Welcome to WatersEdges Versus The cost of life

In this post I am going to review 2 games that are built with flash and available online. Both of the games have Public Health as the main focus. Welcome to WatersEdges is a game that puts the player in the shoes of an intern student at the department of health and let the player experience what happens when there is a disease outbreak, and which people are involved. The other game “the cost of life” gives the player the opportunity to manage a family of 5 in the rural Haiti. The player needs to keep the family healthy, happy and wealthy. During the game the player is suppose to give the family instruction what to do during the seasons. The choices are where the player can choose is for example working on the family farm, what doesn’t make much money at first but when a harvest is successful its profitable. There are also other jobs available, they bring more money in some require a diploma, some make much money but are very unhealthy. The player gets many choices to keep this family happy.

Welcome to WatersEdge!

This game was developed by the Midwest Center for Life-Long-Learning in Public Health (MCLPH). The game is developed to make students aware and interested in the field of public health.  By simulating an outbreak in a small town the player gets introduced to various professions that are available within the field of the public health. Together the player needs to find the source of this outbreak and stop the bacteria that make the people sick. The game is a simple point and click game what is easy to maneuver in. By use of conversations reading leaflets, papers, watching video the player gets a lot of information. For example during a conversation, if colleague tells the player about another outbreak where they used the same research techniques, they reference the outbreak were they were speaking of. That way the player get information what isn’t really helping to finish the game, but still get useful information.

The objective of the game is ultimately to get students interested and aware of the opportunities public health has to offer. The player gets introduces to people that work in the public health field. Each person that player has to work with has a small biography and job description. What the game also teaches is the basic principles in gathering information, methods of investigating, data interpretation and point source contamination.

I think the game is very clear and does what it supposes to do. My only concern would be that it isn’t much fun to play and very straight forward. The dialogs aren’t very interesting and the gathering of the information isn’t very difficult. I think the game would be more fun to play if the player actually gets challenged. Implementing puzzles, or for example more creative ways to gather information.

What worked pretty well in the game was the awareness of the problem. The first thing what pops up is a ‘illness counter’ that counts the people that got ill and during the game the more time the player takes the more people get added to the ‘illness’ counter. The game doesn’t take long to finish, and I think that is a good thing, because it gets repetitive and boring very quick.

Evaluation

Score 18/36

Gameplay video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zey-bG3Es_U

Link to play the game

http://www.mclph.umn.edu/watersedge/play.html

Ayiti: The cost of life

The game Ayiti: The Cost of Life is a game developed in 2005 by the Global Kids and the New York based Gamelab. The global kids program is a non-profit organization that has the mission to educate and inspire urban youth to become successful student. The game is developed to make children aware of the situation some people are forced in and how difficult it is to get a decent living in certain places in the world. The game is made in a child friendly art-style with an easy to use interface. The player has to manage the “guinard” family in the given 4 years. The four years are divided in 16 seasons. In the beginning of the season the player is able to choose the roles that the family members have to perform during the season. This includes work, school, or volunteering. Each member is assigned to a set of statistics; Wellness, Happiness, and Education. There is also an overall statistic and that is the money meter. It will show how much money the family possesses. Without money the family cannot go to school or eat.

The main objective is to make people aware of situation some people have to face every day. It shows by simple game mechanics that living life as a family in a poor country isn’t anything alike a family in a rich country. Even though the game seems very easy to play it is very difficult to keep the family alive and healthy. I haven’t been able to get through the 4 years without wiping out my whole family. This strengthens the point the developers trying to make. Because of the seriousness of the subject it shouldn’t be too easy and simple to complete the game.

I really liked the way the developers designed this game. The content is very clear. The game is easy to play, it is challenging and also very important, it is fun to play. Because it is so difficult to get a successful game it almost seems impossible. I think that eventually stop motivating the player to play the game.

What I liked about the game is the simple gameplay but still there were lots of options and strategies to consider. What also appealed to me is the way they integrated charity in the game.

Gameplay video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfhWV7kQQdM&feature=player_embedded

Link to play the game

http://www.unicef.org/voy/explore/rights/explore_3142.html

Evaluation

Score 27/36

Comparision

Both games take a completely different approach to reach the target group. Where Welcome to the WatersEdges is very serious and dull, the “The cost of life” game is very serious to but more spend much more time in the playability of the game. Result first game is dull and for the player not fun to play a second time. But the game isn’t designed for that. The goal is to get students interested in Public Health. Playing that game once is sufficient and informative enough to get a student interested. The second game is designed to play more than once, it stay fun after a few plays. It isn’t difficult to learn but very challenging. In contrast of the first game that isn’t challenging at all.

Conclusion

Both games were well designed, and did what they were made for. The second game was definitely more fun and challenging. It is a pity that the developers of the first game didn’t put much effort in making the game fun to play. It would probably appeal more for students to play a fun game and catch their interest, then to play a dull game that doesn’t really challenge. In that way the first failed and the second prevailed.

Serous games for employees.

Ship simulator
Vstep

Overview

Why did I pick it?
it may look like a normal game, like the Microsoft flight Sims but it did not start out at such.
At the time I did my internship there this project was still a training simulator just to train employees on ships in the Rotterdam ports.
So I still think it is a valid game for my subject.

where the game can be downloaded or played

• http://www.shipsim.com/downloads/trailers.php?PHPSESSID=fac029b44d6b2f73c4d3866d5c404d49

hardware requirements for the game

Who created the game?

Vstep www.vstep.nl

who is using the game and for what purpose?

In the past it was created to train personnel on large ships mainly for in the docks of Rotterdam and later it was expanded and made into a game.

What YOU learned from playing the game.

To be honest I worked on making the original and I know that all the mayor functions and commands that come with sailing these vessels was in the original. Unfortunately most of the true to life functions have been replaced with unrealistic controllers in the final game version.

Which Serious Game sub-domain the game fits within.

