Breathtaking visuals
Luscious natural environments
Developers of serious games have clear intentions to educate the player, through playing the game, regarding a moral or lesson which is tightly coupled to an actual event or phenomenon in reality. To raise the credibility of the game, it has to progress toward becoming a clockwork world. Although the representation can be made abstract and the complexity of processes can be simplified, the game should replicate realistic environments and causal relations convincingly enough. September 12, a serious game which casts the player as an airforce pilot who has to bomb an Iraqi town, is one such good example. Civilians who are near a dead Iraqi countryman mourn in silence and tears and are subsequently converted into terrorists. The depiction of the scenario might not be photorealistic but the intricacy of the causal relations which centers on the transformation of a harmless civilian to a dangerous terrorist, is successfully and prominently displayed and explained through the sequence of in-game events.
The way to "win" is to do nothing at all
Since a learning outcome is usually attached to a serious game, the player has to enter into a state of reflection to understand and derive meaning from the actions which he performs in the game world. However, this notion is in clear violation of the immersive experience and suspension of disbelief which are required in order to compel to Huizinga’s definition of games. In order for a video game to qualify as a clockwork world, the game experience should be flow-like without any form of disengagement such as having to pause and reflect on one’s actions in the midst of gameplay. In my humble opinion, if reflection occurs after the player is done playing with the game, the learning process and/or outcome, which may be subconscious and not a conscientious effort, are not detrimental to the immersive experience.
For instance, a classmate of mine remarked in class that Angry Birds should be considered as a serious game which teaches physics. Her comment struck me with a realization that I am being taught lessons about physics by the game all these while and I was not aware of it! Although the inner workings of the physics engine are hidden from me, the game showcases the mechanics through the gameplay beautifully without having the need for explicit instructions. I do not understand how the gears of a watch work in tandem but all I need to know is that I can rely on it to tell time accurately. Similarly, when I play Angry Birds, physics equations do not pop up in my head but rather, through trial and error, I learn about the effects of momentum and gravity on the trajectory motion of a projectile subconsciously.
Are you learning something yet?
The Macdonald’s game is a serious game which teaches the player managerial skills which are required to sustain a fastfood business. Along the course of gameplay, the player would be introduced to ethical issues such as using diseased cows for the hamburger patties in order to keep the chain of supply moving smoothly. As observed by Ms Anne Marie Schleiner, players do not seem to care about detrimental effects but are willing to embrace unethical means in order to progress in the game. In my opinion, this phenomenon is observed because the state of flow is strong and reflection might occur but is probably not a conscious effort. While it might not be fully accurate, Henriksen’s stairway model can be applied to the Macdonald’s game. There are incremental learning outcomes for reflection but the player is thrown back into the state of flow before he reaches a full understanding of the repercussions of his actions.
Step into the shoes of a fastfood restaurant manager
My question for you would be: Do you think that a state of reflection, especially one that is imposed in the middle of gameplay, is disruptive and diminishes the mystique of the game as a clockwork world? The topic is the center of hot debate in my serious games course and I would be interested to know your opinions.