Category Archives: Mid School

Bond Breaker

Unity is put to good use. The visuals and animations are slick. Still images don’t do the game justice

Unity is put to good use. The visuals and animations are slick. Still images don’t do the game justice.

Bond Breaker is a free to play browser game. It was developed by Andy Hall of TestTubeGames in conjunction with the Center for Chemistry at the Space Time Limit at University of California, Irvine.

You need to download the Unity Web Player (free) to play it. The game is also available as apps for Android and iPhone/iPad.

What does it teach?

It provides an introduction to physical chemistry. You are introduced to protons, electrons, hydrogen atoms, ions, molecular bonds, lasers, electron energy levels, heat, Van der Waals forces and muons. You never go beyond single molecules: H2 (2 protons & 3 electrons) is as big as it gets.

What do you do?

You control a proton moving around in single screens of a “nano-world”, trying to reach the goal in each screen. It is basically a variation of the ball-rolling genre which originated with  (the still astounding) Marble Madness (1984); hit a popularity peak on home computers in 1986-87; was reinvigorated with Monkey Ball (2001) and more recently returned to its ancient toy roots with tilt-controlled “wooden labyrinths” for smartphones.

A novel spin on ball-rollers, is found in our free browser games Mezzy Maze and Marbles of the Amazement Park. The latter in particular exhibits some resemblances to Bond Breaker in its approach to action puzzles. Bond Breaker is not nearly as mechanically pure but neither is it a generic model of the genre with protons and electrons just substituting for, say, red and blue marbles. A modest but clever little physics-engine (that contrary to standard physics engines deals with subatomic forces but yet works much like a normal Newtonian physics engine) allows for genuinely inspired puzzles and emergent gameplay.

The games' representation of molecular hydrogen (left) might confuse if you are used to the standard representation (right).

The games’ representation of molecular hydrogen (left) might confuse if you are used to the standard representation (right).

The intricacy isn’t obvious until later levels. The default levels really only fashion one long tutorial (still pretty hard to solve). But as the game provides an easy to use level editor, there is also a handful of  baffling user-made levels included. And, crucially, all the physical interactions are present all the time whether a puzzle calls for them or not. You might not need to use the Van der Waals force before its formal introduction in level 17, but it has been at your disposal all the time. It might even have helped you to solve an earlier lever without you noticing.

Do you learn anything?

The mechanics are perfectly congenial to the subject and you will most likely solve complex levels a little faster when you have acquired a good grasp of the physical concepts. Yet Bond Breaker doesn’t quite qualify for the middle category in our educational game typology. It is too light on facts and too heavy on play. Just like rightmost category games Immune Attack, Crazy Plant Shop, Code Fred and Metablast, Bond Breaker could be labelled “broccoli covered chocolate”.

But in contrast to Code Fred and Crazy Plant Shop, the chocolate of Bond Breaker actually tastes good. And in contrast to Immune Attack, Bond Breaker doesn’t just cloak clichéd gameplay in a lab coat. The mechanics are fresh and not a natural match for any real life processes except those found in physics and chemistry.

That is to say, science has enriched the game and served as a source of genuinely novel game mechanics, but the game doesn’t enrich science or serve your understanding of it.

A win for game designer. No win for educators.

The game doesn’t really teach you anything. It might very well excite and inspire kids to look up Van der Waals forces on Wikipedia or on the games excellent companion website, but I suspect those kids will be the kids already sold on the geeky way of life. In fact I’d wager that the physics setting actually repels a lot of kids who would have enjoyed the game if atoms, ions and tunneling microscopes were replaced with hamsterballs and guns. If I’m right, the game is an educational game that doesn’t educate but only motivate – and only those already motivated…

It’s like hard Sci-Fi Novels – they often appeal to physicists but don’t generally teach you anything about physics. You wouldn’t hand over Issac Asimov’s Foundation to a fan of romance novels in hope of teaching her physics. It wouldn’t appeal to her. And even if it appealed to her it wouldn’t teach her anything about physics.

Granted, there is a lot of young people who “fucking love science” these days. But I don’t think they “fucking do”. Most seem rather to be enamoured with Science as a “being on the right side of history”-conceit: I-fucking-love-science-that-validates-my-worldview-and-political-values. And you know:

“When the cameras aren’t rolling, President Obama ponders honeybee colony collapse disorder, fusion energy, and climate change. In truth, he’s a real ‘science geek’.”

So was Kim Il-sung, I guess.

Pros

First-rate game design! Fun, original and attractive. If you like physics, you will enjoy the game all the more. And even if you don’t learn much physics, you might pick up lessons on game design by using the excellent level creator.

Cons

Will probably only preach to the choir.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Chemistry, Mid School, Physics

50 States

50-states-game by sheppard software is a jigsaw map game that teaches you the location of the 50 U.S. states.

Who designed and programmed this game?

50 states is a free to play browser game by Sheppard Software.

What does it teach?

It teaches you the location of the 50 U.S. states.

What do you do?

Among bite-sized geography games there seems to be three sub-genres:

  1. map quizzes (e.g. World Countries Quiz)
  2. pins-in-corkboard-maps (e.g. Globetrotter XL)
  3. jigsaw maps (e.g. this game)

I tried to trace the origin of the jigsaw map genre, gave it my best effort, got more and more overwhelmed and opted to limit myself to the States-of-America sub-sub-niche. Even so, I eventually had to throw in the towel. There are a myriad of them and many lack both credits and copyright year.

50 States is quite typical and works like this: You are presented with an empty map of the USA. Only the borders to Canada and Mexico are visible – there are no state borders, no cities, and no geological markers. You are then handed a random state tile which you try to drag and drop on its correct location. If you succeed the state stays on the map.

The game, like any jigsaw puzzle, thus gets progressively easier as more tiles fall in place during the 50 turns of each round. The states are handed out in a random order and some luck is therefore involved as it is much easier to pinpoint California or Florida than, say, Nebraska or Nevada on an empty map. Since early tiles influence the positioning of later tiles, this isn’t the kind of luck that evens out during a round (in contrast to a game like World Country Quiz).

It is wonderfully intuitive to play and promises to be almost as addictive and educational as Globetrotter XL. Unfortunately 50 States, and all other jigsaw maps that I have played, fail to deliver due to a few fundamental design flaws.

Do you learn anything?

Minor adjustments to the game would make for major improvements on its efficacy as a learning tool and a much more fun game. I’ll go through them one by one.

Number of tiles

A common way of analyzing gameplay is to look at the number of “meaningful choices” or “interesting decisions” available to the player at any given time. From this perspective the jigsaw mechanic in 50 States is a missed opportunity to expand the player’s palette of choices. The Jigsaw mechanic makes the game easier and easier as a round progresses, but it cannot be used tactically as you are only handed one tile at a time. Your only option each turn is to position the given tile as accurately as possible (there are a lot, say 125 000, of pixel coordinates to choose from, but that isn’t an “interesting” decision as there isn’t anything to contemplate – no risks, no rewards, no trade-offs ). The tiles therefore add nothing to gameplay. Ironically enough, the presence of puzzle tiles doesn’t present a puzzle mechanic to the game (looking at our typology, the game consequently belongs primarily to the leftmost category, though some luck is involved due to the random order of the tiles).

If instead you were handed 3-4 tiles each round, the luck factor would be reduced while a tactical puzzle mechanic would come into play as you now would have another choice to make: “what tile should I use?” in addition to “where should I position it?”.

Some jigsaw map games, like Place the State, take the opposite approach and present the player with all the tiles at once. This is as bad, perhaps worse, as it wholly eliminates the luck factor and in practice forces you make the exact same sequence of choices every single round: you choose the tiles you find easy first, the harder ones later, and the hardest last.

Score

The scoring system is a mess. At the end of a round your performance is evaluated by three different numbers:

  • Score
  • Average error in miles
  • Total time

This is too much information and downright confusing – is a score of 76 % with an average error of 59 miles better than a score of 82 % with an average error of 97 miles? Instinctively “score” seems to be the most authoritative mark of your performance but it really isn’t. The score just gives you the percent of states that you pinpointed perfectly at first try. If you were 50 or 2000 miles off in your misses doesn’t matter. That is, “average error” doesn’t contribute to “score” – only “error = 0” contributes to “score”. On the other hand, all errors irrespective of size (including “error = 0”) contributes to “average error”. In other words: score doesnt’ contain average error, but average error contains score. This suggests that average error is a fairer assessment of your knowledge. Of course it also depends on how much you value perfection (that, by the way, ought to depend on the subject) but I would argue that it is much more impressive to locate Colorado within 50 miles on an empty map than getting Hawaii pixel perfect.

And as expected I found a better correlation between how many times I played the game and less average distance, than between times played and higher score.

The “total time” is pretty much a superfluous number as it doesn’t affect anything and there is no time pressure whatsoever. Ideally time should affect score the way it does in Globetrotter XL. As a matter of fact, the jigsaw map genre would be much improved if the scoring system was transplanted wholesale from the pins-in-corkboard-map genre.

