I’ve taken Nolan’s 18 points and I’ve illustrated them in a little slideshow – it’s also, hopefully, mildly amusing.

And what’s more I challenge anyone to come up with a list that really did come from games, and not the other way round.

The interesting thing, and the thing that really matters is that people that are now starting to ask the more important questions (actually some people have been doing this for years). What is it really about games that make them compelling? And conversley, why do people find aspects of their lives so dull? Here’s an interesting view for starters from Scott Nicholson.

It’s got me thinking about education, government and kitchens in a completely different way – more about this another time.

People enjoy computer games – therefore if you turn non-game things into games, everyone will be happy. That’s the idea, and that’s what this book is trying to tell you. But (and I guess you saw that BUT coming) the argument is not convincing. The authors describe in depth (and then in more depth) the techniques that games use (e.g points, levels, badges, power-ups) and then gives examples of non-game games that use these techniques. But (!) imho they are not very good examples. Take for, instance, Four Square: does it make me want to use (play?) it because it gives me quirky badges? Ok, to be fair I am not your typical gamer – I liked Lemmings and SimCity – but my thoughts on gamification are that it can be a powerful tool to engage people who are not your typical gamers, and I think this is where the book fails. The last 2 chapters, a tutorial on programming a points/badge website, are out of place here and would have been happier on the associated website.

Curiously, I expect books about games and gaming to be enjoyable reading; the reality is that they are all too often rather dull (A Theory of Fun being a notable exception). I’ve given the book 3 stars because it really made me start to think about what systems and processes could really benefit from gamification (Schools and the House of Lords! – not appropriate to expand here, but will do so in my LocoMatrix blog), though I think that would have happened if I had read a good article on the subject.

So two gamification ideas. The first is to do with schools and education. A Google search reveals (expectedly) that I am not the first by any means to write about it. What comes up in the search reveals that many writers have missed some or all of the points (and, of course, as with any buzzword there is a lot of bandwagon jumping going on). Missed point 1: turning a lesson into a game is likely to fail (not true of Invisible Buildings, I hope). Missed point 2; giving achievement badges etc probably going to fail, although come to think of it, house points worked well in my day.

No, my point is that the whole mechanics of learning could be made game-like. Take for example, the A level (or whatever exam you like). Two years learning and then you take the test. Your future depends on whether you pass or fail (or even that you pass with a star – hey, that’s gamification – or perhaps not). Far better – you learn something, may be over a day or a week, you do something to show you understand it – you go “up a level”. Going up a level may just take you to the next stage in a subject or it may allow you to move sideways within the subject. Or you may choose to stop there and do something else.

Your argument may be that how will that work within the class and with the teacher – my argument would be: how do teachers and classes fit within the game plan? I will have more to say on this at a later date.

My second gamification idea revolves around bicameral government. Reasonable people realise the need to reform/abolish the House of Lords but what do you replace it with. A second elected chamber which will either reflect the views of the Commons, or completely obstruct it if majority is held by another party. So what really is the point?

So is there some merit in having a second house based, not on election, but on merit? In a way, like life peers, except not for life and not chosen by the government – maybe more like those chosen for OBEs etc (hey, badges!), except not chosen by the government. Yes, maybe, the new house would be made up of those who play the “game” and then, er… “win”.

This could be expanded to have a second “house” at local government level – made up from  local “players”. And then maybe it’s the local players who go on to elect the national players.

Just a thought (and maybe something we can refine – perhaps by creating the “game”)

The following concerns a question in a physics degree exam at the University of Copenhagen: “Describe how to determine the height of a skyscraper with a barometer.”

One student replied: “You tie a long piece of string to the neck of the barometer, then lower the barometer from the roof of the skyscraper to the ground. The length of the string plus the length of the barometer will equal the height of the building.”

This highly original answer so incensed the examiner that the student was failed. The student appealed on the grounds that his answer was indisputably correct, and the university appointed an independent arbiter to decide the case. The arbiter judged that the answer was indeed correct, but did not display any noticeable knowledge of physics.

To resolve the problem it was decided to call the student in and allow him six minutes in which to provide a verbal answer, which showed at least a minimal familiarity the basic principles of physics.

For five minutes the student sat in silence, forehead creased in thought. The arbiter reminded him that time was running out, to which the student replied that he had several extremely relevant answers, but couldn’t make up his mind which to use. On being advised to hurry up the student replied as follows:

“Firstly, you could take the barometer up to the roof of the skyscraper, drop it over the edge, and measure the time it takes to reach the ground. The height of the building can then be worked out from the formula H = 0.5g x t2. But bad luck on the barometer.”

“Or if the sun is shining you could measure the height of the barometer, then set it on end and measure the length of its shadow. Then you measure the length of the skyscraper’s shadow, and thereafter it is a simple matter of proportional arithmetic to work out the height of the skyscraper.”

“But if you wanted to be highly scientific about it, you could tie a short piece of string to the barometer and swing it like a pendulum, first at ground level and then on the roof of the skyscraper. The height is worked out by the difference in the gravitational restoring force T = 2 ∏√ (l / g).”

“Or if the skyscraper has an outside emergency staircase, it would be easier to walk up it and mark off the height of the skyscraper in barometer lengths, then add them up.” 

“If you merely wanted to be boring and orthodox about it, of course, you could use the barometer to measure the air pressure on the roof of the skyscraper and on the ground, and convert the difference in millibars into feet to give the height of the building.”

“But since we are constantly being exhorted to exercise independence of mind and apply scientific methods, undoubtedly the best way would be to knock on the janitor’s door and say to him ‘If you would like a nice new barometer, I will give you this one if you tell me the height of this skyscraper’.” 

The student was Niels Bohr, the only person from Denmark to win the Nobel Prize for Physics.

Height = tan(angle) x distance away from the object. You can make it easy for yourself by walking back to a point where the angle = 45 degrees. Tan 45 = 1 so
distance away = height
BUT the GPS error (maybe around 5 meters) will be more of a problem the nearer you are
AND how easy is it to use the phone to estimate angle.

Watch this space.

Interestingly with both our Invisible Buildings and Detect-o-saurus games, they seem to be of interest across a much greater age group than one would imaging. Yes, we could perhaps adapt the graphics to different ages, but the underlying games seem to appeal to all.

Furthermore, in talking with an archaeologist, there was a suggestion that with very little adaptation, Invisible Buildings would be suitable for undergraduates. Will it – watch this space and we will let you know.

Image via Wikipedia

Friday marked the end of Dinosaur Camp – our week-long activities designing and building a location-based game that would allow school children to locate and then dig up a dinosaur skeleton (virtually). Featuring the Colossal Fossilator and the Skelly Telly, we were able to demonstrate some of the principles of the game at “The Big Idea – Creating Creativity” at Varndean School on Friday.

Detecto-o-saurus has a number of similarities with our existing Invisible Buildings game but instead of digging up a Roman Villa, you dig up, er … a dinosaur. The method of detection is rather different requiring the user to drill samples at various locations (using the Colossal Fossilator) and look at the age of the fossils discovered.

From correlating the ages and depths at which these are found, they can then set the depth at which the Skelly Telly should look for the dinosaur bones. Then having found a skeleton they must work out how to extract it. They can use a variety of methods from gentle brushing and clearing away the soil to dynamiting. But beware if you get it wrong!

Tale the bones back to the lab to reconstruct how your dinosaur may have looked – is it a Stegosaurus or is it a chicken?

Thanks to Claire Hall who was helping all last week. Claire is an MA student at Brunel University and won a prize to work at LocoMatrix for a week following a talk by Richard Vahrman and her submission of a poster describing how the game might work.

Have a look at this example for a game where you have 2 choices at each point. I’ve created it as a pup crawl, but that does’t mean that LocoMatrix encourages drinking! Quite the opposite – get outdoors and run around.

So once again as you get to each point (and at the station start), you see a video but you are given 2 choices as to where to go next. 2 paths are relatively short, but if you make the (wrong) decision you will be zigzagging all over town.

Here are some ways you might use this idea in a game:

• just give people a choice of routes
• have a race – you’ll lose if you pick the zigzag
• real world gamebook
• solve a mystery

Here’s another map I’ve created. Don’t have any thoughts as to what you might do with it (in a way, that’s why we’ve created the framework – you probably have all the best ideas). In this map there are several choices at each location. I was intrigued by the idea of the Inner and Outer Circles that can be found in Regent’s Park.

If you wanted to create something similar then you would use our editor to create an xml file – this holds the video file names, the coordinates of where they are going to be activated, and the additional text that is needed for the game. Alternatively, you could supply us with a map, exactly like this, and we can prepare it for you.

The videos and the xml file get put into a folder on the SD card on the phone in advance – means no delays in uploading the links, no connection to internet needed whilst playing.

In my next post, I will show an extended version of the system where you have choices at each point.

