Gameration 2: Implementing Games and Simulations within a Generational Context
Thanks Andy Petroski and Josh Stroup for their guest post. Andy is a co-coordinator of LEEF and Director and Assistant Professor of Learning Technologies at Harrisburg University. Josh Stroup is President of QTS Performance Solutions in Harrisburg PA.
Read the first Gameration post.
In this series, we’re taking a look at how the generation (Boomers, Generation X or Generation Y) might impact the way an individual thinks about and engages in games and ways in which learning professionals can adjust the game and simulation to address the expectations of each generation. As we explore the generations keep in mind the characteristics are generalizations of the generation and not necessarily accurate for any one individual.
This blog post focuses on game and simulation design and implementation considerations for Generation X. This is the first generation where electronic games (hand-held or console) were an element of the generation’s youth.
Generation X (born between 1963 -1977)
Background:
- Grew up in prosperous, materialistic society in dual-income families
- Witnessed high divorce rates among parents’ generation
- First generation in outside day care, who later became “latchkey” kids
- Witnessed Watergate, Tylenol scare, Three Mile Island, oil spills, Challenger disaster
- Saw parents work many years for large organizations get laid off
- Learned to multi-task on their own with homework, TV, telephone (“latchkey” kids)
Personal Attitude:
- Self –reliant (latchkey kids, two working parents, high divorce rates)
- Seek a sense of family via friends
- Want work/life balance; generally tend to “work to live” (vs. “live to work”)
- Nontraditional orientation to time and space
- Like informality – dress, workplace
- Tend to be skeptical – advertising, parents, corporations, national leaders
- Attracted to risk and adventure, but outside of work [including game play]
- Technologically savvy
Work Attitudes:
- Work style is “Take fastest route to results; protocol is secondary”
- View of authority & leadership is “Egalitarian; rules are flexible; collaboration is important”
- Communication preference is “Casual, direct and electronic; may be skeptical of some messages”
- View of work/family balance is “Value a work/life balance (“Work to live”)”
- At work, primary loyalty shown is “To individual career goals”
- View of technology is “Practical tools for getting things done”
Learning Preferences:
- Very comfortable learning on the computer
- Looking for CD-ROM, interactive video, distance learning and Internet courses
- Still appreciate standard classroom learning
- Respond well to lots of role-playing and skill practice, with coaching and feedback on the spot (i.e. “learn by doing”)
- Print materials should be interactive and participative, with lots of graphics, sidebars, type styles, headlines, cartoons, and subheads (tapping into their penchant for “multi-tasking”)
Implications for Games and Simulations:
Narrative and Character
- Xers might prefer a character that starts the journey on his own and through “friends” or sources is able to achieve individual goals. (primary loyalty is to individual career goals, self-reliant, seek a sense of family via friends, collaboration is important)
- Set the challenge(s) in the context of saving the character from an “evil-doer” that threatens individual advancement. (primary loyalty is to individual career goals, witnessed Watergate, Tylenol scare, Three Mile Island, etc., tend to be skeptical of corporations, attracted to risk and adventure outside of work)
- Identify the benefit of the game or simulation to the individual right up front. (technology is a practical tool for getting things done, tend to be skeptical)
- Provide rewards that indicate both professional and personal success. (want work/life balance, loyalty is to individual goals)
- Allow the learner to vary their role in the game or simulation (respond well to role-playing and skill practice, nontraditional orientation of time and space) so they can see the problem and solutions from a variety of perspectives and how it relates to their true. (real-life) role (counteract self-reliance, skepticism, individual career goals)
- Consider placing the character in a leadership role from the beginning, regardless of whether or not that’s their work role, to learn skills by failing at roles to which they aspire. (work style is “take the fastest route to results, protocol is secondary”, loyalty is to individual goals, nontraditional orientation to time and space)
- Consider a tone and dialogue that is casual throughout the story. (tend to be skeptical of formal leaders, like informality)
Information and Activities
- Allow the player to evaluate the value of information and the information source as part of their journey. (counteract skepticism of individuals and some messages)
- Consider information and activities that do not follow a normal series of events or timeframes. (nontraditional orientation to time and space, communication preference is casual and direct
- Don’t be afraid to present access to a lot of information or opportunities for information all at once. Ask the learner to keep track of information that might be required for later in the game. (penchant for multi-tasking, technologically savvy)
- Emphasize failure when skipping important steps or ignoring rules can lead to dire consequences (including videos of real-world examples of such) and emphasize reward when skipping steps and bending the rules makes sense. (rules are flexible, protocol is secondary)