State names

The learning could further be vastly augmented if the tiles were given text labels once put in place. This would serve as a constant reminder of the state names and provide geographical rather than just geometrical context when positioning later tiles. As it is now, you tend to

  • forget the names of the states the minute you drop them off
  • only look at the visual shapes for hints.

Preferably, major cities and geological information like mountains and rivers should also complete the tiles after they are put in place.

Pros

Very easy to get into and pretty fun at first …

Cons

… but it soon gets repetitious and increasingly hard to improve your score and knowledge  thanks to some truly careless design decisions.

Additional information

This geography game genre probably originates in real, physical, jigsaw puzzle/board game hybrids.

As previously mentioned there are countless clones. Chris Basmajian of Leadpipe Games, for example, made an almost identical game with the same name in 2007. They are so similar (all instructions are identically phrased) that I initially didn’t think it was a clone but rather an earlier version of Sheppard Software’s game as it lacks SFX and has slightly less refined graphics. But considering that Sheppard Software has been developing geography game for a long while, I now suspect Basmajian’s game is a rip-off, though it is entirely possible that Basmajian created an exclusive version for Sheppard Software, using their stock SFX. Anyhow, he went on and created another clone, Place it USA (2013) with improved artwork (and annoying dropshadows) by Robotjam.

Lots more jigsaw map games can be found on Coolmath-Games and on Owl & Mouse.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Geography, High School, Mid School

Globetrotter XL

Detailed review of the educational web game Globetrotter XL

Pretty drab looking, but sharply defined borders and geological definition puts it ahead of many competing clones.

Globetrotter XL is a free to play browser game by Manfred Weber of Dschini.org

What does it teach?

You will learn the location of cities and countries all over the world.

What do you do?

You are given the names of a city and a country and must click on a map before time runs out. The closer you are to the location of the city the more points you get. You also get points for time left, but accuracy is given precedence over speed in the scoring system.

Though this feels inherently more “video gamey” than, for example, World Country Quiz, there’s really nothing intrinsic to the medium in either two games. You could replicate the experience with push pins in a corkboard map, a ruler to measure distance and a stopwatch to time turns. In contrast, fellow simplistic game Tetris owes its existence unconditionally to the computer. That said, Globetrotter XL is undeniably well suited to its medium. It would be much too fiddly and time consuming to play as a board game.

Do you learn anything?

The game sits between the middle and leftmost categories in our game typology. While there is no luck involved if you already know the location of every city in the game, there is an element of luck for most players as cities are randomly picked. In level one, for example, you must pinpoint three cities and reach 350 points to advance to level two. If you are extremely lucky you will be assigned “Belfast, Northern Ireland” three times in a row (the country is easy to identify and so small that any click within its border will give you a near perfect score). If you, on the other hand, are assigned three different, obscure Russian cities, knowing the location of the vast country won’t do you much good.

This is contrary to World Country Quiz, which is a geography game of pure skill. Sure, a novice player will frequently be guessing from the four options given in each turn. But that’s the kind of luck that evens out during a round of 50 turns.

Still, this is predominantly a game about skill in the form of knowledge. The more you learn, the more consistently you will perform well. And as the game rules and mechanics themselves are extremely easy to learn, you are not only motivated to learn geography – you are practically addicted to learn geography. Due to its more systematic approach I would nevertheless choose World Country Quiz for more efficient learning if I was pressed for time facing an exam.

Looking again at our typology, it would be very easy to introduce action game mechanics. Why put push pins on a map when you can throw darts at the map instead? Wouldn’t that enrich the design? No, it would just dilute the game and change the focus from geography to aiming, trajectories, meters and timing. Your incentive to learn geography would drop drastically and the game would still only be a poor substitute for a real game of darts.

Puzzle game mechanics have greater potential. It would perhaps be possible to implement a mechanic that forced you to reflect on how the different locations relate geographically to each other. But you would risk overcomplicating a beautifully simple game. It is remarkable that a game this casual can be this educating. This is mainly due to the scoring system which is satisfactorily discriminating to continue to offer incentive as your knowledge grows and grows.

I recently stated that geography is a subject well suited for rote learning and that rote learning is an activity well suited for gamification. But there is another reason for the quality of geography games: geography is a spatial subject and games excel at spatiality first and foremost – that’s why interactive storytelling is so hard to do.

Pros

Supremely accessible and can be replayed forever as you can always improve your accuracy and timing – even when you have learned all locations by heart. And you will learn.

Cons

Lack of geographical context. Not as substantial and well-structured as Word Country Quiz.

