I know this is also happening in the West. Therefore, these discussions are specifically focused on how to utilize that technology for something more than MS-Word, or simple game play.
Much of this is based on the media literacy discourse going on in education/after-school studies. There are tons of examples of groups that are using new media to work with urban (and rural) youth.
While these games do require hours of play, a MUVE is a little bit different, and is a bit of a smaller version of the MMOG virtual communities. Therefore, I don't think the same amount of hours per day would be required of teens involved in such a program.
Thanks once again for your comments, Tim.
Hey Steve, I kinda like the who mass gaming multi player thinggy. I think it could work if serious thought and planning went into putting it together.
But here are a couple dilemas that I think this type of thing would face within a afterschool or youth program setting. The first thing is how do you make it more than just a game? If the kids think it's just a game then it's not real and there really isn't much carry over into teaching them anything in real life. How do you get them to take it serious and make it meaningful to them? If you take away then fun from it and structure it too much then it becomes just another activity that they have to do. So I think finding that balance and being able to communicate the benefits and meaning to the kids who'll be involved would be vital to the success of this program or game.
The second issue that I see is the issue of feedback. How do you know or tell what has been accomplished or what has worked? There will probably need to be a specific time where kids will be able to debrief on their virtural character and possibly gain direction or clarity on issues. I'm not sure if I'm as clear on this specific issue as I should but I hope you understand atleast a little bit of what I'm trying to say.
Thanks for your time Steve and all you other folks out there reading. Take and good night!
That last comment was posted by Gavin.
Post a Comment