Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
QUO VADIS SERIOUS GAMESKeynote, Darmstadt, Germany 22th March ‘13
Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen, PhDCEO, founder Serious Games Interactive
My Background
• MA Psychology• PhD Games & learning• Between industry & research• Founder of Serious Games Int. • Cofounder DIGRA• Cofounder of CPH Game Centre
Developing games• Three series for education• +80 client projects
Who are we...• Research-based company• Using games for more than entertainment• Won several awards for our productions• First company starting with Unity3D
9 Nationalities | 30 Employees | +80 Projects | 20 Products
Current research projects• Gala – Network of Excellence for Serious Games• SIREN – Conflict resolution for children & adults• VISTRA – virtual game-driven assembly line training• ETREES – Advanced narrative work-place training • C2Learn – Creative learning environment through games• STIMULATE – Physics tablet game on Advanced materials• UrbanWater – Gamification of water usage to change behavior
Background
Agenda
How did I get here?What is this talk about?Can tablets solves fundamental problems?How to go beyond current praxis?What is the sweet spot for game-based learning?
My journey
Step 1: We don't really know a lot about (serious) games (1996-2001) Step 2: Serious games are different things, and will not just work (2002-2005) Step 3: Serious games, school and teachers are not good friends (2002-2005) Step 4: Serious games needs to be tailored for school use (2002-2005) Step 5: Nobody really knows how to make serious games (2003-2007) Step 6: We are going to need a bigger boat (2007-2009) Step 7: I build the wrong boat (2007-2009) - GC small hit Step 8: I build the wrong train (2010-2011) - PH small hit Steo 9: I build the wrong plane (2011-2012) - Trunky small hit Step 10 World domination of serious games involves not only me, but a
mature and sound market. (2012-2013) - Tablets may be the beginning of this.
Our business approach
Flagships
Work-for-hire
Research
Surviving and growing
•Don’t build the technology yourself unless you really need to. •Don’t let go of your technology; constantly build, test
& improve•Develop your core team; know who to invest in &
who to trust•Above all find a niche where you can shine and be
unique. Preferable a niche with a geographic hook•Combine revenue streams; less dependency on client
pipeline•Manage ambitions, scale slowly and work hard.
Serious games revenue streams
Support funds: EU Media+, Regional FundsResearch funds: EU-programs galore, regional and national. Work-for-hire: National start-up, European and then rest of world.
Private licenses: Retail and/or digital distributionEducational licenses: Browser-based online and & CD-ROMTechnology licensing: Seat, source-code or hosting
Other: Ads-based, customer knowledge, eyeballs?
Serious games revenue streams
Private market:Pc was struggling prior to financial crisis (not improved). Channels crowded & retail takes the majority Gate keepers careful & conservativeOnly two segments; Nerds (simulations) or children titles (< 8 years).
Educational market (primary/secondary/Higher):Theoretical market w. a lot of substitutes Slow decisions process & adoption of new praxisCurriculum requirements and hardware limitations significantLocal markets w. many entry barriersWeak channels & marketing (word-of-mouth)
Work-for-hire (military/health/corporate/public)Clear channelWell-defined targetsClear goal
Small & well-defined budgetsMany requirements & limitationsStill difficult to scope & specify up-front
Our business approach
Flagship products (long-term)• New tech• Own control• Motivates team• Showcases• Long projects• Slow mone
Client projects (short-term)•Known/existing tech•Little control•Experience team•Knowledge market•Quick iterations•Quick money
Research (loooong-term)•Experimental tech.•Unknown control•Test new areas for team•Knowledge new markets•Slow & many iterations•Sure money
Agenda
How did I get here?What is this talk about?Can tablets solves fundamental problems?How to go beyond current praxis?What is the sweetspot for game-based learning?
Goal
Get you to reflect on how we as researchers facilitate a new viable and sound market with game-based
learning on tablets in schools.
Still room for scepticism but I believe we have seen that game-based learning can work - now we need to figure
and when and how. Here tablets are interesting!
Tablets are interesting
Graphics - Interface – Gameplay - Business
Most importantly’Less is more’
&’a micro payment channel’
Agenda
What is this talk about?Can tablets solves fundamental problems?How to go beyond current praxis?What is the sweetspot for game-based learning?
“Media will never influence learning”
Historically there has been a tendency to state just that
also supported by Cuban in 'Oversold and underused'.
I think the truth is that it takes a loooong time.
“Teachers – the new black is black”
Teachers maturity level towards computers
Entry Teachers novice users of computers.
Adoption Teachers tend to take a traditional approach to instruction but do provide some explanation on computer use.
Adaptation Traditional approaches to instruction prevail but some class time is allowed for students to use computers for homework and daily class work.