Additional information

Globetrotter XL was released in 2009 and is a shameless but well-done copy of TravelPod’s very successful (it even has a Wikipedia entry) flash-game and promotional tool Traveler IQ Challenge (2007) which in turn is more or less a rip-off of Mark Rossen’s DHTML & Ajax game Geosense (2005). But there are almost certainly older precursors. I wouldn’t be surprised if the concept originated in Brøderbund’s Where in the World is Carmen Sandieogo?series (1985-)

The Wall Street Journal Dec. 15, 2007:

“Traveler IQ Challenge was inspired by games played by Luc Levesque, a Canadian programmer and traveler who founded TravelPod. When he was on train trips across Turkey and driving for days to reach remote salt flats in Bolivia, Mr. Levesque, 32 years old, would randomly name a country and one of his travel companions would attempt to name another country or capital city that starts with the third letter of the previous country’s name.”

Sure…

Later clones seems to be a dime a dozen. The GeoGame site, for example, has a big selection of their own variety.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Geography, High School, Mid School

World Countries Quiz

Screenshot of World Countries Quiz, a free to play browser game by Michal Mrozinsky.

“Country Names” mode

World Countries Quiz is a free to play browser game by Michal Mrozinsky.

What does it teach?

It offers straightforward geography skill-and-drill. You will learn the names, flags and capitals of all countries in the world.

What do you do?

First choose one of the three game modes.

  1. Country Flags: The name of the country, its capital and its location on the map is displayed. Pick its flag from a selection of four flags with similar colors or patterns (note: could be 1 African, 1 European, 1 Asian and 1 American flag as long as they look similar).
  2. Country Names: The flag of the country, its capital and its location on the map is displayed. Pick its name from a selection of four neighboring countries.
  3. Country Capitals: The name of the country, its flag and its location on the map is displayed. Pick the name of its capital from a selection of four capitals in neighboring countries (note: not four cities of the country in question).

Then choose the continent you want to practice. You can also choose the European Union or the entire world.

“Country names” is the most obvious mode to practice. You will learn the flags and capitals there too, but it is more enjoyable to focus on the map. Each mode complements each other very well though.

If you for example choose Europe, the game will go through each of the continent’s 46 countries in turn. Their order is random but a country will never appear twice in a round.

The score simply represents the percentage you get right, e.g. 42 out of 46 countries earns you a score of 91 %. You will also be given the time it took you to complete a round but it doesn’t affect your score.

Do you learn anything?

Typology of educational games - far left

This is the kind of game were your score depends entirely on how well you know the subject being taught. It is also the kind of game where god is in the details when it comes to the design. And though by no means perfect, Michal Mrozinsky has made mostly smart design choices. You will learn; your score will improve as you learn; and you will probably find the process at least somewhat enjoyable.

While the lack of time pressure means there is no point in comparing different players’ scores, it allows you to take a good look at the map and the borders of the country you are considering. I appreciated this as I wanted to focus on geographical context rather than the (too helpful) hints offered by the flags and capitals. But I’d still welcome some additional factor that would allow for finer discrimination of scores. There could for example be more than four countries to choose from and a non-binary scoring system where bordering countries earned you half a point and non-bordering countries earned you zero.

It would also be useful if you were able to exclude the countries that you find too easy. Identifying UK, Germany, France, Italy, the Scandinavian countries and some others quickly became a minor chore when I wanted to concentrate on the Balkan countries. But to let a player customize individual parts of a game inevitably leads to interface and accessibility issues. A more sophisticated workaround would comprise a mechanic that allows the player to use the easy countries strategically the way you use obvious pieces in jigsaw puzzles and easy words in crosswords to narrow down your choices and provide clues further down the line.

Pros

A complete package: all countries in the world with flags, capitals, area and population data translated in nine languages and presented on a stylish scrolling map. Very accessible: the different modes and continents allows for individual preferences without being the least bit overwhelming. You will learn geography in a time efficient manner.

Cons

No time pressure makes global high-score tables pointless but it would have been nice if the game at least kept track of your own best scores during a session.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Geography, High School, Mid School

Pandemic II

Screenshot of Dan Archibald's game Pandemic 2 for Dark Realm Studios

Nice clean vector graphics in the main world map screen.

Pandemic II is a free to play browser game by Dan Archibald of Dark Realm Studios

What does it teach?

It is first and foremost a pure strategy game about global disease transmission. It wasn’t designed with any educational intentions, so any lessons learned about epidemiology and medical microbiology are just bonus spillovers.

What do you do?

You create a pathogen (bacteria, virus or parasite) that you try to spread from country to country to ultimately kill every human being on earth before the planet’s scientists can come up with a vaccine.

