Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
3
Results
The game design was tested using: (1) pre/post and follow-up tests measuring know-
ledge acquisition and (2) the EGameFlow [20] survey of participant enjoyment on
Flow. We compared the Ora game (ORA) to a classroom experience of the sim
(SIM), which shared the UI and 3D world environment of Ora, but did not include
skill stage mapping and mission delivery (Liana). The hypotheses stated: (a) the SPP-
designed ORA would provide a learning environment that better supported know-
ledge acquisition in SIM; and (b) ORA would better promote 'Flow' state conditions.
Participants were recruited (26 female and 26 male, 18-50 age range) from Canter-
bury, NZ. Survey answers for knowledge acquisition and Flow were summarized for
each player to give a score per survey (pre/post/follow-up). We found that players of
the SIM learned slightly more immediately after the user study (post) compared to
before (pre), with the average degree of change between pre and post surveys equal to
22% for ORA and 27% for SIM.
However, knowledge retention after 4 weeks was higher for ORA than SIM: no
significant change (p = 1.0) could be detected in the follow-up survey from pre-test
levels for SIM players, but ORA players retained a significant amount of knowledge
(p < .003) compared to pre-test levels. ORA players also had a more positive percep-
tion of the experience than SIM players: overall 56% of ORA players responded posi-
tively to experiencing Flow conditions compared to only 33% for SIM players. There
was also a statistically significant difference between the two groups in the Flow con-
ditions of Feedback (Mann-Whitney U = 151, p < .001) and Immersion (MWU =
231.5, p < .05), with the mean rank significantly higher for ORA in both instances.
Overall this confirms our hypotheses that the Ora game better supported long-term
knowledge acquisition when compared to the classroom taught SIM, and that ORA
also better promoted conditions of a 'Flow' state.
4
Conclusion
The four spaces of the SPP (Education, Translation, Design and Engine) provide a
practical way to translate a client 'problem' into an effective gameplay environment.
The use of motivation theories [5][11] to define learning outcomes, objectives and
tasks provides a framework for structuring narrative and gameplay goals. Use of skill
performance theory [9] based skill stages [19] link the Design and Engine spaces.
This provides structure for Mission Sets with their system of challenges, tasks, feed-
back and reward into effective gameplay that improves the occurrence of a Flow state.
Implementing the Mission Set structure into a game engine provides a system sup-
porting player progression and gameplay goal achievement. The fact that Ora gameplay
resulted in greater knowledge retention, induced a more positive perception of Flow
showing significantly better Feedback and Immersion when compared to the sim, sug-
gests the SPP has the potential to be a powerful tool for educational game design. The
Design and Engine Spaces are practical, straightforward, and general enough to be ap-
plied to any serious game concept. However, considerable collaboration is required by
designer and client to work through the Education and Translation Spaces. For a game
designer not experienced in teaching methods, mapping learning outcomes could prove
