Advertisement

Expansive Genres of Play: Getting Serious About Game Genres for the Design of Future Learning Environments

  • Brad Mehlenbacher
  • Christopher Kampe
Chapter

Abstract

Game studies researchers have struggled with definitions of genre, defaulting to definitions that highlight game content and interaction differences. These categorizations focus on the feature-based nature of games and are not particularly useful for educational researchers interested in how games facilitate co-production and sharing among peers. A rhetorical conception of genre broadens our understanding of games, such that they become aspects of an environment and community where player participation and learning occur. The authors offer a description of one game that works as an exemplar in its dynamic engagement of players in building narrative objects (i.e. paratexts) that extend and co-produce an engaging learning world: This War of Mine. Ultimately the authors suggest that expansive play-learning can occur around games and within their genre ecologies.

Keywords

Game Play Dynamic Engagement Game World Expansive Learning Game Scholar 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ang, Chee Siang, Panayiotis Zaphiris, and Stephanie Wilson. 2010. Computer games and sociocultural play: An activity theoretical perspective. Games and Culture 5(4): 354–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bazerman, Charles. 2003. What is not institutionally visible does not count: The problem of making activity accessible, accountable, and plannable. In Writing selves/writing societies: Research from activity perspectives, eds. C. Bazerman and D. R. Russell, 428–482. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/books/selves_societies/selves_societies.pdf
  3. Berkenkotter, Carol. 2001. Genre systems at work: DSM-IV and rhetorical recontextualization in psychotherapy paperwork. Written Communication 18(3): 326–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bødker, Susanne, and Peter B. Anderson. 2005. Complex mediation. Human-Computer Interaction 20: 353–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bogost, Ian. 2013. “Keynote address.” Games for change. New York University, 26 June 2013. Keynote Address. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBduFJUdoog
  6. Consalvo, Mia. 2007. Cheating: Gaining advantage in videogames. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Devitt, Amy J. 1991. Intertextuality in tax accounting: Generic, referential, and functional. In Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities, eds. C. Bazerman and J.G. Paradis, 336–357. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 1993. Generalizing about genre: New conceptions of an old concept. College Composition and Communication 44(4): 573–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dibbell, Julian. 2007. The life of the Chinese gold farmer. The New York Times, June 17. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/magazine/ 17lootfarmers-t.html?pagewanted=all
  10. Dicheva, Darina, Christo Dichev, Gennady Agre, and Galia Angelova. 2015. Gamification in education: A systematic mapping study. Educational Technology & Society 18(3): 75–88.Google Scholar
  11. Djaouti, Damien, Julian Alvarez, and Jean-Pierre Jessel. 2011. Classifying serious games: The G/P/S model. In Handbook of research on improving learning and motivation through educational games: multidisciplinary approaches, ed. P. Felicia, 118–136. Hershey: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Engeström, Yrjö. 2001. Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work 14(1): 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fencott, Clive, Jo Clay, Mike Lockyer, and Paul Massey. 2012. Game invaders: The theory and understanding of computer games. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Galloway, Alexander. 2006. Gaming: Essays on algorithmic culture. Vol. 18. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  15. Genette, Gerard. 1997. Paratexts: Thresholds of interpretation (vol. 20) (Trans. J.E. Lewin). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gray, Jonathan. 2010. Show sold separately: Promos, spoilers, and other media paratexts. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Herrington, Jan, Ron Oliver, and Thomas C. Reeves. 2003. Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology 19(1): 59–71.Google Scholar
  18. Hickey, Daniel T., Adam A. Ingram-Globe, and Ellen M. Jameson. 2009. Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology 18: 187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huizinga, Johan. 1955. Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kato, Pamela M. 2010. Video games in health care: Closing the gap. American Psychological Association 14(2): 113–121.Google Scholar
  21. Lewis, J. P., Morgan McGuire, and Pamela Fox. 2007. Mapping the mental space of game genres. In Sandbox Symposium 2007. San Diego, August 4–5, 103–108.Google Scholar
  22. Manney, Patricia J. 2008. Empathy in the time of technology: How storytelling is the key to empathy. Journal of Evolution & Technology 19(1): 51–61.Google Scholar
  23. Marchiori, Eugenio J., Ángel del Blanco, Javier Torrente, Iván Martinez-Ortiz, and Baltasar Fernández-Manjón. 2011. A visual language for the creation of narrative educational games. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 22: 443–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayer, Richard E. 2001. Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCann, Shawn. 2009. Game genres demystified. Library Journal 134(1): January, 56.Google Scholar
