Parent groups prepare to label real life as "violent and filled with adult-related content."....seriously, folks. Access isn't the issue in the modern era; teaching kids good judgment is.
....the fact that a corporation was holding its own interests over that of its founding nation?
I mean, hey, great - I'm really glad this guy got the compensation very much due him. What worries me more is that the article didn't read "Corporation ignores serious national security concerns because there was no obvious profit."
I always wonder... do businesses really think they're immune to the affairs of their "mother country?" I'm quite sure any corporation that sees most of its factories razed would find their bottom line hit pretty hard.
Granted, I'm a teacher by trade, and I don't have that same mindset... but even as a human being, I'm going to tend to the security of the nation that keeps carbombs off my streets before I tend to the profits of fat-cat, tax-dodging boss.
Patriotism isn't an archaic concept; it's a survivalist one.
Come now... The Sims (16 million) - okay, probably not a sequel, but Maxis didn't put "Sim" on it by mistake Diablo II (15 million) - sequel StarCraft (9.5 million, includes StarCraft: Brood War)[3] - you mean "Warcraft in Space?" isn't a sequel? Granted, great game on its own right, but it was originally purchased because of the "Craft" and Blizzard's name. Half-Life (8 million) - not a sequel World of Warcraft - See "The Sims." Blizzard named it what they did for a reason. Myst (6 million) - not a sequel The Sims 2 (5 million) - sequel The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (4 million, including Xbox release) - sequel RollerCoaster Tycoon (4 million for the original in North America alone) - how many Tycoon games are there again? Half-Life 2 (4 million) - sequel
I'd put the count at 8 of 10, myself. Deliberately grabbing your company's predecessor game titles in order to assure yourself of brand reliability is really not very different - people will buy it for the name, not for the ingenuity.
Fair enough, but it's awful hard for people to make games that step outside of the typical when people are very, very shy of BUYING games outside the typical. Seriously - look at the top ten best selling games in the last few years; most of them are part of a series.People don't like taking risks on new games that could rule or stink at the prices involved in that kind of gamble.
People will mindlessly spend money on a game they are pretty sure is good, rather than take a risk on something that might not be. We all play it safe with our cash. Want proof that anything with a sequel on it will be bought, regardless of how much crap it is?
I'm sure. Now all the free software community needs to do is design a game with the kind of educational support and entertainment interest of Civilization 4, and we're all set.
Speaking AS a school teacher and computer game design contractor, saying that using games in a classroom is a minefield of an activity doesn't begin to cover the extent of the problem. Pros and cons? Got a month? Here's a few:
Pros
Engage students who are not responsive to "lecture and discuss" format (kinesthetic learners, especially, or children who have traditionally grown up on electronic media)...
Alternative to traditional assessment methods - fresh approaches promote more vigorous response...
Technology in the classroom is "hip" with kids...
Learning is "fun" for most in this format...
Generally lower stress level for students and teachers both...
Students often learn skills without realizing they have done so; Oregon Trail being famous for this. Students who thought they were just screwing around and wasting time on Oregon Trail were - quite unawares - learning how to ration money, weigh risk factors, etc...
Sounds good, eh? Yeah, well. Check out the "Con" list:
Cons
Computer-to-student ratio must be VERY low in order for game-based learning to be a viable choice (MONEY!)...
Any game new enough to be interesting and "cool" to most students is also likely to be graphically intense, demanding relatively up to date machines - not a school system's strong suit, traditionally....
Few game companies/publishers are willing to give up product for free/cheap (sadly, I have personal experience here) even for publicity....
A great deal of misinformation/uninformed opinions about game effectiveness (primarily by those who do not know the concrete, day-to-day realities of current classroom instruction) make principals/teachers fear taking "the risk" involved....
Not many games are specifically designed for education - even Civ only acknowledges this as a byproduct - making game adoption difficult to defend....
I could go on all day. The problem primarily lies in cost, and justifying the curriculum in the face of a public which is largely uninformed about what makes education go since they have left, but still feels as though they should scream heartily about it and demand results. (This is rather akin to screaming "MAKE THE AIRPLANE NOT CRASH" and giving useless suggestions as to how to do it.)
Do games work for education? Absolutely - many Slashdotters are proof, and I see it in my classroom every year. Will they work as a large-scale adoption technique for schools across the nation? Never... that is, until a large-scale societal shift happens in viewpoints about how much money should be spent on education, and how much freedom teachers should be given to use it.
"We'd pay your prices if XX didn't suck."
Sadly, that's not really a new statement, and it's by no means restricted to the gaming world. Movies/movie theatres are facing this phenomenon as well, and books/music to a lesser degree. As a general rule, innovation for the last few years has been facing a distinct downtrend. Rather than huge leaps, we've been making small nudges forward at refining what we have.
Part of the reason for this is that sequels are safe, and new material isn't. Yet another version of Battlefield:Earth? Quake 99? NFL Madden 3,000,192? Those are safe, predictable sources of income. The only sequel that truly tanked in the last year or two was Tribes, may it rise again.
New titles are risks, and companies don't like those. Ever heard of Savage: The Battle for NewErth? It's a beautiful cross of RTS and FPS... but that game only did "okay" because no one knew about it - no publicity, no risk. Part of this is on the consumer; how many of us buy games we know nothing about except the back of the box?
Innovation is dying; partially because companies aren't taking the risk... and partially because the consumers aren't, either.
Y'know, there IS life outside the consoles.
Doom 3 wasn't terribly impressive, but if you're into turn-based action (which, sadly, fewer are these days) Civ 4 was outstanding.
There's a little known series called UFO: Aftermath and Aftershock - Aftermath was an unfinished product, but I'm still loving Aftershock; it's the new sequel. The content seems to go on forever. After two weeks of casually playing it, a new opponent race/hurdle just now appeared. I was shocked - my usual run-of-the-mill enemy clearance mission turned into a bloodbath.
The problem is that consoles inherently DO NOT ENCOURAGE RISK. I own an X-Box, but you will never see a risky title from a small-fry publisher there. Here's why:
Console games can't be purchased via the web and downloaded. (Stardock anyone?)
Console games can't be patched, so you're going to see a lot less innovative risk out the door.
Console games tend to be played by more casual gamers as a whole; casual gamers want to buy exactly what they expect, and want to be able to sit down and play a quick game.
Extended material? Games that require strategic thought and planning beyond button mashing? Games with online communities? Never happen for your *average* console game.
Want to see high quality games? Put down your joystick, brother. Pick up your keyboard.
And I'm sure Microsoft would just LOVE the negative press that comes from jacking the price way up because they know they can get away with it.
300 is already pretty aggressive - if they went to 700, people would just extend their middle digits and wait a few months to buy a PS3 for a whole lot cheaper.
I'm surprised this is considered newsworthy. Magazines devoted to video games are going to have a very vested interest in making the game companies happy, and vice versa. If "GameD00d" does nothing but rip on/ignore every game EA makes, EA can respond by pulling their ads, and GameD00d takes a serious punch in the economic teeth. On the other hand, if GameD00d knows that EA will throw some extra cash in their Christmas stockings by making a slightly-bigger-than-usual deal over "NFL Deathmatch Blastoid 2009" then *of course* they're going to do so.
Let's face it - what is going to be the "next big game" is largely subjective anyhow. Nothing in the world sways a subjective opinion quite like money. So I say again:
Exactly WHO didn't already know this?
I have to admit that this stunned me as well. I'm a gamer - heck, I've even managed to make a pretty good second living consulting for a game company - but I don't have to battle between that and FOOD. I don't even have to battle between that and my girlfriend. REAL LIFE COMES FIRST. That's the lesson gamers (myself included) need to pass on to their children. Love your hobbies. Love your passions... and don't let them overcome you.
Everything in life in moderation; gaming isn't anything special. It's the newest, greatest thing. Get exercise and your back, wrists and eyes won't hurt when you game for a long time. Spend time with the spouse and he/she'll surprise you with food/drink/backrubs while you're at the keys. Work hard at your job and you'll make friends and get promotions that allow you to live more comfortably and have a better machine(s) to game on.
