Advertisement

Conceptual Factors for the Design of Serious Games

  • Christina TsitaEmail author
  • Maya Satratzemi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11385)

Abstract

Serious Games (SGs) are widely used in a variety of fields, because they have been shown to effectively facilitate learning in an engaging and entertaining manner. In recent years, there is discussion on how valid evidence of SGs efficiency can be increased, in order to further promote their use. Thus, numerous SG design and evaluation frameworks have been introduced, many of which have proved useful for SGs developing teams. Despite this, however, for novice designers, this vast array can be daunting. The aim of the present paper is to combine well-known frameworks and extract the conceptual factors that need to be considered when designing an SG. Having in mind that the proposed aspects are not in their essence independent, a classification of these aspects is presented, along with suggestions regarding their use and the dependencies among them. Although the various frameworks might have many common factors, there are some that highlight specific aspects of a particular factor. For instance, those frameworks that apart from the descriptive factors provide aspects regarding application, measurement, and assessment.

Keywords

Serious Games Framework Conceptual design 

References

  1. 1.
    Fisch, S.: Making educational computer games educational. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp, 56–61. ACM, Colorado, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yusoff, A., Crowder, R., Gilbert, L., Wills, G.: A conceptual framework for serious games. In: Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), pp. 21–23 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Freitas, S., Jarvis, S.: A framework for developing serious games to meet learner needs. In: Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), Florida (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Catalano, E.C., Luccini, M.A., Mortara, M.: Best practices for an effective design and evaluation of serious games. Int. J. Serious Games 1(1) (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arnab, S., et al.: Mapping learning and game mechanics for serious games analysis. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 46(2), 391–411 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carvalho, M., et al.: An activity theory-based model for serious games analysis and conceptual design. Comput. Educ. 87, 166–181 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roungas, B., Dalpiaz, F.: A model-driven framework for educational game design. In: de De Gloria, A., Veltkamp, R. (eds.) GALA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9599, pp. 1–11. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40216-1_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garris, R., Ahlers, R., Driskell, J.E.: Games, motivation, and learning: a research and practice model. Simul. Gaming 33(4), 441–467 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kiili, K.: Content creation challenges and flow experience in educational games: the IT-Emperor case. Internet High. Educ. 8(3), 183–198 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Freitas, S., Neumann, T.: The use of ‘exploratory learning’ for supporting immersive learning in virtual environments. Comput. Educ. 52(2), 343–352 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bellotti, F., et al.: Designing serious games for education: from pedagogical principles to game mechanisms. In: Gouscos, D., Meimaris, M. (eds.) 5th European Conference on Game-Based Learning, October 2011, Athens, Greece, pp. 26–34. Academic Publ. Ltd., Reading, UK (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kiili, K., De Freitas, S., Arnab, S., Lainema, T.: The design principles for flow experience in educational games. Procedia Comput. Sci. 15, 78–91 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Malliarakis, C., Satratzemi, M., Xinogalos, S.: Designing educational games for computer programming: a holistic framework. Electron. J. e-Learn. 12(3), 281–298 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Perennial, New York (1991)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kolb, D.A.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. FT Press, London (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vygotsky, L.: Interaction between learning and development. Read. Dev. Child. 23(3), 34–41 (1978)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied InformaticsUniversity of MacedoniaThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations