Elsevier

Computers & Education

Volume 58, Issue 1, January 2012, Pages 590-599
Computers & Education

A narrative metaphor to facilitate educational game authoring

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.017Get rights and content

Abstract

In this paper we present WEEV (Writing Environment for Educational Video games), a methodology for educational point-and-click adventure game authoring. Our approach aims to allow educators to actively collaborate in the educational game development process, using a narrative-based representation. WEEV is based on a pragmatic reinterpretation of previous works on narrativity and video games, enhanced by the use of a novel visual language to represent the flow of the story or narrative. The WEEV methodology has been implemented into an actual tool based on the already established <e-Adventure> platform for educational games. This tool was improved with feedback gathered from formative evaluation, end-users testing (i.e. educators), and actual use in the development of an educational game. The system, still under development, presents some user-interaction problems along with a need for the educational effectiveness of the resulting games to be further analyzed. However, this paper highlights that, according to the qualitative results of evaluations, WEEV can indeed be successfully applied to simplify the game creation process and that by using representations of games that educators can understand, WEEV can help provide educational value to games.

Highlights

► Increase educators implication in educational video games authoring. ► Educational game authoring methodology based on narrative concepts. ► Narrative authoring tool for educational video games. ► Formative and end-user (i.e. educators) evaluations of the authoring tool.

Introduction

Educational video games, or serious games, are continually growing in number and complexity, as shown by growth in the interest and investment in them (Wexler, Corti, Derryberry, Quinn, & Barneveld, 2008). These video games imply substantial changes in the way that educators teach and how they use the teaching material. A serious game is usually a “black box” that educators must use “as is” in their courses. However, as educators are used to having more control over other course materials (e.g. creating, modifying or adapting course contents) the inclusion of a non-customizable teaching tool can be a drawback.

Game-authoring tools can provide a way for educators to recover their place in the creation or adaptation of contents when video games are used in a classroom. Through these tools educators can take an active role in development, by either creating the games, or contributing modifications or suggestions to expert teams in charge of the actual development. In this manner, educators can ensure that games provide learning opportunities and usefulness (understood from an educational perspective), aspects that have the greatest impact on students’ preference for games (Bourgonjon, Valcke, Soetaert, & Schellens, 2010).

Game authoring tools can also help educators feel more comfortable while using educational games, by allowing them to understand the inner workings of the game and make small modifications as they see fit. This allows educators to master the content and make it theirs, which is quite commonly a critical factor in the adoption of third-party content by educators.

Traditional video game development tools are usually based on programming concepts unfamiliar to many educators. These tools usually inherit not just the concepts and wording used in programming languages (e.g. 3D models, skeleton animations, Boolean conditions), but also the complexity, in terms of user interaction, of interactive content authoring tools designed for experts. For example, many tools classify elements by their interactivity, understood as how elements are used (e.g. what game objects do for different keyboard inputs), and not by their function in the game (i.e. their role in the story).

In tools created for programmers, defining how game elements are used takes precedence over defining what they are used for. However, this is not the most adequate structure for education professionals whose goal it is to teach through the game rather than to program it. As the function of an element usually depends on several interactions (e.g. show the question, answer the question, increase the game score, start the next part of the story, etc.), it usually becomes hard to understand by non-experts. Nonetheless, a correlation between different interaction mechanisms to certain functions in the game can be established (e.g. a typical in-game multiple-choice question in a conversation is often used to evaluate the knowledge of a given concept). In many cases, the interaction with the game can sometimes be automatically inferred from the function its elements must play. This suggests that an increased focus on function does not necessarily imply a limitation on interactivity, but it does imply a change in point of view during development.

In addition, most authoring tools use content-based or object-centered descriptions that result in the logic of the game being scattered around different components in a story that emerges from the interaction further complicating the problem. This means that the story is implicit, cannot be viewed as a whole, and is difficult to understand. For instance, the consequence of player action might be the modification of a variable, which only later, and indirectly, triggers the modification of an art resource that results in the player seeing the consequence of the action in the game world.

We propose bringing game development closer to the story-writing process by using a description based on a narrative metaphor (i.e. development based on the function of the game, more natural to non-developers such as educators). Some authors such as Ryan (2006) consider video games to be a new narrative medium. Educators, though usually unfamiliar with programming, can be expected to be used to other narrative materials (e.g. stories). This narrative metaphor is inspired by different heuristics, case studies and proposals regarding story-writing and video game development. We use an explicit representation of the story to create a comprehensive description of the game, “weaving” the story of the game by using visual components while facilitating game edition and understanding. A description based on a narrative metaphor is also being considered in other approaches to educational video game creation (Göbel, Salvatore, Konrad, & Mehm, 2008). Moreover, although games could be created by bundling together interactive puzzles or problems (e.g. this approach is used by the popular Raptivity1 tool), studies show that the narrative structure plays a fundamental role in the understanding of the instructional message and helps new learners to set appropriate goals (Laurillard, 1998).

We implemented our approach in order to test it with end-users. Story editing is done through the use of a visual language to represent low-level user interactions (e.g. “grabbing” an object) abstracted as high-level visual components (i.e. an icon in the flow representation). In the WEEV system, simple and explicit visual constructs (i.e. circles, arrows and boxes) replace complex and implicit descriptions (Marchiori, Torrente, Del Blanco, Moreno-Ger, & Fernández-Manjón, 2010). For instance, conditions, which result in complex logic structures unfamiliar to non-programmers, are hidden behind the visual components. Moreover, commonly used structures such as multiple-choice questions are included as out-of-the-box and customizable components to fit user needs, instead of being described as complex interrelations between different game elements, thus placing function over interactivity.