  26. Mehlenbacher, Brad. 2010. Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mikropoulos, Tassos A., and Antonis Natsis. 2011. Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & Education 56: 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Miller, Carolyn R. 1984. Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. ———. 1994. Rhetorical community: The cultural basis of genre. In Genre and the new rhetoric, eds. A. Freedman and P. Medway, 67–78. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  30. Owens, Trevor. 2011. Modding the history of science: Values at play in modder discussions of Sid Meier’s Civilization. Simulation & Gaming 42(4): 481–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Paré, Anthony. 1993. Discourse regulations and the production of knowledge. In Writing in the workplace: New research perspectives, ed. R. Spilka, 111–123. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Paul, Christopher A. 2011. Optimizing play: How theorycraft changes gameplay and design. Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research 11(2). Retrieved from http://gamestudies.org/1102/articles/paul
  33. Poole, Steven. 2000. Trigger happy: Videogames and the entertainment revolution. New York: Arcade Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Raczkowski, Felix. 2012. “And what do you play?”: A few considerations concerning a genre theory of games. In Computer games and new media cultures: A handbook of digital games studies, eds. J. Fromme and A. Unger, 61–74. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rapeepisarn, Kowit, Kok Wai Wong, Chun Che Fung, and Myint Swe Khine. 2008. The relationship between game genres, learning techniques and learning styles in educational computer games. Edutainment LNCS 5093: 497–508.Google Scholar
  36. Schell, Jesse. 2008. The art of game design: A book of lenses. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  37. Schryer, Catherine F. 1993. Records as genre. Written Communication 10 (2): 200–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simon, Herbert. A. 1979. Models of thought. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Simon, Bart. 2007. Geek chic machine aesthetics, digital gaming, and the cultural politics of the case mod. Games and Culture 2(3): 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith, Karl A., Sheri D. Sheppard, David W. Johnson, and Robert T. Johnson. 2005. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education 94(1): 87–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Spinuzzi, Clay. 2004. Four ways to investigate assemblages of texts: Genre sets, systems, repertoires, and ecologies. SIGDOC’04, October 10–13, Memphis, 110–116.Google Scholar
  42. Squire, Kurt. 2008. Open-ended video games: A model for developing learning in the interactive age. In The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games, and learning, ed. K. Salen, 167–198. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  43. ———. 2011. Video games and learning: Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age, Technology, education—connections (the TEC series). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  44. Stanitzek, Georg. 2005. Texts and paratexts in media. Critical Inquiry 32(1): 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Starke-Meyerring, Doreen. 2009. The contested materialities of writing in digital environments: Implications for writing development. In The SAGE handbook of writing development, eds. R. Beard, M.J. Riley, D. Myhill, and M. Nystrand, 506–526. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Steinkuehler, Constance, and S.C. Duncan. 2008. Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology 17(6): 530–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Suchman, Lucy. 1987. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human machine communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Susi, T., Mikael Johannesson, and Per Backlund. 2007. Serious games: An overview. Technical report HS-IKI-TR-07-001. Skövde, Sweden: School of Humanities and Informatics, University of Skövde.Google Scholar
  49. Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Van Eck, Richard. 2006. Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review 41(2): 16–30.Google Scholar
  51. Winsor, Dorothy A. 1996. Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  52. Wolf, Mark J.P., ed. 2001. The medium of the video game. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  53. Yates, JoAnne, and Wanda Orlikowski. 2002. Genre systems: Structuring interaction through communicative norms. The Journal of Business Communication 39(1): 3–35.Google Scholar
  54. Young, Michael F., Slota, Stephen, Andrew B. Cutter, Gerard Jalette, Greg Mullin, Benedict Lai, Zeus Simeoni, Matthew Tran, and Mariya Yukhymenko. 2012. Our princess is in another castle: A review of trends in serious gaming for education. Review of Educational Research 82(1): 61–89.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brad Mehlenbacher
    • 1
  • Christopher Kampe
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Human DevelopmentNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, NCUSA
  2. 2.Program in Communication, Rhetoric, and Digital MediaNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations