I've had an absolute blast with a game called Magicka, an indie RPG (role playing game) that goes for about $10US on steam. Especially when you play it with friends... Boy oh boy, your stomach will be begging for mercy from all the laughing that will inevitably be happening...
Here's a short clip on the basic concept and mechanics of the game:
If that link doesn't show, you can watch it from YouTube here.
Not sure about you, but that seems to me like a great collaborative inquiry based learning game!
There are basic science concepts like the different elements which do not work too well together (eg. you cannot queue up electricity and water spells at once) or use at your own advantage (and so can the enemies), but it occurred to me that a lot of what this developer said in the video was close to what my friends and I did when we "seriously" buckled down and tried to complete some levels. (The first 2-3 hours was just plain experimenting different and humorous ways on how to trap/stun/knock off map/basically destroy each other!) Some would take certain roles, make plans, re-adjust these plans if they don't work out as intended, discuss alternative solutions and so on. We were doing this with none of us realising it! Something I took away from the recent macICT think-tank session, was about "Immersion" and the difference it has with "Engagement," and I can really see how immersion can really just make one lose themselves in something and subconsciously create their own learning experience. Without knowing, the four of us gained skills in collaboration, problem solving and to a certain extent metacognitive ability (Last attempt I tried to slow them, why did I think that was a good idea? Was it due to poor execution we couldn't succeed, or was there a flaw in our strategy? Other variables such as latency, disconnects, etc?).
I was thinking about this game when doing some research and work on a current SciTech group assignment. We set our IBL (inquiry based learning) unit question on "How do things freeze?" and whilst finding some awesomely interesting and informative videos and websites, the experiences of playing this game kind of crept into my head and it just got me thinking about it.
Ultimately, one major factor that this game can't be used in a classroom (especially a Primary one at that) is plain and simple. The dreaded V word. Violence.
Such a shame, and it is something i want to write about in the future here. The whole validity of violence and sex, not just in video games but other forms of media. But I have some questions first, so would like to at least do a LITTLE TINY WEENY bit of research before I do. Main question I am asking is, who came up with the notion that at age 15 people can watch/play something with low/mid level of violence and low level of sexual reference and some drug use and at age of 18 can experience everything else? Is there actually any scientific research done on this? Or is it just another generalisation/dodgy research like the one about how video games make children into psychotic killers? (Interestingly, in the U.S, M rated games are called T -Teen- and for ages 13 and up, the equivalent of our MA 15 rated games, are M -Mature- rated games over there and are for ages 18 and up, whereas in Australia R rated games are denied classification. Just shows what the rulemakers think of games and gamers. That is, made for kids, used by kids.)
If anyone actually has any answers or even links, insight, commentary, thoughts about this, please comment away as it will make my own research more clearer in direction.
Anyway, that's all for now, GAME ON! errmm.. I mean, write essays :(