This work is structured as follows: In Section 2 we present the basic theoretical framework for the WEEV methodology. In Section 3 we introduce the WEEV methodology itself. Section 4 provides a description of the WEEV system, the concrete implementation of the WEEV methodology. In Section 5 a brief introduction to the related work in the area and a critical analysis of such work is provided. Section 6 presents a formative evaluation, an end-user evaluation and a use case of the system. Finally, Section 7 presents the conclusions and future work in this area.

Section snippets

Theoretical framework

Educational video games are becoming an increasingly accepted complement to traditional educational approaches. Authors such as Gee, 2003, Squire and Barab, 2004, or Aldrich (2004) argue that games can be used to enhance learning. Amory, Naicker, Vincent, and Adams (1999) argue that computer games could provide a good mechanism to entice learners to acquire knowledge through intrinsic motivation. Computer games can engage students in the learning environment by the use of an interesting story,

The WEEV methodology

WEEV is a methodology for the authoring of narrative point-and-click educational games. The theoretical works presented in the previous section provide a framework for the definition of the elements in the methodology. In particular, WEEV identifies three main elements or tasks:

  • 1.

    Definition of the actors: Major actors (i.e. characters and useful objects) that will appear in the story are identified. Actors are described by using detailed descriptions (textual or graphic).

  • 2.

    Definition of the world:

The WEEV system

The WEEV system is the implementation of the WEEV methodology into an actual game creation framework. The WEEV system is built upon <e-Adventure>,2 an educational video game authoring platform created with the aim of enhancing the teacher’s implication in the game development process by reducing the related cost and technical requirements while increasing the created game’s educational value (Moreno-Ger, et al., 2008, Torrente, Del

Related work

Other systems attempt to simplify the creation of games or introduce games in education. While some of these systems share particular features with WEEV, others take very different approaches. This section will cover only some systems that we consider most representative to provide a better framing of our contribution, with Table 3 summarizing the main features of each system in comparison with WEEV. A more detailed discussion of the creation of educational games, including the costs and tools

Evaluation

Three different evaluations were performed on the system. The first evaluation was of a formative nature, intended to improve the software. The second evaluation, performed after the improvements to the software were implemented, was performed with end-users (i.e. educators) to assess the potential of the approach. The third evaluation consisted of the creation of an actual game by using the system.

The stories or games used in the first two evaluations have no educational value, because the

Conclusions and future work

This paper presented the WEEV methodology and system. WEEV’s main goal is to facilitate educational video game development, while making it easy to include educators in the development process. Involving educators is the best way to ensure a high degree of usefulness and educational value within the games. To achieve this goal, the WEEV methodology is grounded on video game and narrative theory, while the system uses a set of visual languages to create explicit representations of the elements

Acknowledgments

The Ministry of Education (grants Movilidad I-D+i PR2010-0070 and TIN2010-21735-C02-02) and the Ministry of Industry (grants TSI-020110-2009-170, TSI-020312-2009-27) have partially supported this work, as well as the Complutense University of Madrid and the Regional Government of Madrid (research group GR35/10-A and project e-Madrid S2009/TIC-1650), and the PROACTIVE EU project (505469-2009-LLP-ES-KA3-KA3MP) and the GALA EU Network of Excellence in serious games (FP7-ICT-2009-5- 258169).

We

References (36)

  • C. Aldrich

    Simulations and the future of learning: An innovative (and perhaps revolutionary) approach to e-learning

    (2004)
  • A. Amory

    Game object model version II: a theoretical framework for educational game development

    Educational Technology Research and Development

    (2006)
  • A. Amory et al.

    The use of computer games as an educational tool: identification of appropriate game types and game elements

    British Journal of Educational Technology

    (1999)
  • Blunt, R. (2007). Does game-based learning work? Results from three recent studies. In Proceedings of...
  • M. Boshernitsan et al.

    Visual programming languages: A survey

    (2004)
  • M.F. Costabile et al.

    Visual interactive systems for end-user development: a model-based design methodology

    IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics

    (2007)
  • M.D. Dickey

    Engaging by design: how engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design

    Educational Technology Research and Development

    (2005)
  • M.D. Dickey

    Game design narrative for learning: appropriating adventure game design narrative devices and techniques for the design of interactive learning environments

    Educational Technology Research and Development

    (2006)
  • Cited by (55)

    • Towards a visual guide for communicating uncertainty in Visual Analytics

      2019, Journal of Visual Languages and Computing
      Citation Excerpt :

      In a more casual context, visual languages are used to support laymen with the creation of games. By simplifying game mechanics into a set of graphical, interconnected building blocks that form a library of actions and meanings, non-programmers, such as educators outside the field of computing, can build computer games themselves and focus on content creation and story line, rather than on the acquisition of programming skills [44,45]. The power of visual representation for describing complex coherences is even being employed to support managers in understanding organisational structures and optimising workflows [46].

    • Using New AI-Driven Techniques to Ease Serious Games Authoring

      2023, Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE
    • Can Educators Develop Digital Role-Playing Games?

      2023, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text