Training for employees (training for people wanting to become captains)

give it a score out of 36 as per the rubric

Complete, Correct and Well-Rounded Content:               1
Focused on the Topic:                                                                 3
Encourages Active Player Participation:                            3
Problem Solving:                                                                            1
User Interface:                                                                               3
Genre:                                                                                                 3
Integration of game play and content:                                 3
Assessment:                                                                                    2
Scalable:                                                                                            3
Interoperable:                                                                                2
Editable:                                                                                            0
Reusable:                                                                                          3

TOTAL

27 Out of 36

Full Spectrum Warrior
pandamic studios

Why did I pick it?
Like the Vstep game this also is a training simulation and later turned into a entertainment game.
I thought it would bring a good contrast between two training games and how some word as normal games while others don’t

where the game can be downloaded or played

• http://www.fileshack.com/file.x/5463/Full+Spectrum+Warrior+Demo

hardware requirements for the game

Who created the game?

pandamic studios  http://www.pandemicstudios.com/corp/index.php

who is using the game and for what purpose?

It was created for the American army to train their soldiers how to act during a conflict.
So they could gain experience in how to handle enemy contacts and how to work in squad’s whiteout ever having to be exposed to dangerous environments or other dangerous envirements.

What YOU learned from playing the game.

I learned how the military handles themselves in a conflict, that it is not just a run and gun mentality, but that there is really thought about it.
On the other side, I could see why it failed as a serious game.
As I heard for Andrew and found out for myself now, the game has dangerous flags as far as training goes for military personnel.
For example the windows are fake (non see through) this works for a normal game, but for training for soldiers this could mean the difference between life and death.
Someone could easily shoot them if he was standing in a building and the soldier would have never experienced that in the simulator.

Which Serious Game sub-domain the game fits within.

Training for employees (training for people wanting to become soldiers)

give it a score out of 36 as per the rubric

Complete, Correct and Well-Rounded Content:               3
Focused on the Topic:                                                                 3
Encourages Active Player Participation:                           3
Problem Solving:                                                                           1
User Interface:                                                                               3
Genre:                                                                                                 2
Integration of game play and content:                                 1
Assessment:                                                                                    2
Scalable:                                                                                            2
Interoperable:                                                                                2
Editable:                                                                                            3
Reusable:                                                                                          1

TOTAL

26 Out of 36

Complete, Correct and Well-Rounded Content:
ship simulator.
This game has almost everything that you would encounter in real life (the original even had all the things you would encounter in real life) and it is done correctly.
The player will get a completely feel for what it takes to handle the ship and how to handle it correctly.
This makes for a good simulator but a terribly boring game.
Full spectrum warrior.
This game handles most of the things a soldier would encounter in a real combat but because of the fact that it was originally meant to train soldiers it’s a has a fatal flaw in the fact that it does not handle every aspect that the soldier would encounter and that would be fatal.

Reusable:
ship simulator.
The game is reusable multiple times because the system can be changes for different weather conditions and types of ships so that it can be reused multiple times.
Full spectrum warrior.
The game has scripted events and every replay would result in similar encounters that would be useless to train someone to think fast and on their feet

Conclusion
ship simulator is a good training game because it handles the aspects, but it is a terrible entertainment game because real life sailing is not as exciting as one would expect.
While full spectrum warrior is a terrible simulator for training because it does not handle all the subjects, but it is a great game for entertainment because it is action packed and fast.

In this post I will review the two serious games Sneeze and Killer Flu. They both try to teach the player something about the spreading of viruses (flu viruses mainly). Both games encourage you to try and infect as many people as possible. In Sneeze you are controlling a single infected person who can sneeze once to spread the virus to nearby people who then become infected and start sneezing themselves, causing a chain reaction. Killer Flu gives the player more of a god like perspective and confronts the player with virus mutations as well.

Sneeze play here

This game is created by Routes. Routes is an eight week game from Channel 4 Education in association with the Wellcome Trust that takes players into a world of genetics, evolution and the human genome. A small amount of mini-games (including Sneeze) was made to learn the players more about that mysterious world. There are no hardware requirements listed on the site, but it is safe to assume everyone with a browser, an internet connection and Adobe Flash installed can play the game.

The game is pretty simply. You have a top-down view of a single area which is crowded with three types of people: children, adults and elderly. You control a single individual which is infected with the flu. Your job is to infect as many people as possible by sneezing at the right time at the right location. Infecting children is the easiest because they have a high chance of being infected due to having an inexperienced immune system and because they walk around very fast they have a higher chance of infecting other people. Because of these attributes children are only worth a few points when infected. Second are the adults. They are hardest to infect due to a strong immune system and they travel at a normal pace, granting twice as much points then an infected child. The elderly are worth the most. They are not hard to infect because of a weakened immune system due to old age, but they move very slow, making it unlikely they wander into an area where you are spreading the virus.
In each round you need to infect a certain percentage of all the people to be able to progress to the next round. Going over this percentage will award bonus points.

Between each round, a fun-fact about sneezing and virus spreading in general is displayed to educate and entertain the player. For example “The 1918 flu pandemic killed 2.5% of the world’s population” or “It is impossible to sneeze with your eyes open”.

The educational value of the game stops there. Nothing further is explained or otherwise build into the gameplay like the reason elderly have a weakened immune system or what having a stronger immune system for the adults actually means.

The game is incredibly addictive though. After losing the game in rounds 4 and 5, I have restarted it for at least 5 times because I wanted to see if I could progress further. But unfortunately it is extremely hard to predict how the people will sneeze once infected, so the game is more luck based then anything else.

Here is a YouTube movie of someone who won the final round with either skill or luck, that’s up to you to decide.
Sneeze on YouTube

Evaluation

Score 17/36

Killer Flu play here

This game is created by the UK Clinical Virology Network. The primary aim of this Network is to provide a modern and comprehensive virology service, with equality of service provision across the UK. More info about them can be found HERE. The same as Sneeze, this game has no hardware requirements but simply requires the Flash player.

In Killer Flu you also need to try to infect as many people as possible. There are three different game types. In each the kind of virus and the method of infection is different. The difficulty also varies between these types. I will start with the first type, the Seasonal Flu.

The game is played with god-like influence. You can zoom in on a piece of land and see people walking or driving around, minding their own business. You can select one of these people to see against what kind of strain this person is currently immune to. To make sure the infection is successful, you need to mutate your virus before you attempt infection. How this infection actually occurs is never explained by the game, it simply happens. Once infected, you can order the person to spread the virus by sending him to his natural environment (a student to a school, a manual laborer to a factory, a tourist to an airfield, etc). Everyone this person encounters on the street will be infected as well along with the complex you send him to, but you cannot control those people to send them somewhere. After everyone on a single piece of land is infected, you can zoom out and select another piece of land and repeat the process. You can even order a controllable infected to move to another piece of land to infect a complex there. You have to move quickly though, because after a while, the immune systems of the infected people will have adapted and cured the infection.

The goal of the game is to infect 25% of the population within a certain amount of time. The site told me it was not easy and I should prepare myself for failure on the first attempt, but I had no problems whatsoever in spreading the virus and reaching the goal in half the time allowed.

This mode starts with a lot of text explaining everything about virus mutation and human immunity. Although educational, it is a lot of text and is not very motivating to read. The other modes start again with a lot of text, but also add a video to clarify it a little. Although I could learn the difference between different kind of flu’s with this game, I wasn’t very interested to read all that text so I didn’t bother.

Although a lot more educational then Sneeze, this game is a lot less fun to play. After playing enough to be able to write the review, I lacked any motivation to play another round.

Killer Flu on YouTube

Evaluation

Score 22/36

Comparison

Both games are focused on the flu and instruct the player to spread it amongst people as much as possible. But it is clear Sneeze was designed with a fun factor in mind next to the (relatively small amount of) educational value. Killer Flu is really trying to teach you about different kind of flu strains, how they mutate and how hard it is for a single strain of virus to achieve global infection and the creators put a lot of work in this as well with the bird movies. The fun factor however really took a back seat in Killer Flu, which is ok for a serious game, but it does not score well on the re-playability department because of it.

Conclusion

If you want to have some fun with the basic rules of flu infection go for Sneeze, but if you want to learn more about the flu and what exactly the difference is between a seasonal and a pandemic fly, go with Killer Flu. You even get to test your management skills to check if you are quick enough to spread an infection around before people become immune to it.

Introduction

In this review we will be comparing America’s Army with Virtual Battlespace 2. Both are serious games in the games for training genre in the defense sector. The two games are for training military personal in virtual combat situations. Although America’s Army is also primarily used as a recruitment tool while as VBS2 is primarily used for training.

Game: America’s Army

The main focus of America’s Army is on team-based multiplayer battles. The entire game is centered around the idea of working as a squad of US Army soldiers. Both sides see themselves as American soldiers (to avoid any potential controversy) and the opposite side as a fictional nationality.

The attention to detail is very important in this game. Smooth, good looking animations and realistic looking guns and soldiers combined with realistic sounds make for an immersive gameplay.

America’s Army comes with a standard amount of maps that are iterations from previous versions of the game. With each map you can choose a different mode like VIP (where you need to escort a Very Important Person to safety, while the other team hunts him down), some Capture the flag modes, … but you could ignore those and just try to kill the opposing team.

The latest version of the game is called America’s Army 3 but basically it is just an iteration of the previous versions with better graphics and some patched up things. Although the game does have a few bugs like glitch-y animations, people can’t complain because of the price, it’s free.

Links

• Official website: http://www.americasarmy.com/downloads/

• Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DTQqdFdlas

Minimum hardware requirements

• Microsoft Windows XP (with Service Pack 2)
• Processor (CPU): 3.0+ GHz Single Core CPU
• Memory (RAM): 1GB RAM
• Video Card: Direct X 9.0c compliant, Shader 3.0 enabled video card with 256MB RAM (NVIDIA 6600 or better/ATI X1300 or better)
• Sound Card: Direct X 9.0c compliant sound card (Minimum)
• Hard Drive Space: 5GB free hard drive space
• Network: Broadband Internet Connection
• DVD-ROM: 4x DVD-ROM (Disc Copies Only)

Developer

U.S. Army

Evaluation

Score: 25/36

Game: Virtual BattleSpace 2 (VBS2)

Virtual BattleSpace 2 (VBS2) is a military grade simulation of air, land, and sea small unit combat. it doesn’t come with any already made missions at all, except for 2 simple training missions, an obstacle course and a weapons range. It has a very extensive tool kit for level creation and the like. That being said that is all that you get with the game. It is up to the player/company/army that bought it to make the levels/scenarios that is has a need for and wants to train for.

This product is strictly for training only since it has no single player missions of multiplayer for itself (need to have a LAN with lots of other trainees on it). If a person really would like to have a go at a game there is a commercial version of the game available called ArmA. It basically has all the missing features that this game lacks.

Links

• Official website: http://virtualbattlespace.vbs2.com/

• Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_3zIodwGXw

Minimum hardware requirements

• Processor (CPU): 2.4+ GHz Single Core CPU
• Memory (RAM): 2GB RAM
• Video Card: video card with 512MB RAM (NVIDIA 9600 or better)
• Hard Drive Space: 20GB free hard drive space

Developer

Bohemia Interactive

Evaluation

Score: 33/36

Comparison

Both games are realistic first-person shooters but because the the primary focus of both games are different it is hard to compare the two. The edit-ability, scalability and reusability of America’s Army may be less than VBS2 but I believe that in the right hands the content creation tools of America’s Army to create the level and gameplay can be just as good as VBS2’s creation tools.

The biggest difference between the two games is the player base. America’s Army is accessible to everybody and thus has a very big player community giving it a lot of extra content and support. The fact that VBS2 is only used as a battle simulator by a select number of people does not encourage a lot of extra development or support.

Conclusion

Both games are proper serious games but VBS2 is more focused on the training aspect of soldiers than America’s Army is. I would have to say that for quick combat situations where the player only needs to focus on reflexes, enemies and some team based strategy, America’s Army would be the game to use. But for actual and strategic combat with the ability to make very specific combat situations with an extensive creation kit I would recommend VBS2.

Darfur Is Dying versus September 12th: A Toy World

In this post I will compare two Serious Games which are created with flash and are available online. The games are designed to educate the player about the negative sides of warfare. The first, Darfur Is Dying, shows the life of a refugee and the problems they have with the simple act of getting water. The second game, September 12th: A Toy World, is a reaction on the US’s campaign against terrorism. Both of the games can easily be played using your web browser with flash layer.

Darfur Is Dying

Play it here

This browser-based game is created by the mtvU, a division of Viacom’s MTV Networks . It sets out to give the player a view of the life of one of the millions of refugees in the Darfur region of the Sudan. The player begins by selecting a character to forage for water, quickly discovering how age and gender play heavily into the success or failure of such a simple daily tasks and how harsh the consequences can be.

The game offers an opportunity to explore a typical village, discovering all the dangers and deprivations within. The game also gives the player the ability to improve conditions in the village through various actions such as petitioning politicians to pass laws that will benefit Darfur’s refugees. The two parts of the game could have been connected to one another. Getting the water is fairly simple when you get the hang of it, the camp life is much more complicated. I hardly played the camp life because it wasn’t clear to me what I needed to do.

The game displays it’s information is screens of text which are easily skipped and mostly unneeded for the game. From playing the game you learn that a simple thing as getting water is for the refugees something they literally risk their life for. If your player is caught, you cannot use that character again. The choice of character play a big role in the gameplay: an adult will bring back more water than a child, but is also more likely to get caught.

Evaluation

Score 25/36

September 12th: A Toy World

Play it here

The game is response to America’s War on Terror. It puts the player in control of an aiming device that hovers over a town; clicking the mouse fires the weapon, launching a missile towards a “terrorist” target. However, no matter how well you shoot the missile will create collateral damage. The dead civilians are mourned by loved ones, who then become terrorists themselves due to the damage the player has caused. The game cannot be won; the player’s violent actions only make the situation worse. This is a damning commentary on the US’s military campaigns.

The game doesn’t have any text, it tries to deliver its message by showing the results rather than telling the player what the result will be. As this general has a bigger impact and it is much more likely that the player will get the message this way (written text is too easily skipped), the game fails in doing so. It was fun to play for about 5 seconds, after which it became just a repetition. The new terrorist don’t cause you any harm, so it doesn’t matter for the game how much damage you cause. The game did however get the message across that the war against terrorism will just create more terrorists and that we’re caught on a never-ending path of destruction and hate.

Evaluation

Score 3/36

Comparison

The two games which I discussed here are vastly different, both in nature and gameplay. Darfur Is Dying is showing the life of a refugee up close while September 12th: A Toy World gives a much more global overview of the problems war causes. In Darfur Is Dying, being caught while running for water has a serious impact on the game. The impact could have been bigger if you would see a dead body instead of having text saying that you’ve most likely been killed. Darfur Is Dying has clearly been designed better than September 12th: A Toy World. It is more rounded, the topic better integrated and it does a much better job in delivering its message.

Conclusion

Darfur Is Dying is a proper online Serious Game which shows the life of refugees. It might be worth playing the camp life more if it was explained better. September 12th: A Toy World is fun to play for a few seconds and doesn’t get any message across at all. It is just about of destroying buildings. The people in the game are too small to really notice.

World of Warcraft versus EVE online.

This review will compare the games World of Warcraft and EVE online.

World of Warcraft

World of Warcraft can be downloaded here: https://eu.battle.net/account/creation/wow/signup/index.xml

PC System Requirements

OS:
Windows XP 32/64-Bit (Service pack 3)
Windows Vista 32/64-Bit (with the latest Service Packs)
Windows 7** 32/64-Bit (with the latest updates)

Processor:
Minimum: Intel Pentium 4 1.3 GHz or AMD Athlon XP 1500+
Recommended: Dual-core processor, such as the Intel Pentium D or AMD Athlon 64 X2

Memory:
Minimum: 512 MB RAM (1GB for Vista users)
Recommended: 1 GB RAM (2 GB for Vista users)

Video:
Minimum: 3D graphics processor with Hardware Transform and Lighting with 32 MB VRAM Such as an ATI Radeon 7200 or NVIDIA GeForce 2 class card or better

Recommended: 3D graphics processor with Vertex and Pixel Shader capability with 128 MB VRAM Such as an ATI Radeon X1600 or NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT class card or better

Storage:
15 Gigabytes or more free hard drive space is required

Sound:
DirectX-compatible sound card or motherboard sound capability
** The exact hardware requirements for Windows 7 are still being calculated. Only retail versions of Windows 7 are supported.

Created by: Blizzard

In World of Warcraft the player first needs to create a character. There are a lot of choices you can make for your character and this makes you character unique. When you are done you will be joining an online society of 10.000 online people.

There are a lot of things you can do in the World of Warcraft that have effect on this society. Your character can have 2 professions that will effect him and his environment. For example you can become a blacksmith and learn how to make weapons. You can make groups that will work together to do specific quests. These are just a few options of what you character can do in the World of Warcraft.

World of Warcraft is suitable for almost every one. The age’s range is very big. All these players have on thing in common. They will learn how to life in a completely new society. They will learn how to manage there money. It takes hard work to get money and you can only spend it once for example. You will learn how to manage your profession. For example you made a few swords as a blacksmith but now you need to sell them. So you will advertise yourself and you will learn how this is done the best. You also learn to sell your items to players and to make the best deals by learning how to talk like a real hardened salesman.

The biggest thing you learn is how to work in a group. There can be groups from 5 till 40 people that all need to work together to get to there goal. This takes some serious management skills, skills you will learn in this game. Also there is an option to join a guild. This is a group that can extent over 300 people. You can see a guild as a military operation. You have ranks(guild leaders guild members etc.) and you have people with specific skills (people that are good in healing or good in doing a lot of damage). Guilds have rules you need to follow or else you can be kicked out of it.

In short, World of Warcraft will learn to interact with people and how to socialize. It will learn how to manage allot of things, this can be used in real life as well.

Gameplay video of how group management goes wrong: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkCNJRfSZBU&feature=related

Evolution rubric: 333323330003: 26/36

EVE online

EVE online can be downloaded here:
https://secure.eve-online.com/ft/FreeTrialSignup.aspx?aid=105895

Minimum System Requirements:

•OS: Windows® XP Service Pack 2 / Vista

•CPU: Intel Pentium® or AMD @ 1 GHz

•RAM: XP (SP2) – 1 GB / Vista – 1.5 GB

•HD space: 6gig Free Space

•Network: 56k modem or better Internet connection

•Video: 64 MB Shader Model 2.0 Graphics cards such as GeForce FX (5 series) class card or higher, ATi 9500, x300 series or higher and Similar chips from other manufacturers

•Drivers: DirectX® 9.0c (included) and latest video drivers

•DVD-ROM : 2 speed DVD reader or greater required.

Recommended system configuration for running EVE Online:

•OS: Windows® XP Service Pack 2 / Vista

•CPU: Intel Pentium® or AMD dual core @ 2 GHz

•RAM: 2 GB

•HD space: 6gig Free Space

•Network: ADSL connection or faster

•Video: 256 MB Shader Model 3.0 Graphics cards such as GeForce 8 class card or higher, ATi 3000 series or higher and Similar chips from other manufacturers

•Drivers: DirectX® 9.0c (included) and latest video drivers

•DVD-ROM : 2 speed DVD reader or greater required.

The minimum screen resolution for EVE is 1024×768.

Audio hardware must support SSE and be Direct Sound compatible. For optimum performance, use latest drivers available.

Please note that Windows 95, 98, ME, NT and 2000 are not supported.

Created by: CCP

In EVE online the player first needs to make a character. Also in this game there are a lot of options to make him or here look unique. When you’re done you will join a community of 250.000 online people.

The things you can do in EVE online are almost limitless. The options compared to World of Warcraft are really over the top. In World of Warcraft you can only have 2 professions, in EVE online you can have as much as you want. It just depends on the amount of time you put in to it.

EVE online is suitable for people around 20+. Just like World of Warcraft all these players learn the same things. Only EVE online is much bigger then World of Warcraft. The age of the game is allot higher then World of Warcraft and the amount of player also make the experience allot different.

The main thing you will learn is the same thing as in World of Warcraft but it’s more complicated and advance. Instead of working with groups of 5 till 40 players you will work in groups that can top 1500 players. This means even more management and testing your leadership skills.

In short: EVE online can be compared to World of Warcraft but then more advance. You learn the same skills of socializing and managing but on bigger level.

A short movie about EVE online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pzc8oPKXqvo

Evolution rubric: 323303320003 22/36

Comparison

The games are very alike. World of Warcraft focuses on a bigger audience by giving more easier access to playing the game while EVE online is allot less accessibly. They both aim for the same goal. Learn to life in a big online society follow the rules and obey the law in a society.  Interact with people and become powerful. It can be compared to real life skills and goals people have.

Conclusion

If you are looking for a game that learns you how to function in a society, learn and follow rules and obey laws. Learn to manage skills, people and money World of Warcraft and EVE online are the games to pick. EVE online just aims for a older audience then World of Warcraft.

Transport Tycoon versus EVE Online

This post is a review about 2 serious games in the Games for Education genre. These 2 games have a strong focus on teaching players about the economy. Transport Tycoon is a game in which you have to run a corporation and transport goods and people to earn money and let your company grow to be the biggest. EVE online is an MMO game about a universe. As a player there are almost endless possibilities. Warface, industry, business, politics, and many more.

Transport Tycoon/OpenTTD

Transport Tycoon is a game made by Chris Sawyer, in which the player is in control of a transport company, and can compete against rival companies to make as much profit as possible by transporting passengers and various goods by road, rail, sea or by air. The game is presented in a 2D isometric view. Since the release of the game dates back to 1994, the graphics have a very low resolution. Nevertheless the gameplay is very extensive, which makes it a good business simulation game.

There is also an Open-Source expansion of the game which is called OpenTTD. This expansion is made and maintained by a big community. The expansion gets rid of certain annoying things and limits there were in the original version.

The game can be used to teach people about how to run a corporation and make profit. The simulation is pretty detailed and thus provides players enough problems and options to make it a simulation from which players really learn. This means the learning curve is pretty big.

However, in the long run, the game is still too simple to be a really good simulation. Simple exploits can be used to get a lot of money, which decrease the replay value a lot.

In this game I learned what things you have to take into account when trying to run a transport corporation, which transport products are more valuable than others, and general information about transport types, such as busses, trains, airplanes and more.

Rating

Complete, correct and well-rounded content: 2/3
Focused on the topic: 3/3
Encourages active player participation: 2/3
Problem solving: 2/3
User interface: 3/3
Genre: 2/3
Integration of gameplay and content: 2/3
Assessment: 2/3
Scalable: 1/3
Interoperable: 0/3
Editable: 3/3
Reusable:2/3
Total: 24/36 = 67%

The game can be downloaded from: http://www.abandonia.com/en/games/240
The OpenTTD expansion can be downloaded from: http://www.openttd.org/en/download-stable
Since the game was made in 1994, the hardware requirements are trivial.

Click here to watch a video about Transport Tycoon

EVE Online

EVE Online is a game made by CCP, in which the player controls an individual settled in a universe called New Eden. The universe is almost completely ran by players, so almost every individual you encounter is real player. The game also has a huge market system in which players can buy and sell any item that is available in the game.

Around 95% of every item or ship in EVE is made by the players from scratch and sold through EVE‘s central market system. You can start your own corporation to build items that are in demand and sell them to other people. You can also buy things when the price is low and sell them when the price is high or exploit other people‘s lack of time or patience by moving things around for them. In essence you are free to invent any service valuable to other players and market it for your own profit. Wherever you see an opportunity there is probably money to be made. [EveOnline.com]

A great example of how realistic the EVE market is: There was a certain blueprint of a certain space ship, which was extremely hard to get your hands on, so it was very expensive to buy. The people maintaining the game thought it was a good idea to make this item easier to get. However, this action made the economy around this spaceship collapse completely.

I learned from this game how to sell items on a market with profit. For example by buying it on a location where it is cheap, and selling it where it is expensive.

Rating

Complete, correct and well-rounded content: 3/3
Focused on the topic: 3/3
Encourages active player participation: 3/3
Problem solving: 3/3
User interface: 1/3
Genre: 2/3
Integration of gameplay and content: 3/3
Assessment: 3/3
Scalable: 3/3
Interoperable: 3/3
Editable: 1/3
Reusable: 3/3
Total: 31/36 = 86%

A trial of the game can be downloaded from: http://www.eveonline.com/
The game requires a 1Ghz processor, a video card with 64MB of memory, 1.5GB of RAM, and 6GB of disk space.

Comparison

It is hard to compare these games, as transport tycoon is only about managing a corporation, and EVE Online is about a whole universe filled with players, and everything that comes with it, such as business, warfare, politics, and many more things. On the rating list there were 2 categories in which the games differed a lot.

Scalability

There is a huge difference in scalability between the games. Transport tycoon’s open source expansion OpenTTD can be played online, but the maximum amount of players on a server is 15, whereas the huge server of EVE Online is filled with at least 25.000 players at all times, and has 250.000 active players. This also explains why an OpenTTD server has a max of 10 companies, and that EVE online has thousands of companies, all of which fulfill a small or big part in the EVE universe.

Ability to edit

Because 250.000 players all have to play on one server and players thus cannot host their own server, everything has to be the same on each client. So the game cannot be modded or whatsoever. OpenTTD however, is an open-source project. This means players can modify the game to any extent they want. Next to modding the gameplay, OpenTTD also has support to change game graphics easily. There are tons of new and modified graphics sets to be found on the internet.

Conclusion

OpenTTD is a good game to teach you about running a transport corporation, and the problems that come with this; however it is still too small and simple to be a really good business simulation. Whereas EVE Online is a huge universe almost completely ran by players themselves, which makes it an excellent business simulation. Mainly because everything you do has a same effect on the EVE market as it would have in the real life business. The main reason this difference is so big is probably because EVE Online is maintained by a big team of paid professionals, whereas OpenTTD is maintained by hobbyists who do this as a spare-time project.

Documentary games: JFK reloaded and Kuma Wars.

JFK reloaded

In JFK reloaded the player takes the role of Lee Harvey Oswald, the supposed assassin of John F. Kennedy. The player is positioned on the sixth floor of the Texas Schoolbook Depository overlooking a street armed with a sniper rifle. The player cannot move but look and aim at the scene in front of her. The limo with John F. Kennedy and escort drives into view and follows a set path of the screen. The player is supposed to aim the rifle at the car and replicate the assassination on John F. Kennedy.

Having only been able to play a demo version of the game I haven’t been able to judge the assessment of the game on itself and will have to base my score on impressions from screenshots and documentation regarding the game.

JFK reloaded aims to provide proof for the Warren Commission’s findings regarding the JFK assassination through using realistic physics and conditions on the bullet’s trajectory. After taking the shots the player will be able to review the past playing session from multiple angles through several camera controls. Following the player will be able to view a 3d model of the car along with the bullet trajectories of the shots the player took and will be presented with her scores based on how closely the player’s performance relates to the Warren Commission’s forensic findings. The scoring could be submitted to Traffic Games for a contest which challenged players to get as close to a perfect score as possible.

Of the supposed use to gather a large amount of data regarding the possible forensic evidence there’s never been any information released. It’s assumed solely the scoring was uploaded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKV7MLnJt54

Evaluation

Score 22/36

Kuma War

Kuma War is a first person shooter based around news headline real-war situations. The player is able to install a client on which she can download what missions she’d like to play from a collection of historical and more recent real-war scenarios.

Prior to each mission the player is introduced to the mission’s settings and mission specific details by means of a news broadcasting. Through satellite imaging, real footage, Interviews and an in-game reconstruction of how the mission was carried out in reality the player is made aware of what’s going on. After the introduction the player is allowed control of a character with a certain set of weaponry and possible vehicles at her disposal and will be updated about mission milestones to guide her whilst she moves around the mission through first person style game play. The player might for example have to patrol a certain area, locate enemies, take them out as well as their supply depot and make it back to base alive.

Though the mission briefings highlight the settings and introduce specific details relevant to the mission and real-war mission equivalent or even use interviews with veteran soldiers the first person shooter style game play doesn’t immerse me enough to make me truly experience the war scenarios. To me it feels as though within the game itself an entertainment element has influenced the game play itself to a larger extend than the documentary side of the game which is most present within the mission introductions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGFBIfU0RUI

Evaluation

Score 20/36

Comparison

Reusability

JFK reloaded contains a single situation that a player can keep replaying in an attempt to improve the final score and get as close as possible to a replication of the real conditions of the JFK assassination. The player is not able to play any different scenarios nor any variation of the situation.

Kuma war however is meant to offer the player a large number of different scenarios. Kuma Games creates new scenarios for players to download and experience real-war events based on recent headline news. (kumawar.com 2006) This leads through a large number of different missions and settings for the player to experience and learn about through the background information contained in each mission briefing. Gameplay may change slightly depending on the mission requirements through the use of different weapons or vehicles.

