ahandrewh teaches IAT-165game design and development

Critical play #2 (due March 11)

This document is a draft

Until January 21As a result it may still change up until January 21.

What are critical play reflections?

Critical play reflections are an opportunity to engage with games beyond just play — to unpack the biases, values and experiences of games. These reflections require that you play at least a portion of a game (board or videogame) and then reflection and critique how the game presents particular biases, values and/or experiences. The structure of this reflection and critique is detailed in the instructions.

This reflection is completed individually and is worth 10% of your final grade.

Instructions

The instructions below detail the process to follow for completing the critical play reflection. You have a number of weeks over which to complete it.

  1. Select a video or board game that you would like to complete the reflection with. This will have to be a different game than your first reflection. If you have any questions about your choice before proceeding please ask Andrew.
  2. Prepare to review the game's mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics.
    • Make sure you have read through "MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research" (Hunicke et al, 2013) — also available on Canvas as a PDF.
    • Make a cheat-sheet of key ideas from the article to look for while playing.
    • Keep in mind that you will experience the game 'in reverse' as a player — first experiencing the aesthetics, then understanding some of the dynamics and to some extent the mechanics (though you will not be expected to explain specific algorithms).
  3. Play through at least 1 hour of gameplay (for video games) or one full game (if board game). During the playthrough make sure to pause to capture:
    • Notes on mechanics, dynamics or aesthetics that describe the game's experience.
    • Screenshots, photos, or short videos (<10 seconds) to help illustrate your description of the game.
    • Replay particular mechanics or dynamics of the game as necessary to ensure you feel that you can effectively explain them.
  4. Prepare to critique the game in the context of culture.

    "The Joy of Virtual Violence" (Ellison & Keough, 2015) — available on Canvas provides an introduction to one way of thinking about this kind of critique. For example if the game you are critiquing draws upon a particular mythology consider asking:

    • Why it is important that the game use this mythology?
    • What does this mythology offer to the game's MDA?
    • Is the mythology purely an aesthetic choice? Could another mythology be applied while maintaining many of the mechanics and dynamics?
    • Does the use of the mythology feel stereotyped?

    To proceed with the cultural critique:

    • Having played the game, determine a framing for your critique based on your experience so far.
    • Write down at least three questions that you would like to answer based on the framing.
    • Do not worry about answering every question, focus on answering one well.
  5. Play through at least 1 hour of gameplay (for video games) or one full game (if board game). If this is a video game you can replay the first hour.
    • It is important that this playthrough is done separately from the first one to help you focus and effectively capture answers.
    • Take notes, screenshots, photos, or short videos (<10 seconds) on pieces that may answer your questions.

You will use the content from your process to form the critical play review described below.

Submission

The final submission is a standalone write-up. This means that we should be able to understand everything we need to within the document itself without playing the game ourselves.

The write-up should contain the following:

Final submission

You may submit a PDF or URL to a website that contains your report.

Your project submission is due to Canvas before your March 11 class.

Please make sure double-check all your submitted URLs to ensure they can be opened. We want to avoid late or problematic submission penalties whenever possible.

Grading

Please email Andrew with any questions about the rubric.

A B C D/F

Included the requested pieces (2 pt)

All requested materials have been completed and included.

One requested material has not been completed and/or is not included.

Two requested materials have not been completed and/or is not included.

Critical reflection (4 points): 'Is it critical reflection on the game?'

  • The description of the mechanics, dynamic and aesthetics demonstrates a strong understanding of the described portion of the game.
  • The cultural question is well defined and clearly answered with strong support of why.
  • The description of the mechanics, dynamic and aesthetics demonstrates an understanding of the described portion of the game.
  • The cultural question is defined and answered with good of why.
  • The description of the mechanics, dynamic and aesthetics demonstrates some understanding of the described portion of the game. Explanation feels incomplete or unclear at times.
  • The cultural question is somewhat defined and/or answered.
  • The description of the mechanics, dynamic and aesthetics demonstrates little understanding of the described portion of the game.
  • The cultural question is not well defined and/or answered.

Effective rationale (3 points): 'Does it show and tell effectively?'

  • The explanation uses supporting artifacts effectively — i.e. images, quotes, process material, etc. — to present an easy-to-understand review without extra, un-related materials.
  • Writing is within word limits.
  • The explanation uses supporting artifacts — i.e. images, quotes, process material, etc. — to present an easy-to-understand review with some extra, un-related materials.
  • Writing is within word limits.
  • The explanation uses some supporting artifacts — i.e. images, quotes, process material, etc. — to present an understandable review with some extra, un-related materials.
  • Writing is within word limits.
  • The explanation uses few supporting artifacts — i.e. images, quotes, process material, etc. — to present a confusing review with materials that are not clearly related.
  • Writing is significantly over or under word limits.

Citations (1 pt)

Citations are provided in a consistent, standard (APA, MLA, or otherwise) format for all materials.

Citations are provided in a consistent, non-standard format and/or some citations appear to be missing.

Citations are provided in an in-consistent format and/or many citations appear to be missing.