To accomplish your mission you are able to change your pathogens properties that affect the three principal parameters under your direct control:

  • Lethality
  • Infectivity
  • Visibility

For example choosing vomiting as a symptom will increase lethality slightly by dehydrating hosts; it will increase infectivity significantly by exposing others to pathogen-rich body fluids and, finally, it will also increase visibility a lot as vomiting is a very noticeable symptom. Fevers, on the other hand, have the advantage of being deadly while barely being noticeable.

Your best strategy depends on which country you start in, but you should always try to keep the lethality and visibility low in the beginning. Otherwise other countries will shut down their borders by closing airports and seaports. It is better to infect every country without causing any deaths or conspicuous symptoms and then equip your pathogen with lethal symptoms to kill off all infected people (this is, to put it mildly, hefty artistic license as all of the pathogens of the infected individuals could never evolve a new virulence factor at the same time).

You also have to take account of the geography, climate and the natural disasters occurring randomly in different countries. If, for example, there is a flood in an area that you are already infecting you should choose “waterborne” as your pathogen’s route of transmission. This will make it spread much quicker throughout that region. And if you want to spread the disease from Russia to the Middle East, you should make your pathogen resistant to heat and perhaps pick insects or rodents for vector-borne transmission.

Do you learn anything?

An average player will very likely increase his awareness of how diseases spread and gain a better understanding of what role transportation and virulence factors play in that process. He might also gain new appreciation for the ways society deals with epidemics: closing borders, airports and schools; exterminating rodents, imposing curfews and martial law; hurrying to develop vaccines that may or may not work, etc. The player might pick up same basic geography too!

Pandemic II is in fact a very good example of an educational simulation, which I wrote about in my review of Conflict: Immunity. Simulation games are uniquely able to make the workings of systems clear and comprehensible. Epidemiology is all about systems; it is all about lots of interconnecting objects and processes and thus in some respects better explained by a game than by a textbook or a lecture.

You will certainly kill more people and increase your score the better you understand the principles of epidemiology as they are modelled in the game. This doesn’t necessarily mean that you will gain greater understanding of real-life epidemiology as the simulation model is vastly simplified and perhaps even fundamentally wrong. True, textbook models might also be wrong, but the risk with games is the incentive to exploit the model: to search for weak spots in the algorithms in order to increase your score, rather than to focus on the sound foundations of the algorithms in order to increase your understanding.

Pros

Pandemic II is unusually ambitious for a free flash game from a small developer. The complex interplay between geography, communications and pathogen attributes makes for deep gameplay with lots of replay value and actual educational benefits.

Cons

If you don’t like strategy games or board games of the Risk variety, chances are it will bore you.

Additional information

Dan Archibald originally made the turn based Pandemic in 2007. It was quickly followed by Pandemic: Extinction of Man (2007) and then Pandemic II (2008), which was big hit in the flash game market and spawned the President Madagascar-meme. It was a major improvement on the first two games and served as a template for later infect-the-world games. The first one of those was Archibald’s own Pandemic 2.5 (2012). for iOS It was a relatively successful but eclipsed by the release of James Vaughan’s Plague Inc. for iOS and Android just three weeks later. While it was clearly a blatant clone of Archibald’s 2008 opus, it was also generally deemed more of an improvement than Archibald’s own 2012 effort and outsold it by a factor of two. More recently Vaughan has taken the genre even further with Plague Inc: Evolved (2014) for PC and Mac (Xbox One forthcoming) while cash-in clones like Infection Bio War (2014) has arrived on iOS and Android.

There have also been topical spin-offs like Archibald’s Pandemic: American Swine (2009): a role reversal where you fight the 2009 swine flu pandemic in the United States. Killer Flu (2009) by Ian Bogost and The Great Flu (2009) by Erasmus Medical Centre in Rotterdam are two similar and institutionally sponsored browser based games.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Biology, Epidemiology, High School, Medicine, Microbiology, Mid School

Immune Attack

Immune Attack is a Fantastic Voyage styled game about the  innate immune system.

Low flying over the macrophage, forcing it to emit the cytokine IL-8 (aka CXCL8)

Immune Attack is free downloadable game for Windows XP and later versions.

A number of very large institutions were involved with the game. It was funded chiefly by the National Science Foundation and developed over four years by the Federation of American Scientists, the University of South California, Brown University, and Escape Hatch Entertainment.

Garry M. Gaber (ex-LucasArts director of several Star Wars games) seems to have been the main creative force. It is also interesting to note that Jenova Chen of Journey fame is credited as one of the designers.

What does it teach?

You are introduced to various features of the innate immune system. The game is designed to appeal to mid school and high schools students but covers material that is normally taught in college.

What do you do?

