![]() |
| What made you think of that PARTICULAR webpage, store, or restaurant? |

![]() |
| What made you think of that PARTICULAR webpage, store, or restaurant? |

![]() |
| Pretty simple, but this is the core idea. |
| "This is the final piece?" - Ian Black, manager of Spinal Tap |
![]() |
| Spinal Tap is not going to be pleased with the monument. |
![]() |
| Led Zeppelin with their manager, the late, great Peter Grant. He "got" it. You should Google him. |
![]() |
| Where's Peter Grant? He's not even in the building because he's taking their money to a safe location. Really. Look him up. |
![]() |
| This is the level of creative output possible when the environment is right. |
![]() |
| When things go right, I feel like I'm on the front row. We need more of that. |
When designing a game, one of your main challenges is to expend as little wasted time as posible so you can focus on what is important: making fun.
You can read about agile methodologies elsewhere, so let' assume you grok that.
The first thing you need to do is define your main game loop, I.e. what does a player do in a game session until they get back to a starting point. In Super Mario, you start at the beginning of a level, move left to right, avoid obstacles and explore for puzzles and hidden items, and reach the end, where you receive a reward. In a racing game, you may select a car, type of transmission, start a race, pass cars, etc. until you cross the finish line, get rated, etc. As simple as this sounds, many developers don't start this way. Block out your game loop.
Then block out your menu/options system. This tells you if your team knows what they are trying to do in a way that forces some hard decisions. For instance, do you want to allow a selectable difficulty? Can you select a level? You might be surprised to find out how far off your team is from your original vision, or maybe they have better ideas. I guarantee that a menu discussion up front will be interesting.
Then you have to decide whether you are going to need to make things look perfect or if you can use rough art for everything.
I have had the most luck and the least wasted effort building projects with placeholder art first, and replacing it with final art only after it is playable and fun. This generally only works when you have control of the money, or the trust of the money people. You see, many people cannot "see through" the lack of final art to understand what it will look like once it is finished. Tread lightly there. You need to know the dangers. This can be mitigated by creating a small area that is final enough, so you can use it to show the money people.
Gotta run, unfortunately. Next time we'll talk about creating test areas for your features and more overall planning...
http://readandsucceedtoday.catsone.com/careers/index.php?m=portal&a=details&jobOrderID=1725581
This position is SO important to me that I want to discuss how the person that takes it is going to change the learning experience for our students. My hope is that we can have an open discussion about this project so that it improves everything for everyone. Certainly work of the type described here is being done in different areas, but since this is going to be so unique to our programs, I feel that it is completely okay to speak of this openly.
Some background on our company: we have a series of educational products that teach vocabulary and critical reasoning. They are amazingly effective and they do actually adapt to students' knowledge. But they could be so much better.
Some background on me: I've been making video games for 20 years. I believe that we can take gaming concepts and apply them to other fields, like education. That's why I'm here at FastPath.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) within video games can create situations that make for truly memorable and engaging experiences. If a game's AI is too easy, the game is boring to a player. If the AI is too hard, the game is considered unplayable. Neither of these are acceptable in the gaming market. However, when the AI is neither impossible or too simple, it can be called "just right," the experience is then considered "fun." This can also be called "pleasurable frustration."
The challenge of creating an experience filled with "pleasurable frustration" is that a players' ability to play or interact with a game continually changes, whether it's because they are gaining experience or maybe because they are having a bad day.
This can be adjusted for in gaming by adding "handicaps" such as in a foot race where you give someone a 10 second lead, or on a carnival midway when the barker gives you a couple of extra softballs to knock over the milk jugs. But those are done with people that can continually assess the situation.
The same can be said for having a teacher that understands their student well. They can take what they know about the student and use that to adapt their curriculum accordingly. For instance, they may be a soccer player so their physics discussions surround making a goal in a vacuum, or they may be sick and they need a few reminders in order to keep their mind focused upon the current topic.
