Word-Bank

Usman Athar

CUNY York College

The game is trying to teach subjects to read specific letters and identify which words they are. The learning objective the game is trying to create for the subjects is to think faster and be more attentive. The dominant form of interaction the player has with the game is simply reading the flashcard, and thinking of the word that it could be. The player doesn’t have any physical interaction with the game. This does not get in the way of the learning objective as it still stimulates the brain and achieves the learning objective. Cognitive processes are most affected by the game design. The design affects this system simply by not having any physical interaction with the game. It is solely all cognitive processes in action.

Three people are engaged in the game. One person will be the player (subject), the other will be just someone to hold the index cards, and one person will be keeping tally of the score. They interact with one another by the person giving the answer, and the other person holding the index card responding if it was right or wrong. It is neither cooperative nor competitive amongst them. One is simply helping facilitate the game. One is playing the game. One is keeping score of the game. The primary objective of the game is to get as many words right as possible, under the amount of time allotted per word. Time would be set as 10-seconds/per word, for example. The game objective does reinforce the learning objective, as the game objective is to score as many points as possible and the only way to score points is to complete the words, which will then reinforce the learning objective. The rules of the game are simple. Each word will have a 10-second timer. If the timer passes 10 seconds then the game is over and whatever points you collected will be your score. Each word is equivalent to one point. If you get all the words, you get all the points and you successfully beat the game. This compliments the learning objective, as it encourages players to try and beat the game each time they lose, which should help them get better and be more attentive over time. Items such as points are accrued during the game. No resources are spent during the game. Since there are no resources spent, nothing governs the exchange of resources. The only conflicts between the player and the game elements include the difficulty/longevity of the word, the timer and every time the player loses. These conflicts are resolved by getting better each time they lose. The game prevents players from having physical interaction, which should then help them focus as they are solely using their minds to play the game. This limitation can be fun because when you have less things to touch, feel and think about, you’re more focused on doing one thing. This one thing will be thinking, and will contribute to the objective ultimately. The game ends when the player wins, which means the player has to get every word right each round, under the 10-second timer. The outcome does not conflict with the objective, as the end of the game is made long enough that the player has to lose a few times, before getting it right, which then helps the player use his mind more, be more focused and attentive and eventually the objective is achieved.

The main character is the player. The motivation is the difficulty of the game, and the fact that it looks easy in the beginning and seems beatable. There is no relationship between the player and the character, as it is not a video game. The challenges presented to the player include the timer on each word, the difficulty the word, and the longevity of the word. The player must master or learn the skill of reading and thinking fast. This game is a card-based game as it is not a video game, so it does not take place in a fictional world. The premise of the game is to get all fifty words right under the allotted time of ten seconds per word. The game uses a linear narrative, as it is simply one thing the player has to achieve over and over, until they beat the game. Player interactions related to the narrative by allowing them to only use their minds and no physical interaction. That should help isolate them from any other activity and help stimulate reading and thinking. The game is playful by being simple; not having too much going on can make a game fun, simple and playful. Of the many types of play, the most prevalent is the “solitary play”. Of the players in Bartle’s Taxonomy, the one to most likely enjoy this game would be the “achievers”. The tension and resolution are controlled in the game by beating each round. If the player loses then he/she comes back to beat it, which keeps the player at a constant to relieve the tension. The cycle continues. The story does not create conflict in the game, as there is none.

The objects used to build the game include a timer and a deck of index cards. The only object property required for the game includes the words written on the index cards. The only object behaviors that are required are reading and thinking of the word on the index card and speaking it out. The basic relationship between the system elements is associated with the player as it is up to him/her to read them. The player controls the dynamics of the game. The game system does not exist as an economy. No new systems emerge from the game play, as it is a pretty simple game with the same rules and objectives for each round. There are no procedurally generated systems. The rules of the game and how the game is to be played is exposed to the player, there is nothing hidden from the player. The player interacts with the system, controls the system and receives feedback from the system by reading, thinking and then saying out loud what his answer is. The feedback given to him/her is from the other person holding the index card, telling him/her whether or not he/she is right or wrong.

The game is fully functional, as it has all the components to help achieve the learning objective. The game is indeed complete. There is no voice that isn’t being represented in the game. All aspects needed are present. The game is balanced as it has a points system, a system to tell the player if he/she is wrong, etc. The only dominant strategy is to think faster, and read faster. This helps reinforce the learning objective. The game is also symmetrical in all aspects. The game is indeed engaging, as it has the player coming back for more, to eventually beat the game. The elements that support engagement promotes the learning objective by playing the game with the rules provided. Word choices are meaningful in the game and it relates to the objective, as it is needed to beat the game, thus help you get better at thinking. There are no parts of the game that are broken, micromanaging, boring or stagnant, have insurmountable obstacles, etc. It is very easy to play the game, as it is very simple. It takes 30 seconds to learn the game and players learn to play by reading instructions.

My game is called ice cream phrase, this upcoming week i will be working on a better game board, since i was having a bit of issue when the kids were playing before. When the children played this week I noticed the child with the speech delay pronounce the words much better then last week. This game is really helping her pronounce the words better and her memory skill is great as well. She is learning the words and colors at the same time which is a plus.

