I dislike the term “serious games,” which implies that there is something that isn’t serious about, say, WoW. I’ll go ahead and suggest that a service that brings in ~$700 million/year in revenue and provides thousands of jobs (both within Blizzard and in multiple gold-generating operations) is a lot more serious than any game that has, to date, been produced with a purpose other than entertainment. In fact, I’m just going to refer to them as Alternative Purpose Games (APGs) until I grow tired of having to explain what I mean every time I use the term. I think APG sums them up much more clearly than ‘Serious’ does when trying to distinguish between games whose purpose is entertainment and games whose purpose is something else.
Many APGs suffer from a major problem: They’re just not very good games. In fact, many of them are somewhat beyond horrible. For instance, Ian Bogost of Persuasive Games, seems like a smart fellow with intentions in the right place, though I don’t know him personally. The media loves him too. The games of his I’ve played are pretty bad though, and judging by his site’s 900k+ Alexa ranking (higher is worse) it doesn’t seem as if his games are getting any traction at all. They all but beat you over the head with their political messages, sacrificing gameplay while doing so, and ensuring that few people will play them and thus they will have little to no impact. Not very serious to me, intentions aside.
I read a good article in Wired last night though about a guy named Luis von Ahn. (Among other things, he invented the CAPTCHA.) He’s an assistant professor of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon, and he makes APGs that are truly serious. For instance, he did a game a couple of years ago called the ESP Game in which players are paired up with an anonymous partner and each is shown the same picture. The participants then have a fixed amount of time to type in as many words as they can think of that describe that picture. They get points for each word that matches one also typed by their partner.
The result of the game is that words co-tagged by both partners are ‘likely’ (though not certain) to accurately describe something about the image. Computers are pretty terrible currently at recognizing things in photographs but humans are very good at it. The results produced by the game were considerably more accurate than other image-search technologies were generating, and soon Google licensed the technology and launched it as the Google Image Labeler, which works to improve the accuracy of Google Image Search results. Essentially, his game is helping to make information more accessible to all of us. (I know I use Google Image search frequently.)
His newest game, called Matchin’ (not out yet), is even more interesting. In it, you’re once again paired with someone anonymous, but this time you’re shown two pictures and asked to pick which one you think both of you are more likely to find the most attractive. Every time players agree on a picture, it’s tagged as prettier. The idea is that since the human aesthetic has not yet been reduced to code in anything resembling an effective fashion, von Ahn can harness human players to build a database of images with varying levels of ‘prettiness.’ Someday Google may let you search for pictures of “hotels rated X or higher in prettiness.”
(On a non-game note, the thing he’s doing that fascinates me the most is called the reCaptcha. Instead of showing you one word to input when you register for a forum or whatever, it shows you two. One of the words the software knows and can recognize, while the other is a word scanned from millions of public domain books that has come out smudged and needs a human to recognize it. If one (or perhaps a few) people input the smudged word the same, chances are they’ve correctly recognized the word and thus is now ‘translated’, thus performing a valuable, if small individually, task.)
Persuasive Games and von Ahn (who will be launching Games With A Purpose this summer) are both making APGs, but I suspect von Ahn’s approach is likely to continue to end with far more ’serious’ results. He’s building his purpose into the most foundational layer of his games, whereas Persuasive Games (and most self-labeled ’serious games’ developers) are, largely ineffectively, layering political/social messages on top of games whose gameplay would work just as well in multiple genres.
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 27th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Andrew Crystall
My only problem with the term is it’s quite close to ARG (Alternate Reality Game), a moderately established term.
June 27th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
Matt
ARG-H!
Just kidding. The great thing about APG and ARG is that you only have to remember 4 letters but you get 2 three letter acronyms out of them! Efficiency.
–matt
June 28th, 2007 at 5:47 am
Galleus
So…
ARP or APG? You used ARP in the post and APG in the comment.
Either that or I’m completely lost.
June 28th, 2007 at 6:26 am
Ben
“Many ARPs suffer from a major problem: They’re just not very good games”
Reminds of Food Force, which was made by the United Nations World Food Program to teach kids about helping feed developing nations. Sure, it’s a great concept, and the media started going on about how more games should be like it, but no one seemed to mention that it looks and plays like a shareware game from the mid 90’s. The kind you’d buy on a floppy for 5 bucks from Radioshack.
I just hate when parents and media always assume that if a game is blatantly educational, it’s obviously so much more important than an “entertainment” video game.
June 28th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Matt
APG, sorry Galleus!
–matt
June 29th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Steven "PlayNoEvil" Davis
Matt -
I half agree with you. Games are a core form of entertainment / interaction - like literature, theater, film… and we have a multitude of potential genres within games.
“Serious” games seem to sit in a couple of categories:
Non-fiction games, Educational games, Propaganda games, and Documenta-games?
In some sense, we are selling ourselves short as defining games so narrowly - no one does that with writing, film, or theater?
June 30th, 2007 at 6:08 am
AC
http://seriousgames.ning.com
http://seriousgamesblog.blogspot.com/
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:16 am
CaRteR
I think this post says more about the writer than about games. (Translation: Maybe it isn’t the games that are boring - maybe it’s YOU that is boring.) There are some games from the old 8-bit days that still play extremely well. For example, MULE. I think you guys won’t touch your cereal unless its slathered in sugar (read: lots of “kewl grafiks” with explosions and junk).
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:50 am
Matt
No, the games suck.
I run text MUDs - games without any graphics at all - so you’re definitely barking up the wrong tree by accusing me of being a graphics whore.
–matt