In a video game, creating a dynamic experience that adapts to the players' performance is a challenge, but it is a common practice. Some games adjust the likelihood that you will get hit by a laser bolt, while others may make the enemies move slower so you can catch them easier.
In an automated online educational product, measuring a students' knowledge and wisdom is a challenge. Currently we use an assessment test that creates a score based upon a series of questions with different difficulties. The performance of a student in that assessment determines how far we move a student forward. This is a very valid way to customize a program, but it is not perfect.
Our challenge is to create an educational program that constantly adapts to an individual students' performance from every conceivable angle. This will create an educational version of "pleasurable frustration" that will also result in "fun."
We have a plan in place that, more than anything, needs a special person to make it a reality. I don't think I'll find the right person without making this plan somewhat public. So here goes my attempt at explaining my current take on it:
STAGE ONE
We take the data from all of our products and add it to a single database. This means we can then edit everything and preform analytics across programs.
STAGE TWO
This is where, I believe, we can start grading and sorting the data about how students perform in a way that we can build patterns of performance from. For example, we can compare the data for everyone that missed question 1 and begin predicting what other questions they may miss or get right.
To accomplish this, we'll need to build some serious analytics tools and some creative data storage concepts.
STAGE THREE
All data must be served up and measured / tracked based upon A/B testing so we can ascertain that we are providing students the best learning experiences. The types of things we could choose to test: audio files, questions, answers, button sizes, button colors, page layouts, etc.
STAGE FOUR
Once these pieces are in place, we can track and measure performance of each user, find trends within groups of users, change the level of difficulty to determine if a student is ready to jump forward, and find many other ways to provide students a completely unique learning experience that is heuristically determined to be the "best" content for them at that moment.
If this sounds interesting to you, and you want to make it happen, then we need to talk. Now.
In the late 80s, I was in the music business for a few years as a performing musician, and because I was really interested in learning on how to make a living at it, I took a lot of classes in commercial music management.
After spending 20 years in the video game industry, I think I can compare the two industries somewhat fairly.
The traditional music business is VERY similar to the traditional video game publishing business. You are advanced money that you make a product with, you have to make a commercially relevant product on a schedule, and you have to work with the assets that are available and that the publisher allows you to have. Assuming you release your product, everyone takes a piece of your work. If you are very lucky, you may make something back, but most likely, you'll never see a penny of royalties.
So much of this mimics my experience in the video game industry. I’m sure there’s a novel in there somewhere.
However, what is fascinating to me is that, unlike the music industry, the video game industry reinvents its business model continually. As an ecosystem, it does that because people are willing to try anything to make it work. Companies have tried everything from hard core DRM to giving their product away for free, hoping that people will pay for it if they like it. When a model works, others copy that model and riff on it. The more disruptive the new model is, the more interesting it can be for the customers. This is absolutely healthy and is the most honest way to help connect with your customers. People want to pay for great content. You have to find the way that works best with the people that are enjoying your content.
I think a key component of this is that it works because the people that make the content own it completely. They do not have to rely on “how it is supposed to be done” because they have no buy-in to the system. They are completely free to take chances. And the rewards can be huge, from a ton of money to just being in charge of your own destiny.
Without writing a thesis on all the different methods that have evolved through the years (and wow - game publishing is an infant compared to music publishing, here is what I want to propose to the music industry: challenge your business model. Try something that “won’t” work. Try everything! You see this with smaller bands that have complete ownership of their work - they have nothing to lose so they are inventing opportunities for themselves. Some succeed wildly. Others fail.
Challenge the entire structure of the music business. Publishers, unions, guilds, copyrights, etc. are doing well for some people but not for everyone. What would happen if everyone released their music under creative commons? Whatever you decide to do, make lots of mistakes as quickly as you can. Learn from them and keep doing more of the things that work. And talk about your mistakes openly so others can learn from what you have tried.
Good luck out there!