A mature, intelligent gamer should pass on that lesson to their child - like any hobby, it is best enjoyed when you know everything that SHOULD be taken care of already IS.
No, it's equivalent to misspelling some leader of a religion that you don't follow and care nothing about's name. Can you correctly spell the name of the last few major Muslim leaders? Buddhist ones? Taoist? Any other world religion?
I for one live in the United States, am not an active Catholic, and couldn't care less about which man is wearing the pointy hat in Rome this week. Couldn't you guys have come up with a slightly more photogenic fella, though?
Rockstar makes the top game of their type - whatever type you might want to call the GTA series.
Firaxis makes the top game of their type - show me a TBS game with the fanbase and staying power of the Civilization series.
I'm inclined to give this a cautious thumbs-up. Take2 seems to be in the habit of snapping up successful developers, letting them do their thing, and funding them. Rockstar wasn't meddled with... I don't think Firaxis will be, either.
And yet at the same time, as a teacher in a Title 1 (read: seriously economically disadvantaged school) we spend a lot of time seeing parents that don't do ANY job of parenting at all. We run multiple after-school programs just to keep kids off the streets who don't have a parent at home to watch over them.
We expect teachers to teach students morals and values (or do we? I've lost track of public opinion on that subject at the moment), teach responsibility, and inspire public virtue in our students... but the moment the final bell rings, the teacher is expected to ignore everything that goes on.
So as soon as the kid steps off school property and beats the holy living crap out of another student, I should turn and walk away? Cool. Next time I won't have to pick up the black eye stepping between the two and saving one kid from the beating of his life. Except I'll get sued for that.
I'm not saying the principal was in line for what happened here (though I strongly suspect there's another side to the story where maybe the kid refused to remove the comment or something), but I am saying that there are all kinds of cases where teachers and schools ARE expected to exert authority outside of school hours... and are gravely endangered if they don't.
The line isn't clear - don't smash the school for trying (however poorly) to err on the side of protecting decency.
Slashdot Mirror
Parent groups prepare to label real life as "violent and filled with adult-related content." ....seriously, folks. Access isn't the issue in the modern era; teaching kids good judgment is.
....the fact that a corporation was holding its own interests over that of its founding nation?
I mean, hey, great - I'm really glad this guy got the compensation very much due him. What worries me more is that the article didn't read "Corporation ignores serious national security concerns because there was no obvious profit."
I always wonder... do businesses really think they're immune to the affairs of their "mother country?" I'm quite sure any corporation that sees most of its factories razed would find their bottom line hit pretty hard.
Granted, I'm a teacher by trade, and I don't have that same mindset... but even as a human being, I'm going to tend to the security of the nation that keeps carbombs off my streets before I tend to the profits of fat-cat, tax-dodging boss.
Patriotism isn't an archaic concept; it's a survivalist one.
Come now...
The Sims (16 million) - okay, probably not a sequel, but Maxis didn't put "Sim" on it by mistake
Diablo II (15 million) - sequel
StarCraft (9.5 million, includes StarCraft: Brood War)[3] - you mean "Warcraft in Space?" isn't a sequel? Granted, great game on its own right, but it was originally purchased because of the "Craft" and Blizzard's name.
Half-Life (8 million) - not a sequel
World of Warcraft - See "The Sims." Blizzard named it what they did for a reason.
Myst (6 million) - not a sequel
The Sims 2 (5 million) - sequel
The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (4 million, including Xbox release) - sequel
RollerCoaster Tycoon (4 million for the original in North America alone) - how many Tycoon games are there again?
Half-Life 2 (4 million) - sequel
I'd put the count at 8 of 10, myself. Deliberately grabbing your company's predecessor game titles in order to assure yourself of brand reliability is really not very different - people will buy it for the name, not for the ingenuity.
Fair enough, but it's awful hard for people to make games that step outside of the typical when people are very, very shy of BUYING games outside the typical. Seriously - look at the top ten best selling games in the last few years; most of them are part of a series.People don't like taking risks on new games that could rule or stink at the prices involved in that kind of gamble.