Focussed on the topic

Kuma war offers the player the experience of real-war situations as it claims. During a mission the player is introduced to the settings, background information whilst she’s shown how the real mission was carried out. Through playing however the player is, albeit limited, free to move around and replay the mission as she pleases. This takes away form the documentary side of the game. This is partially caused by kuma wars also aiming for a more entertainment kind of approach than documentary simulation.

JFK reloaded in providing limited gameplay possibilities stays focused on the one situation the player can influence. Regardless of how the player performs the results will be compared to the findings of the Warren commission at the actual assassination. These results are the intent by which the game was created. Because the player can solely do what Traffic Games intended the player to do in their game, it’s more focused on the topic than kuma wars is.

Conclusion

There isn’t too large a gap in evaluation scoring between JFK Reloaded and Kuma War. Both make use of first person shooter style gameplay and both stay focused on their intended purpose. As a serious game though JFK Reloaded does a better Job. It might be very limited in what the player can do but it’s focused on its single goal of replicating the conditions of Kennedy’s assassination and allowing the player to attempt to get closer to the real conditions by showing a comparison after each simulation.

Kuma War might offer a lot more variety and replay value as well as covering a lot more scenarios and historical war situations for the player to explore, most documentary value lies within the mission introductions which in themselves aren’t interactive. The missions are created based on the original settings but the game play within it to me appears more influenced by entertainment than documenting history.

JFK reloaded (2004)

Traffic Software

A demo of JFK Reloaded can be found here: http://www.gamershell.com/download_7625.shtml

Kuma War (2006)

Kuma Games

Kuma, LLC

Kuma war is available for free from: http://www.kumawar.com

In this serious game review I will be rating and comparing two flash games in the field of physics. Both games try to teach the player several facts about their respective fields in physics.

So, let’s take a look at both these games, and see what’s what!

Laser Challenge

You can play this game for free and without registration here. This serious game deals with the everyday use of laser equipment in modern life. The game consists of two different game section types, a simple platformer section as well as various puzzle sections. Every section has an introduction which explains the game mechanics as well as the controls to be used. The entire game is set up like a simple story, in which the player controls the protagonist who has to set up a party for the celebration of the existence of laser equipment. The game consists of several levels, each starts with a platform-section and finishes with a puzzle-section.

The game teaches the player facts about lasers by presenting a database of facts that the player can browse through. In the process of the game, the player is presented with multiple-choice questions as well as problems that can be solved by looking in the database, and then applying the facts presented in there. The player is awarded disproportinally large amount of points for completing these challenges in comparison with the other gameplay elements that in order to set a high score the player has to apply knowledge from the database. The database is integrated in the game, but not in the gameplay itself. I think that for the parts where the player has to answer multiple choice questions, this non-integration is a problem, but in the more practical puzzle-sections, I don’t think this is as much of a problem.

Rating:
Complete, correct and wellrounded content: 3/3
Focused on the topic: 3/3
Encourages active player participation: 2/3
Problem solving: 2/3
User interface: 3/3
Genre: 1/3
Integration of gameplay and content: 2/3
Assessment: 3/3
Scalable: does not apply
Interoperable: 0/3
Editable: 0/3
Total: 19/33 = 57%

Steel Alloys

You can play this game for free and without registration here. This serious game deals with the use of alloys in different areas in modern life. The game consists of several timed challenges. Basically, the tutor-character in the game, known as the “Chef” will set you a challenge by requesting an alloy from the player for a specific use. The player then has to select the appropriate alloy recipe from a small selection. In the next stage the player has to combine the elements in the selected recipe, after which the player can select a number of item-patterns that should reflect the intended use of the created material. For each phase, the game presents a timer, in which the player can try to correctly solve the problem at hand. When the player makes a mistake, he/she can retry until the allotted time runs out, after which the game will skip to the next section and award no points for that phase. This transition is awkward, and the correct solution is not presented to the player.

The game teaches the player about different alloys and their use in modern day life. The amount of information available is fairly limited, but is integrated in the gameplay. The information presented is incomplete (by it’s own admission), but this is done for reduced game complexity, which I think is an acceptable reason. I don’t think the player is actively learning anything while playing this game, it is basically “match words and forms” without requiring the understanding of what the words mean, not entirely unlike the plastic cube with different holes toddlers play with to fit a plastic shape through the correct hole.

Complete, correct and wellrounded content: 1/3
Focused on the topic: 2/3
Encourages active player participation: 1/3
Problem solving: 0/3
User interface: 2/3
Genre: 1/3
Integration of gameplay and content: 0/3
Assessment: 2/3
Scalable: does not apply
Interoperable: 0/3
Editable: 0/3
Total: 9/33 = 27%

Comparison

Both these games might be used as an extension of in-class material on secondary schools. The “Laser Challenge” game correctly targets this audience by providing information of sufficient quantity and complexity, whereas the “Steel Alloys” game seems to fail miserably by providing gameplay elements targeted at a much younger audience. The information is too complex for younger children, but the gameplay elements are too trivial for the target audience.

The information in both games isn’t really integrated in the gameplay, but in the “Laser Challenge” case the information is required to complete the gameplay challenges, whereas in the “Steel Alloys” case the information isn’t really required for completing the gameplay challenges at all.

The “Laser Challenge” game requires the players active participation and problem solving abilities in order to complete the game, where it is unlikely that the player would succeed without learning the information provided. It’s unfortunate that this information is not presented to the player in an appealing, integrated way, but merely as a database the player can dig in when required. However, in comparison with the “Steel Alloys” game this is still preferable: “Steel Alloys” doesn’t really require any thinking or information absorption to complete the game at all. All problems can be solved by directly matching words to words or forms, without knowing the meaning of either. The only complexity arising from this method is the fact that some of these forms are hard to recognize as any word, but this only makes the game unclear instead of challenging.

The user interface of the games is quite straightforward in both cases, but it is admirable that the “Laser Challenge” presents a graphical representation of the input methods and the upcoming challenge before the challenge actually starts, which is a welcome change from “Steel Alloys” way of figuring it out as you go, while the timer keeps on running.

