Strategies for Effective Digital Games Development and Implementation

Abstract

Digital technologies have increased the pace of knowledge creation, sharing, and the way in which learning is being undertaken. This chapter considers how Serious Games (SGs) as a digital technology endeavours to support effective lifelong learning. Three fundamental characteristics of the SG ecosystem, namely, game mechanics, interoperability, and assessment, are considered here as strategic elements that impact upon how SGs are to support learning, how they affect the learning environment, and ultimately, the SG development process. A prospective deconstruction of SGs into its pedagogical elements and its game mechanic nodes is presented to make aware the interoperability modus from which topical (domain) frameworks or architectures can be structured and assessed. To this end, the chapter explores the conceptual underpinnings through a case study on the eAdventure platform and argues that the key elements form the foundation for strategic development and implementation of SGs.

Mapping learning and game mechanics for serious games analysis

“…This is due to various factors including the fundamental fact that digital game designers and educational experts do not usually share a common vocabulary and view of the domain (Gunter et al , ). This perspective is also shared by Killi and Lainema (), and Lim et al (). There is hence a need to improve the theoretical basis behind the design of SGs, considering the underlying pedagogic principles and the contexts of use, which are also key to the success (Bellotti, Berta & De Gloria, 2012a).…”

“…Yet, despite the digital games' potential in terms of interactivity, immersion and engagement, more work is still required to understand how to better design, administrate and evaluate digital games across different learning contexts and targets (Alvarez & Michaud, ; Bellotti, Berta & De Gloria, 2010a; de Freitas & Liarokapis, ; Dror, 2008; Ulicsak, ; Westera, Nadolski, Hummel & Woperels, ). One of the biggest issues with educational games to date is the inadequate integration of educational and game design principles (e.g., Gunter, Kenny & Vick, ; Kenny & Gunter, ; Kiili & Lainema, ; Lim et al , ). This is due to various factors including the fundamental fact that digital game designers and educational experts do not usually share a common vocabulary and view of the domain (Gunter et al , ).…”

Learning Mechanics and Game Mechanics Under the Perspective of Self-Determination Theory to Foster Motivation in Digital Game Based Learning

“…To map pedagogical constructs to entertaining gameplay, Lim et al (2013) proposed the LM-GM and was evaluated by Arnab et al (2015) as a Serious Game (SG) analysis guideline with positive outcomes. As a general overview, the pedagogical elements are viewed as an abstract interface while game elements are deemed as a concrete interface of SGs.…”

CREATING EVALUATION PROFILES FOR GAMES DESIGNED TO BE FUN: An Interpretive Framework for Serious Game Mechanics

“…As with the pedagogic dimension, design considerations should address and reflect upon design frameworks, models, and theories. Evaluators can then obtain new insights by reflecting upon the game and immersive mechanics as individual parts of an artifact (e.g., Lim et al, 2013), for example, by using design science research (Gregor & Jones, 2007;Peffers, Tuunanen, Rothenberger, & Chatterjee, 2008;Pries-Heje & Baskerville, 2008), Gestalt theory (Chang, Dooley, & Tuovinen, 2002), or theories of participatory design (Kensing & Blomberg, 1998). For example, evaluators can interpret design considerations by asking which theories of design can be applied to the game, who designed the game, how the design approach shaped the game's architecture, and what could be done better.…”