People will mindlessly spend money on a game they are pretty sure is good, rather than take a risk on something that might not be. We all play it safe with our cash. Want proof that anything with a sequel on it will be bought, regardless of how much crap it is?
Mario Party.
'nuff said.
I'm sure. Now all the free software community needs to do is design a game with the kind of educational support and entertainment interest of Civilization 4, and we're all set.
Pros
Engage students who are not responsive to "lecture and discuss" format (kinesthetic learners, especially, or children who have traditionally grown up on electronic media)...
Alternative to traditional assessment methods - fresh approaches promote more vigorous response...
Technology in the classroom is "hip" with kids...
Learning is "fun" for most in this format...
Generally lower stress level for students and teachers both...
Students often learn skills without realizing they have done so; Oregon Trail being famous for this. Students who thought they were just screwing around and wasting time on Oregon Trail were - quite unawares - learning how to ration money, weigh risk factors, etc...
Sounds good, eh? Yeah, well. Check out the "Con" list:
Cons
Computer-to-student ratio must be VERY low in order for game-based learning to be a viable choice (MONEY!)...
Any game new enough to be interesting and "cool" to most students is also likely to be graphically intense, demanding relatively up to date machines - not a school system's strong suit, traditionally....
Few game companies/publishers are willing to give up product for free/cheap (sadly, I have personal experience here) even for publicity....
A great deal of misinformation/uninformed opinions about game effectiveness (primarily by those who do not know the concrete, day-to-day realities of current classroom instruction) make principals/teachers fear taking "the risk" involved....
Not many games are specifically designed for education - even Civ only acknowledges this as a byproduct - making game adoption difficult to defend....
I could go on all day. The problem primarily lies in cost, and justifying the curriculum in the face of a public which is largely uninformed about what makes education go since they have left, but still feels as though they should scream heartily about it and demand results. (This is rather akin to screaming "MAKE THE AIRPLANE NOT CRASH" and giving useless suggestions as to how to do it.)
Do games work for education? Absolutely - many Slashdotters are proof, and I see it in my classroom every year. Will they work as a large-scale adoption technique for schools across the nation? Never... that is, until a large-scale societal shift happens in viewpoints about how much money should be spent on education, and how much freedom teachers should be given to use it.
"We'd pay your prices if XX didn't suck." Sadly, that's not really a new statement, and it's by no means restricted to the gaming world. Movies/movie theatres are facing this phenomenon as well, and books/music to a lesser degree. As a general rule, innovation for the last few years has been facing a distinct downtrend. Rather than huge leaps, we've been making small nudges forward at refining what we have. Part of the reason for this is that sequels are safe, and new material isn't. Yet another version of Battlefield:Earth? Quake 99? NFL Madden 3,000,192? Those are safe, predictable sources of income. The only sequel that truly tanked in the last year or two was Tribes, may it rise again. New titles are risks, and companies don't like those. Ever heard of Savage: The Battle for NewErth? It's a beautiful cross of RTS and FPS... but that game only did "okay" because no one knew about it - no publicity, no risk. Part of this is on the consumer; how many of us buy games we know nothing about except the back of the box? Innovation is dying; partially because companies aren't taking the risk... and partially because the consumers aren't, either.
Y'know, there IS life outside the consoles. Doom 3 wasn't terribly impressive, but if you're into turn-based action (which, sadly, fewer are these days) Civ 4 was outstanding. There's a little known series called UFO: Aftermath and Aftershock - Aftermath was an unfinished product, but I'm still loving Aftershock; it's the new sequel. The content seems to go on forever. After two weeks of casually playing it, a new opponent race/hurdle just now appeared. I was shocked - my usual run-of-the-mill enemy clearance mission turned into a bloodbath. The problem is that consoles inherently DO NOT ENCOURAGE RISK. I own an X-Box, but you will never see a risky title from a small-fry publisher there. Here's why: Console games can't be purchased via the web and downloaded. (Stardock anyone?) Console games can't be patched, so you're going to see a lot less innovative risk out the door. Console games tend to be played by more casual gamers as a whole; casual gamers want to buy exactly what they expect, and want to be able to sit down and play a quick game. Extended material? Games that require strategic thought and planning beyond button mashing? Games with online communities? Never happen for your *average* console game. Want to see high quality games? Put down your joystick, brother. Pick up your keyboard.