Considering the Star Wars heritage, the game unsurprisingly joins the rank of biology games that borrows its concept from seminal sci-fi classic The Fantastic Voyage (1966). You pilot a miniature ship (a nanobot) through a 3D word of blood vessels and connective tissue on your mission to repair a defective immune system. You will mainly be teaching macrophages and neutrophils how to hunt and kill bacteria.

The mission is partitioned into discrete levels, for example:

  • Find the monocyte in the blood vessels (just follow the map while “flying” in tunnels of blood)
  • Make the monocyte transmigrate by activating cell adhesion molecules (“shoot” the selectins and an ICAM).
  • Make a trail of complement proteins to guide the macrophage to the site of infection (“shoot” the C3a molecules)

Do you learn anything?

The levels are introduced by tutorials in the form of scientists and military styled officers who hand out objectives, information and advice. This is really were most of the learning is taking place, but during the levels themselves there is also information represented in a more concrete manner: scanning the organs and cells with your reticle displays an information box with text and a picture. This is quite neat.

The gameplay is less congenial to learning. The mechanics are identical to any space flight game: move around in a 3D environment, find things and shoot them. You  don’t have to master the science to master the game, but you will certainly have to master the rather complicated controls and possess decent visuospatial skills to navigate the claustrophobic and confusing environments successfully. So the core of the game is as gamey as games get.

And yet there is not much depth to the game. Immune Attack is an exceptionally ambitious and big budget educational game, but it offers less of a simulation than a small amateur game like Conflict: Immunity. The levels are linear and straightforward. You don’t have to think; you don’t have to adapt to an evolving environment. You know what to do, but may not be quick and precise enough to do so. The challenge is physical, not cerebral.

Though the levels can be considered big minigames, they still offer a lot more than the game & watch-like simplicity of the minigames in Code Fred. Some are even quite engrossing – for a while. I initially enjoyed hunting bacteria in the connective tissue, which felt wonderfully organic and messy, but I rapidly got increasingly bored and frustrated as the task got out of hand and transformed into a Sisyphean game of Where’s Waldo. The more bacteria the macrophages engulfed, the harder it got to find the few remaining ones. At the same time they kept reproducing and put you back in square one. Thank god for the cheat code.

The game is in essence an interactive tutorial interspersed with spatial agility tests that you must pass before proceeding. The tests don’t have anything to do with understanding the (surprisingly advanced) biology but they might make some of the stuff more tangible and concrete. Flying around, trying to locate and shoot the selectins, and then watching the trailing monocyte attach and slow down, does hammer the process of transmigration into your head. It is, however, not a time efficient way of learning. I think it could work as a complement to textbooks and the developers indeed state that the game is “a supplemental teaching tool”.

Pros

Crammed full of facts and credible science in carefully crafted 3D-environments that evoke a sense of wonder.

Cons

Clichéd gameplay with superficial relevance to the scientific concepts.

Additional information

Clueless comments on Immune Attack and educational games in general in this article from the prestigious scientific journal Cell.

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Biology, College, Fantastic Voyage, FAS, High School, Immunology, Mid School

Conflict: Immunity

Conflict Immunity is a game that demonstrates a simplified model of how B cells, T cells and macrophages work together in humoral immunity and cell mediated immunity.

Not a pretty sight, but there are some decent ideas here.

Conflict: Immunity is a free to play browser game by Brett Baughman, a biology teacher who makes games and quizzes for his website BioMan Biology.

What does it teach?

It demonstrates a simplified model of how B cells, T cells and macrophages work together in humoral immunity and cell mediated immunity.

What do you do?

You are patrolling a single screen in top down 2D with ten nonspecific cells which you have to protect from invading pathogens. At your disposal are five different types of leukocytes (white blood cells):

  1. Macrophages
  2. Helper T cells
  3. B cells (Naïve B cells)
  4. Activated B cells (Plasma cells)
  5. Killer T cells (Cytotoxic T cells)

When the game starts you are given a short tutorial on the functions of each member of your leukocyte army. You then get to play the levels where you fight infections of increasing complexities. Between each level you have to answer multiple choice questions that review the material you learned in the tutorial (and which hopefully was reinforced during play). For example: “What is an antigen?” (Correct answer: “A surface molecule on a pathogen that allows the immune system to recognize the pathogen.”).

There are also some bonus levels where you just go wild, shooting antibodies on a screen swarming with pathogens. These are the low points of the game and add neither educational value nor entertainment value, just padding.