Jools Moore: I hear you have a new game in development – what’s it all about?
Richard Vahrman: Finding and defusing bombs – it’s 24 meets geocaching meets The Hurt Locker. And it’s all against the clock.
JM: Interesting – how’s it played?
RV: The game is in 3 parts. One – using a map, find the area in which a bombs been hidden. Two – using orienteering, find the exact location of the bomb. Three – defuse the bomb but remember, it’s ticking, so if you’re not quick, you will be blown up.
JM: And that’s it?
RV: Not quite, once you’ve done this, you have to find all the other bombs.
JM: Sound’s exhausting – so where did the idea come from?
RV: We had been playing around with ideas based on a traditional treasure hunt (which incidentally was LocoMatrix’s second game). And watching people play (particularly adults), I was aware that there didn’t seem any urgency in reaching a target, so I was keen on doing something where you had to move quickly, or else you lost. Inherently, I am not too keen on games that have things blowing up, but a ticking bomb is a really good motivator!
JM: And I guess it makes an ideal team game; is that what you intended?
RV: Exactly, we are thinking up to 4 teams of 3 to 4 people. But we also wanted to factor in some elements that meant the fasted team wouldn’t necessarily be the winners. Strategy would come in too, and one of the ideas was that if a bomb explodes, teams in the blast zone are handicapped, but teams outside the zone can run to collect the bomb fragments which are also worth points – so you might get more points for not getting there first.
JM: It sounds as though this would make a great game for team-building companies.
RV: Yes, this was another of our considerations. A game where real teamwork would play a part – you have to decide which bombs to go for – which route to take you there – so many possibilities.
JM: And actually defusing the bomb?
RV: This depends a little on how the game is set up and who exactly we build it for. In general, like all good bombs (and incidentally why do all bombs have a numeric counter – if I made a bomb, this is the one bit I would leave out!), you remove the cover and then have to cut coloured wires in sequence. So in our game this may be done by correctly identifying the make and model of the bomb, either from a “book” or maybe communicating with a control room. But as a school’s game, the colours could be linked in with multiple choice revision questions.
JM: You mention a control room.
RV: Again, this is a variation of the game where a part of the team could be back at a base directing the operations and providing info on how best to proceed and what the other teams are up to.
JM: And is the game available now?
RV: Not yet, we are looking for sponsors to provide the wherewithal to carry out the coding. This may either be a school or schools, or could be a team-building company looking for something new. We tried an experiment using Indiegogo, a crowd-funding web site, but there seems little enthusiasm to fund games – this may change in future.
JM: But you have produced an excellent short animation which gives an idea of what it’s all about.
RV: Indeed – it was produced by Andy Etter who is our lead designer and the game itself will have the same retrp “public information film”  look and feel to it. Have a peek.

• We work in new ways
• We communicate in new ways
• We socialise in new ways
• We must educate in new ways

Digital technology, in the forms of mobile apps, games and other interactive resources, offers new and exciting ways of learning that can be personalised and can be fun.

The technology is there. From smartphone to PS3, Xbox to Nintendo Wii, ipad, Samsung galaxy. Myriad digital devices that offer all the creative possibilities of the use of graphics and animations, video and still images, speech and music, GPS, at everyone’s fingertips.

The trick is how to harness it.

• We know that times are hard for schools, with budget cuts and continuing changes to curriculum.
• We know it is difficult for schools to keep pace with the exponential progress of technology.
• We know that it is difficult for schools to gather the expertise they may need to fully realise the exciting potential of digital technology for teaching and learning.

We want to help, and that is why we are establishing the Brighton Digital Education Forum to:

• Share experience, and exchange ideas
• Encourage use of digital technologies in schools
• Work with and within schools on digital media projects
• Educate teachers about digital technology
• Help schools develop exciting teaching and learning opportunities using the technology
• Involve pupils through work experience

We believe that digital media will have a vital role in transforming education from a system designed for industrialisation to an environment appropriate to our 21^st century information society, an environment where learning for all is collaborative, and fun, and happens throughout life, not just in the classroom.

Whilst the initial focus of the group will be to engage with local schools and other education institutions in teaching and learning projects that harness the exciting potential of digital media through workshops, teaching activities, and work experience schemes we also recognise that learning is not just for school.

So, it is intended that the activities of the forum will broaden out to include other training initiatives outside school environments reaching out to all ages, the socially excluded and the elderly.

The forum is being established in the first instance by Phil Jones MD Wired Sussex, Mick Landmann MD Vivid Interactive and Richard Vahrman MD Locomatrix, all Brighton based.

We will also look to participate in conferences and exhibitions such as BETT and Learning Without Frontiers and promote leading edge digital resources that are ‘Made in Brighton’

These are the conclusions of  Lee Graves, Gareth Stratton, N D Ridgers and N T Cable in their paper “Comparison of energy expenditure in adolescents when playing new generation and sedentary computer games: cross sectional study.”

They state that “activity promoting new generation active computer games significantly increased participants’ energy expenditure compared with sedentary games, but not to the same extent as the authentic sports. Further research is needed to investigate the energy demands of active gaming across sexes, ages, and consoles.”

A study is about to be carried out in a similar vein investigating whether location-based games such as LocoMatrix will fare better.