Approriation Teachers integrate technology regularly into the curriculum
Invention Teachers find new ways to connect students and use project-based and interdisciplinary approaches to instruction.
Source: Cuban, 2001
Time
Complexity
BoardsBooks
TapeVideo
Computer LaptopsNetbooks
Smart boards
Tablet
“Reduced complexity is key”
First time schools charge ahead
The success of a new technology relies on the fact that it can be used to conserve existing praxis while offering
new opportunities to the dedicated…
That is the success of Smart Boards and Tablets - that seems to roll out much more quickly than past
educational technology.
“Game-based learning has boring problems..”
57%
12%
11%
6%
6%
7%Practical: Software, hardware & setting
My own lack of knowledge about games
Learning games not on a par with other games
Limited relevance to the syllabus of my subject
Difficult to control the learning process
Difficult to evaluate what pupils actually learn
Top 6 – categories barriers (top1)
Source: Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2011N= 275
“What teachers see..” Stable & robust vs. buggy & difficult to maintain Intuitive interface vs. complex mouse/key board Active interface vs. passive interface Transportable vs. stationary Consumption oriented vs. production orienteered Lots of free content vs. costly packages
A very interesting road that ‘promise’ to solve 58% of problems.
But new may ariseTablets not intended for school environemnt
New channel is unique- The long tail
Agenda
How did I get here?What is this talk about?Can tablets solves fundamental problems?How to go beyond current praxis?What is the sweet spot for game-based learning?
“Diffusion struggles in educational system”
Five attributes can explain 49-87% of the variation in adaption of an innovation.Relative advantage: How much is the innovation perceived as being better than what already exists.Compatibility: How well does the innovation match existing norms, values, needs, expectations and previous experiences? Complexity: How easy is the innovation to use and understand for users? Observability: How easy is it to observe the advantages achieved from adapting the innovation? Trialability: How easy is the innovation to try out and experiments with without going all in?
Source: Rogers, 2003
“But tablets may change this”
Relative Advantage: A lot of teachers embrace the devices. It’s a new opportunity to get on the wagon.
Compatibility: They can fit into classroom very nicely compared to other ICT:
Complexity: They are simple to use and maintain.
Triability: Try it out with a few devices in a class with a few apps.
Observability: Bring it to the next-door teacher in the break.
Agenda
How did I get here?What is this talk about?Can tablets solves fundamental problems?How to go beyond current praxis?What is the sweet spot for game-based learning?
“Research is practically non-existent”
Don’t know if tablets really do improve things as there is pretty much no research. Does the touch interface really help kids learn better,
more efficient, more engaging? Do interface transform into new gameplay that help
kids learn better? Does the tablet really improve learning effect
compare to other instructional methods and platforms.
Does the tablet really make it easier for teacher to use ICT in class?
“Developers are trying quite hard”
Source: Egenfeldt-Nielsen, In review
48.2%
8.9%
21.4%
7.1%
3.6%7.1%
1.8% 1.8%
What is your average development time for a project in working days (total time for code, graphics, music, testing etc)?
+120 days 90-120 days
60-90 days 45-60 days
30-45 days 15-30 days
7-15 days < 7 days
N= 57
“But a lot lose money…”
Source: Egenfeldt-Nielsen, In review
22.6%
20.8%
28.3%
28.3%
Did you get Return on your investment?
I recouped my money within 6 monthsI recouped my money but took more than 6 monthsI haven’t recouped my money but expect to within 6 monthsI haven’t recouped my money and do not expect to.N= 57
“Designing for tablets”
Unforgiving market. Developers have to work hard and constantly update. Otherwise they will have a low star
rating sitting. The feedback loop is much more close with users. Less crashing software and quick response.
The device affordance is towards smooth interface with high usability that is quick to get started with and get
into. No waiting for things to boot in 5 minutes.
The room for more complex apps is non-existent
“Designing for tablets”
Golden age of computer games in the 1980s where developers and content experts were often the same guy. We see this with a lot of the start-ups now that
there is a closer affinity. Not just nerds but educators.
+ =More succesfu
l
games?
“Designing for tablets”
”[In 1980s] Mass merchants wanted to deal with no more than 20 suppliers and carry a maximum of 300
titles".. Carly Shyler, 2012
Compare that with maybe 3.000 titles in the market.
We now know that the promising 1980s with edutainment games failed because we failed to build a sustainable market place that could ensure continued
innovation and research.
Contact infoCompany details
Serious Games InteractiveRavnsborggade 2-4, 2. floor
DK - 2200 Copenhagen Nwww.seriousgames.dk
My details: Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen
[email protected] | +45 40 10 79 69www.egenfeldt.eu
© Serious Games Interactive