A typical core loop of play in the levels proper looks like this:

  1. Choose the macrophage, move it quickly to catch and eat a pathogen.
  2. Select the helper T cell and move it to the macrophage so that it can present its antigen to the helper T cell. Do this before another pathogen invades one of your nonspecific cells.
  3. Select the B cell and move it to the helper T cell. The B cell will be transformed into a Plasma Cell that can shoot antibodies.
  4. Select the plasma cell. Hunt for new pathogens and shoot antibodies at them.
  5. Select the macrophage and move in to eat the pathogens that are tagged with antibodies.

If any of your nonspecific cells have been invaded the first two steps are exactly the same but the concluding steps won’t involve B cells:

  1. Select a killer T cell. Move it to the helper T cell. This will activate the killer T cell.
  2. Move the killer T cell to one of your infected nonspecific cell. Shoot perforin and cytotoxins at the cell and it will eventually burst, killing the cell as well as the pathogen. If you’re not fast enough the pathogen will kill the cell and move on to one of the remaining cells.

This might be the abridged version (with some artistic license to boot) of the adaptive immune system, but it is still complicated enough to be pretty confusing. It will almost certainly take a while for most people to get the hang of it. Sure, in the first level you can do with just plasma cells and in the second level you only have to use killer T cells, but in later levels you have to use both and this is the hard and strategic part: to decide your priorities and get your leukocytes to work in concert against the invaders.

It is almost always a good idea to first use plasma cells as the antibody-tagged pathogens are unable to invade your cells. When just one cell is invaded the game has a way of quickly descending into chaos. On the other hand, this is where the game gets interesting, as you have to improvise your strategies as the environment changes.

Sometimes you are attacked by viruses and bacteria simultaneously and in later levels you also have antibiotics at your disposal. They don’t affect resistant bacteria, however, and this is meant to teach you about the dangers of antibiotics overuse. It’s an idea that could make for an interesting game mechanic if developed further, but in truth it doesn’t make a noticeable difference to the game play when it appears all too briefly.

Conflict immunity quizz

You always have to answer two questions in between the levels.

The game plays much like a regular, if crude, top down shooter. Unfortunately there are some control issues: you maneuver your chosen leukocyte with one hand on the arrow keys and the other hand on the spacebar, but when you wish to select another leukocyte you have to move one hand and grab the mouse. This is really cumbersome in the heat of battle when you have to think on your feet and move quickly. Arguably, this further stresses the need to learn the different functions of the leukocytes by heart, but it could have been solved with a smarter design. It is especially annoying in the final levels when HIV appears, multiplies, and kills every leukocyte it touches while you frantically try to switch between them. A pity as that, too, is an idea with potential. If handled with just a little more care and taken a little bit further it would have made for much richer game play.

Do you learn anything?

Simulations, games that model systems with interconnecting objects and processes, are in my opinion probably the only kind of educational games where the game mechanics themselves truly have the potential to support better understanding than traditional teaching. But simulations are by no means suited for all kind of subjects. Typically they aren’t very efficient either. If you need to learn something specific in a short time, a simulation will rarely be the go-to solution. A small, focused game where the mechanics support learning  by simply providing feedback and motivation, will always be a better choice if you just need to learn for example the Greek alphabet or the 20 amino acids.

Simulations can make for deep and fun game play, however, and the immune system is the kind of intricate system that just begs to be simulated. It is also a natural fit for many traditional gaming genres thanks to the war metaphors that are so easy to apply to the subject.

Though small, very rough and amateurish, Conflict: Immunity manages to give you some feel for the immune system by providing a tiny toy simulation as well as traditional action gameplay. I consider that a success by the standards of educational games with 100 times the budget.

There is certainly room for enormous improvements in presentation and interface design but my main reservations concern the role of macrophages. You almost always finish a level by eating the last pathogen with a macrophage (step 5 in the core loop). But to be able to do that you must first use the macrophage as an antigen presenting cells by eating a pathogen and presenting its antigen to a helper T cell (step 1 and 2 in the core loop). If you don’t have any prior knowledge of the immune system this ought to strike you as strange and unnecessary. Why go through all these steps? Why not just use the macrophage alone to gobble up all the pathogens? They disappear from the screen all the same! The downside is that new ones keep appearing if you play this way. Only the antibody-tagged pathogens count when you try to rack up the required tally that the level demands, but you’re never told why. It seems arbitrary – illogical. The rules of the simulations simply fail to communicate the use of antibodies.

Pros

The basic premise of the game is sound and it is actually quite fun for a short while. It is oddly satisfying to shoot and eat the pathogens and there is a good chance that you will learn at least something. With some more work on the game design and the interface this could have been brilliant.

Cons

Difficult controls, lack of polish, minor bugs, inconsistencies and a misleading stats display are the main offenders. Better graphics and properly looping music would have been nice, of course, but not essential.

