Example of scientific discourse via World of Warcraft
I posted about some of the research going on regarding scientific discourse and virtual worlds in the past, and an interview with a top raiding guild, Vodka, provided another great example. When asked how they approach a new raid encounter within the game:
When we first approach a new encounter, we typically just throw ourselves at the boss a few times without any real plan just to see what is going on, which may sound silly, but during each of these attempts we are observing as much as we possibly can and recording as much data as possible so that we can begin analyzing it more thoroughly in order to develop a strategy. Once we have collected some information about the encounter, we can then determine what type of damage output we will be dealing with, which will then answer the question of what type of healing we need to counter it, and then we can move on to things such as positioning, what the best type of DPS is going to be, and what tanks will give us the best results. Once we have all of that figured out, we can begin testing different iterations of our strategy to see where the flaws are and then work on resolving them. Eventually we will have a strategy that will work long enough for us to see if there are different phases to the encounter, and determine whether or not there are any types of enrage timers or anything. Once we have that information, we go back to our original strategy and figure out how to adjust it so that we can deal with anything new that is introduced to the encounter in the later phases. Eventually we end up with a well rounded strategy that we are confident will work for us and then we begin doing reps over and over until the boss is dead.
If you simply read the snippets in bold, this could just as easily be someone talking about a design challenge, a production challenge, a supply chain challenge, a management challenge…you name it. This is the scientific method, a systematic approach to problem solving, that apparently our schools are doing a TERRIBLE job teaching these days (Miller 2004; Chinn and Malhotra 2002; National Research Council 2005; too many to list…) This also exemplifies problem-based learning, something the College of Information Sciences and Technology prides itself on. I’m simultaneously embarrassed and excited that our educational system is doing so poorly with this form of discourse, yet games are doing it so well.
Cripes, this PhD stuff must be getting to me if I’m citing academic articles in a blog entry. Apologies!
There is something afoot here! de Jong and van Joolingen
Scientific discovery learning with a computer simulations of conceptual domains
Ton de Jong; Wouter R van Joolingen
Review of Educational Research; Summer 1998; 68, 2
did a meta-analysis 10 years ago on simulations and the patterns of interaction and found very different usage patterns. People would start out trying random things, but never got to the analysis, “scientific method” stage.
Is this difference because of the medium, the audience (for them non-millennials), or some other factor? Is it games themselves causing the shift? Is it online communities and/or the ability to work together in world?
Interesting stuff!
I’d argue that simulations are much different than virtual worlds. You can do all this stuff in a sim…but it’s usually just you along manipulating the model. Collaboration plays a big part here, and depending on what type of character you’re playing in the game, you’re scientific approach will be a bit different from encounter to encounter.