For week 9, i again discussed what I did during week 7.  I explained the different learning objectives and elements that are included in the building of my game. The two systems affected by the game design are the social and cognitive processes. For example, Learning and decision making are examples because the children have to learn and decide which shapes belong to which space. The rules of the game are: select a beginning shape. (ex. Circle, square, rectangle, etc.) Then the timer starts for 30 seconds. The objective is to place all the shapes in their appropriate spaces. Whoever complete the game first wins. These rules complement the game. It creates a fun, competitive way to learn different shapes, make new friends, and to enjoy an activity during your free time. After each segment of the game, the winner will receive letters to complete the name “Willie”. Once a player receives all of the letters, they will be crowned winner, with a “Willie Crown”. Each player will receive cookies to enjoy, while playing the game. The game is usually played by children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. There is also Typically Developing children that also play the game. This will prevent players from behaving in inappropriate ways, by having them work together to complete the levels. The outcome of the game is to place each shape in its appropriate space, completing it in the given time span, also completing the word “Willie”. “Willie the Monster”, will be satiated at the end, because the shapes mocks food that the monster will eat. The challenges that may be presented to the player in the game, is making sure each piece fit correctly. (ex. Placing a square into a rectangle shape. That wouldn’t fit correctly.) The player will learn to master how to play with help from other people. This will create a great social environment. This story uses emergent narrative. Each player might approach certain situation in the game differently.

Minimal changes that I made, were that I added more groups to the amount of people that will be playing the game. I also spoke about including irregular shapes along with the general shapes, like squares and circles.

The name of the game is textured card game. The learning objective of the game is to expose children with sensory processing disorder to different textures. the cognitive process involved is sensory process. The numbers of players in the game is up to 4 players, they are divided into small groups.  the players take turns in the game and they each name the animal thats being presented on the card and how the feel about the card in regards to the texture.The purpose of teaching/ exposing the children to textures is so they can get used to it and wont have issues with it because is something that is used in their everyday life and they may be affected if they are unable to cop with different textures. There are no actual rules in the game because the game is being played by kids and the main point of the game is to learn by the idea of exposure. During the game the kids are exposed to textured and the learning of different textures are acquired. Engagement promotes learning of the different textures to the children. Some of the players in the game have different reactions to textures therefore the textures used on the cards all small pieces like a small piece of faux fur. The ending of the game consist of the children counting how many cards the players has in their hands. When the player no longer has cards left in their hands the game ends. Challenges presented to the player includes the player having issues with certain textures that they dislike. The game takes place in a farm nice quiet place. All the players interact and talk to one another in order to play the game.

After the conduction of Pingo’s first test trial a few changes were implemented in the game. Instead of one general playing card the new Pingo would include easy, medium, and hard playing cards. The level of rotation and the types of images would increase in difficulty in each level. This would allow players more room to further improve their skills. . This addition is fun because it can give players something to work towards. To keep things organized a list of the different images used for the different playing card would be added. Pingo used to be played by a minimum of two people and a maximum of 20. The game would now be recommended to be played by a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 10. I believe this change in players would shorten the game time and make the game more intimate. The length of time to complete the game use to make the game feel stagnant and boring. However by lowering the amount for players and variation in the image card and playing cards, it should lower the game time.

This week we were comparing our notes from when we started and where we are now and its good because I can actually see the progress I’ve made in the game. plus throughout the weeks I have been getting new ideas and have been trying to incorporate them in the game to the best of my ability. hopefully it will all come together.

Willie the Monster.
Eligible participants were at least 12 years of age, and no more than age 18. They were recruited from a school research subject pool at Brooklyn Autism Center in Brooklyn, New York. The subjects were recruited through a brief survey asking parents about any behavioral problems they are going through, and that they may need help with. Subjects with great visual skills were chosen to be the control. The children that had great abilities in music were the experimental group. The average age of the subjects were 15 years old. The teens were male and female, any ethnicity, but they would have to be American born. Must attend an American school in New York City or any disability programs in New York City.

The materials that I used to collect data were recording behaviors through a two-way mirror. The collection of data was then recorded on a spreadsheet that showed how long a subject took to place the shapes in the right place. It also showed the different behaviors and how often they occurred throughout the game. It would be the first time this game would be used. The subjects were motivated to participate by receiving movie tickets for a new ASD movie.

The game will take place in a classroom. There were two groups. One group will play with a child that does not have ASD. The other group will play the exact same game but without a typically developing child. Subjects were told that they will be playing a game in which they had to feed the monster. If they got the answer wrong, then the monster will be hungry. The collection of data was recorded on a bar- graph to show the ranges of behavior when working with another child. There were 10 trials for the game.

The outcome of my experiment, was that the children that played with the typically developing child, experienced a great change in their social ability. The whole study was to see if a child with ASD can develop better social skills by working with a typically developing child to finish the game. The children that played the game without a typically developing child, were looked at as the control, because they had higher visual skills than the other kids. It was fact that they can look at something and figure it out very quickly.

There were twenty subjects used for the game. The subjects were recruited in high school. They volunteered to participate in the games. Inclusion and exclusion criteria didn’t include their sex or their ethnicities. All subjects were assigned to these conditions. The only things that were included were their ages. The subject demographics were 10 males and 10 females to make the study even. Ethnicity, sex, etc. wasn’t important.

There were a few conditions that were created. Some Conditions included one with some students getting easier pictures to look at and remember and the rest of the students got the harder pictures and objects to look at and remember. I explained the things to the subjects by telling the students that they will have to look at a series of objects or pictures, remember them, and afterward, say them in their original order. Depending on the game variant that the students choose, the students may alternatively be asked to say what they remembered in reverse order. There is also a Time limit to answering the questions. The data was collected based on the points the students got on each round.

.