And I'm sure Microsoft would just LOVE the negative press that comes from jacking the price way up because they know they can get away with it. 300 is already pretty aggressive - if they went to 700, people would just extend their middle digits and wait a few months to buy a PS3 for a whole lot cheaper.
Bah, I'm not redundant. I said it first. :P
I'm surprised this is considered newsworthy. Magazines devoted to video games are going to have a very vested interest in making the game companies happy, and vice versa. If "GameD00d" does nothing but rip on/ignore every game EA makes, EA can respond by pulling their ads, and GameD00d takes a serious punch in the economic teeth. On the other hand, if GameD00d knows that EA will throw some extra cash in their Christmas stockings by making a slightly-bigger-than-usual deal over "NFL Deathmatch Blastoid 2009" then *of course* they're going to do so. Let's face it - what is going to be the "next big game" is largely subjective anyhow. Nothing in the world sways a subjective opinion quite like money. So I say again: Exactly WHO didn't already know this?
I have to admit that this stunned me as well. I'm a gamer - heck, I've even managed to make a pretty good second living consulting for a game company - but I don't have to battle between that and FOOD. I don't even have to battle between that and my girlfriend. REAL LIFE COMES FIRST. That's the lesson gamers (myself included) need to pass on to their children. Love your hobbies. Love your passions... and don't let them overcome you. Everything in life in moderation; gaming isn't anything special. It's the newest, greatest thing. Get exercise and your back, wrists and eyes won't hurt when you game for a long time. Spend time with the spouse and he/she'll surprise you with food/drink/backrubs while you're at the keys. Work hard at your job and you'll make friends and get promotions that allow you to live more comfortably and have a better machine(s) to game on. A mature, intelligent gamer should pass on that lesson to their child - like any hobby, it is best enjoyed when you know everything that SHOULD be taken care of already IS.
Only if you even know there's a problem - why would someone not involved in the Catholic church even keep track?
No, it's equivalent to misspelling some leader of a religion that you don't follow and care nothing about's name. Can you correctly spell the name of the last few major Muslim leaders? Buddhist ones? Taoist? Any other world religion? I for one live in the United States, am not an active Catholic, and couldn't care less about which man is wearing the pointy hat in Rome this week. Couldn't you guys have come up with a slightly more photogenic fella, though?
Rockstar makes the top game of their type - whatever type you might want to call the GTA series. Firaxis makes the top game of their type - show me a TBS game with the fanbase and staying power of the Civilization series. I'm inclined to give this a cautious thumbs-up. Take2 seems to be in the habit of snapping up successful developers, letting them do their thing, and funding them. Rockstar wasn't meddled with... I don't think Firaxis will be, either.
And yet at the same time, as a teacher in a Title 1 (read: seriously economically disadvantaged school) we spend a lot of time seeing parents that don't do ANY job of parenting at all. We run multiple after-school programs just to keep kids off the streets who don't have a parent at home to watch over them. We expect teachers to teach students morals and values (or do we? I've lost track of public opinion on that subject at the moment), teach responsibility, and inspire public virtue in our students... but the moment the final bell rings, the teacher is expected to ignore everything that goes on. So as soon as the kid steps off school property and beats the holy living crap out of another student, I should turn and walk away? Cool. Next time I won't have to pick up the black eye stepping between the two and saving one kid from the beating of his life. Except I'll get sued for that. I'm not saying the principal was in line for what happened here (though I strongly suspect there's another side to the story where maybe the kid refused to remove the comment or something), but I am saying that there are all kinds of cases where teachers and schools ARE expected to exert authority outside of school hours... and are gravely endangered if they don't. The line isn't clear - don't smash the school for trying (however poorly) to err on the side of protecting decency.