- Limit the introduction and storyline or provide options for minimizing the storyline and let learners jump in right away with role-playing and skill practice. (respond well to learn by doing, rules are flexible, attracted to risk and adventure outside of work, self-reliant)
Feedback
- Provide feedback regularly throughout, including opportunities for coaching before starting a critical path or making key decisions. (respond well to coaching and feedback on the spot)
- Provide informal feedback from characters that might be friends of colleagues of the main character. (like informality, tend to be skeptical of formal leaders, seek a sense of family via friends)
- Provide feedback in the context of the individual’s success or failure toward achieving professional and personal success. (want work/life balance, loyalty to individual career goals)
- Consider a group review or debrief of play and outcomes in an asynchronous and synchronous format; face-to-face or online. (prefer direct, casual and electronic communication, still appreciate standard classroom setting, counteract skepticism)
Summary/Conclusion of Play
Provide a review of the experience and how/what the learner could have done for a different outcome, within the context of individual character/personal goals (respond well to coaching, loyalty is to individual goals)
Implementation
Downplay the technology and emphasize the story of the game and how it relates to real-world individual goals (view technology as a practical way to get things done, individual career goals, value work/life balance). But, emphasize the approach as a new and innovate way to get results from training (rules are flexible, like informality, casual and direct communication style, counteract some clinging to traditional classroom learning). Promote the experience based on other players’ reviews (tend to be skeptical of traditional leaders). Introduce the game through email, but consider a “launch” or question and answer session in a face-to-face setting as a follow-up to the email access to emphasize the importance of the game or simulation. (still appreciate standard classroom setting, skeptical of traditional leaders, counteract “rules are flexible” and “fastest route to results” attitude)
These are suggestions to consider as you design games for Xers. Also consider incorporating elements that will challenge the Xer’s personal attitudes, work attitudes and learning preferences to achieve even greater performance results from games and simulations.
What do you think? Are the Xer’s generational traits to general to be valuable for game and simulation design? Have you seen Xer’s react to games and simulations that indicate elements of their generational profile? What other game design considerations should be made for Generation X?
This reflects just one of the topics to be explored at LEEF, the Learning and Entertainment Evolution Forum on June 17-18. LEEF is an interactive professional development event showcasing the convergence of learning and entertainment technologies and exploring the organizational, design and technical challenges for adopting games and simulations for learning. Join Andy and presenters such as Jerry Heneghan of Applied Research Associates, Mike Cuffe, VP at Farmer’s Insurance, Phaedra Boinodiris of IBM, Koreen Olbrish of Tandem Learning, and more at LEEF this summer! The event will take place in Central Pennsylvania at Harrisburg University. Go to www.LEEF2010.net to learn more about the program!
The designations ‘boomer, gen x and gen y’ are just a ‘modern’ and ‘politically correct’ way of describing the classic three age groups that have been with us for centuries – that is, young, middle-aged and senior. However, no one wants to be ‘age-ist’ so we have stopped using age-based descriptions. However, the categories are the same and the ‘characteristics’ assigned to each group are nothing new, and just as meaningless or meaningful as they always were … Furthermore, complications are many. For instance, many seniors can still think and act like young people, and young people have learned to imitate much older people …
However, the learning characteristics assigned to each group are good in their comprehensiveness and very useful, provided we don’t limit them to the assigned age groups. In many cases, whether you think and act like a Boomers or like a Gen Yer depends more on the situation than anything else. An upfront quiz, based on the characteristics of each generational profile, that lets you identify yourself in terms of your values and run a game that reflects your mindset, would be most useful. Then everyone could get what they need when they need it.
Another thing, there’s lots and lots of research to suggest that there really is no such thing as multi-tasking. I’ve tried this with my own children aged 16 and 21 and confirmed the research. They claim that they can watch TV, listen to music and do Facebook all at the same time. But really they are just flipping back and forth very quickly between the three and ultimately doing all in a half-assed way. But that never comes out because there are no assessments and no testing of the quality with which they are doing all three.
If you have children of this category you can test this research yourself. Ask your children to do three difficult or challenging tasks at once – such as studying for a test, listening to an audio novel they are studying and writing an essay – and you’ll quickly see that they just can’t do it and are, in fact, no better at ‘multi-tasking’ than the old folks.
Great job on the blog, it looks great. I am going to bookmark it and will make sure to check often