Additional information

An interview with the developer.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Biology, biomanbio, High School, Immunology, Mid School

Code Fred: Survival Mode

code fred
Code Fred: Survival Mode is a free to play browser game developed by Helpful Strangers and Unit9 for Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago.

What does it teach?

It provides a brief but wide-ranging introduction to human physiology.

What do you do?

You play 12 mini games that intersperse the narrative frame of a boy being hunted by a wolf through a forest. Each mini game illustrates a body process that aids survival, either via avoiding danger or via recovery from trauma or disease. The mini games deals with:

  1. Adrenaline
  2. Hemoglobin
  3. Heart rate
  4. Vasoconstriction
  5. Blood clots
  6. Nerve regeneration
  7. Bacteria & cilia
  8. Phagocytes
  9. Lymphocytes & antibodies
  10. Metabolism
  11. Digestion
  12. Blood sugar regulation

The games are very simplistic: schematic animations of a body process where you just have to click on the correct molecule/cell/organ at the right time, sometimes as quickly as possible. Still, they are not always very intuitive. Trial-and-error is occasionally required and might prove frustrating.

Do you learn anything?

If you know next to nothing about physiology you will certainly pick up a thing or two from a play through. I’m not sure it will stick though. Almost certainly, you would learn much more by browsing through an illustrated children’s book. I’d actually go as far as saying that the interactivity subtracts, rather than adds to the learning process. Whatever educational value the animations offer is probably lost due to the need to focus on the game mechanics. The animations would be easier to absorb and reflect on if you could just sit back, relax and watch.

The main reason for this is the lack of connection between the mechanics and the physiological processes they are applied to. Nor is there any connection between the mechanics and any process of learning. Consequently the mini games serve to irritate rather than to illuminate or even motivate. To succeed you don’t have to understand anything about the physiology and you most definitely won’t perform better by learning and understanding more. You’ll perform better with nimbler mousing and vision, that’s all.

kentucky route zero, another world, code fred

Three very different games, one look.

Pros

Great presentation! The Kentucky Route Zero/Another World-like visuals are complemented perfectly by MindFunk Productions’ “organic, cinematic cowboy theme”. The desire to see more of the art and get back into the two bar guitar groove was actually what kept me playing to the end. I wasn’t motivated by a desire to learn more, neither was I coerced to learn more by a desire to play more. On the contrary, I thought the playing torturous and only endured it thanks to the art and the music.

Cons

This might have been acceptable if the minigames were educational, but they aren’t. They are just clickable animations that are made harder to watch … which you must do again and again until you’ve mastered an arbitrary and dull task.

Additional information

A short interview with one of the designers.
A long post mortem explaining the thought process behind the mechanics. Read it + play the game = cognitive dissonance.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Biology, High School, Mid School, Physiology

Crazy Plant Shop

Crazy Plant Shop by Filament Games

What does it teach?

Crazy Plant Shop is a browser-based game where you learn about inheritance and how dominant and recessive genes work.

What do you do?

You are running a plant shop where you buy, sell and breed different types of plants. An assortment of customers visits your store with specific requests for plants. To satisfy them, you order plants from a catalog and then breed the plants to create offspring with the desired traits. Every order you fulfill earns you money that you will need to spend in the plant catalog to further increase your breeding stock.

In essence, the game is shop sim with a Punnett squares game mechanic which teaches you the basics of gene expression.

Do you learn anything?

The game is really just a shop sim with a thin educational coating. You will spend most of your time and brain power on boring administrative duties like inventory management and time management. This is not only boring, it is also a very inefficient way of learning.

While logistics as a game mechanic does not seem congenial to the subject of genetics, there actually is some synergy as you have to think in terms of genes, rather than the observable qualities of your plants, in order to offer your customers the most combinations of plants using the least amount of breeding stock (store space) and breeding attempts (energy). This is commendable and a pretty rare thing in educational games.

You don’t really improve your score the more you learn about genetics though. To do well in the game you only need to understand the very basic principles of breeding. The key to do better is then just a case of honing your logistics, not honing your knowledge or your understanding of the breeding process. This is really a game about store management not a game about science.

Pros

The production values are very impressive. The art style is pleasant and there is sort of a story to experience through interaction with the numerous characters that visit your store. Depending on your disposition (and age) it might motivate you or distract you from playing the game.

Cons

The point of educational games is surely to make learning fun, not make it (even more) boring by mixing it with ultra-boring administrative work. The game is also pretty confusing and hard to learn even though the genetics involved are very basic. If you go into the game without already grasping the concept of a Punnett Square, you will likely not get very far.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Biology, Filament Games, Genetics, Mid School