Because both games are flash-based, they are both scalable to any computer with access to the internet, as well as portable devices with flash-support. However, the games don’t provide any multiplayer interaction, since all players play an instance of the game entirely independently. Because of this property of flash-based games I decided not to rate them on this property, as it doesn’t really apply to them.

Neither of these games is interoperable or editable, but this is common amongst flash-based games. Although there are high-score keeping facilities which might be used as a measurement of players understanding of the information in the game, this information cannot be exported from the game.

Conclusion

This should be quite clear with a 57% versus a 27% score, but here is my final verdict…

The “Steel Alloys” game presents correct but incomplete information to the player, which isn’t so bad, since the information is quite complex. However, this game totally misses the serious game boat by bolting this information on a very simple game with unintuitive controls as well as gameplay of a way to low level. This game most appreciated element is probably the Chef’s animation and voice-acting, which is actually quite funny, but, admittedly, doesn’t raise this game to any useful level in terms of serious gaming. I would advise not wasting your valuable time on this, as I did for writing this review. There’s nothing to see here, please move along to the next paragraph

The “Laser Challenge” game presents correct and complete information to the player, and this information is required to complete the game challenges with a decent score. Although the information is not integrated in the gameplay directly, it is still required to finish the game with a decent score.  I would say that this game as quite informative and valuable as a teaching tool, and is clearly the best game out of the two games reviewed. It’s funny the game should advise laser-based eye-surgery as a valid way to repair someone’s glasses, seeing is how this is totally in the same price- and risk-range. However, this doesn’t take away from the fact that this game is of a very good quality in it’s category!

RollerCoaster Tycoon versus Brother in Arms Hell’s Highway

In this review I will compare RollerCoaster Tycoon and Brothers in Arms Hell’s Highway.
Both can be seen as serious games.

RollerCoaster Tycoon

Strategy, simulation
Hasbro Interactive, 1999, PC
Windows 95/98/ME

 Minimum System Requirements:
-          Intel Pentium 90MHz CPU
-          16MB RAM
-          55MB hard disk space
-          1MB GPU 

In this game the player is the manager of an amusement park. And will learn the basics of being a manager. Therefore this game can be used at school to teach students the basics of management. 

The player starts with an amount of money and needs to complete the objective that is set at the beginning of the game. These objectives are very different and can include that the player has to have an x amount of visitor before the amusement park is open for an x amount of years or for example the objective is the have a high park rating.

The player has to spend its money wisely to complete the objective and to proceed in the game. In order to reach that goal the player has to build a good amusement park. And a good amusement park does include fun rides, a good infrastructure and is clean and safe. The rides can be build by the player itself and will include rollercoaster’s, hunted houses etc. Furthermore you as a player have to hire your staff. This staff includes handymen (to clean the path, empty the bins, mowing the grass) mechanics (to check all the rides regularly and fix them when they are broken) and security guards to makes sure that there is no vandalism in the park.
Seats have to be placed for the visitors to take a break and rest and the bins that are placed along the paths can be used to putt there trash in. If there are not enough bins than the visitors will throw there garbage on the paths and that has a negative influence on the rating of the park. The player also has to place stores to get food and drinks and an information desk will help the visitors to navigate through the park and is also a place for the player to earn some extra money on maps and umbrellas.

 Money can be earned at the entrance of the park and on each ride. This is not always the cases because some objective will include that the player can not ask any money at the entrance or a the rides. That way the player has to earn all of its money either on the rides or at the entrance.
Furthermore there is the possibility to loan money to invest but the disadvantage is that the money has to be returned with rent.
Promotion campaigns can be started to promote the entire park or just one ride. This will result in an increase in visitors but this is not for free.

 In this game the player has to invest it money wisely and the goal is to build a successful amusement park.

 A gameplay video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEmSwbG19bA&feature=related

 Evaluation 

Score 24/36

Brothers in Arms Hell’s Highway

First Person Shooter, Tactical Shooter
Gearbox, October 2008 PC, Xbox 360, PS3 

Minimum System Requirements:
-  Processor: Intel Pentium D 3.0 GHz /AMD Athlon64 3000+
-  Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Series /ATI Radeon X1600 Series
-  Memory: 1024MB
-  Free Disk Space: 8GB
-  Operating System: Windows XP SP2 / Windows Vista SP1

The main feature in this game is to replay Operation Market garden (September, 1944, Holland). This is as you know a real operation during World War 2 and this way the player will learn a part of history of World War 2 by playing this game. 

The environment in this game is build as realistic as possible. That is done very well (Eindhoven and Best are just like there were looking in 1944 during World War 2) and combined with the intense action the player really has the feeling of standing right in the middle of the battle field.
Furthermore you colleges do have many humanlike characteristics and that will pull the player even deeper into the action.
The A.I. of the German opposition is pretty advance and they will constantly switch position and tactics. So you as a player do need to use real life army tactics to defeat the enemy.

This game is not a sim but is does try to be as realistic as possible and still make it a fun game with a lot of action.
Therefore this game can be used to learn soldiers about the war planning that was used during World War 2 and they will also learn the various weapons that were used during that time in history.

 A gameplay video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFhDW3BYyXk

Evaluation 

Score 25 /36

Comparison 

These games are very different. The first one is focused on management and the second one is focused on warfare.
The similarity between the two is that they try to simulate reality in a fun way and do succeed in that. But it has to be said the RollerCoaster Tycoon does a better job than Brothers in Arms Hell’s Highway. 

I think that both games can be used as a learning tool in there particular field. And will make it fun to learn the content.

 Conclusion

 My opinion is that RollerCoaster Tycoon is a pretty serious game because the player has the ability to manage an amusement park in realistic way with all the pros and cons of being a manager. The player has to make compromises all the time.
I personally learned how to invest the money wisely and had a lot of fun building a nice park.
After playing the game Brothers in Arms Hell’s Highway I had learned a lot about Operation Market Garden and the tactics that you have to use in real life to win the battles.

I would recommend both games.