About Game Reviews

When I was working on my PhD (2003-2008), I found it very hard to find any decent reviews of educational games. There are plenty of reasons for this, including:

1. Teachers aren't, for the most part, gamers and so really have no idea what makes a good game.
2. The culture of Education does not foster critical reviews, only accolades. As a result, even bad games often get good reviews.
3. Most educational game reviews are focused on the technicalities of using the game (how easy is it to install, and the like) and really don't say much about the game or the gameplay.
4. Reviews rarely mention what is possible (perhaps because the reviewers aren't trained in tech and so don't actually know what's possible).

I am not a hard-core gamer, but I DO play digital games; I DO know technology; I DO know about design (having designed and built many different things from clothing, jewelry, and buildings to programs, websites and instruction); I DO know about teaching; and I ALSO know Education.

I'm also not afraid to say what I think.

So, I will add reviews as I find time (unless someone wants to pay me for this, in which case I might be convinced to do more). The focus is on things that claim to be educational, and this includes games AND simulations, because ALL GAMES ARE SIMULATIONS.

If you have any favorites you'd like me to review, let me know, and I'll add them to the list.

For a more detailed explanation of this template, along with examples, stay tuned for my up-coming book.

Template V5.0 (2014)

There are two parts that are not scored. It doesn't make much sense to score these as there really can't be a good or bad answer here - it depends totally on context. They do, however, contribute to the whole picture and so they add a dimension that can be useful. They are:

1. Instructional Strategy - What instructional strategies does it use?
2. Theoretical Underpinnings - What theories, models, or principles were used in the design of this game?

These are discussed at the end of this page.

The review has 4 main parts, each of which contributes to a total score.

Approximately half of the total score has to do with the game and game elements. This is, after all a GAME we are reviewing, and if it doesn't make it as a game, it shouldn't matter how well it does in the other categories. The other half has to do with the educational potential. Remember that this template does not include efficacy tests or any other user validation. As such, this is ONE step in what should be a battery of assessments performed to try and determine the value of this game in an educational context. The current version is biased towards the use of the game in a formal educational context.

Each section includes several sub-parts, and each sub-part is to be scored on a 5-point scale from excellent [5] to non-existent [0] (or [na] for not applicable). The points are simply summed to create the over-all score.

Each of the following elements are rated according to the scale below:

		An element that is N/A will not be counted in the score.

Most should include a brief explanation if possible.

The following lists all the elements that form the review along with explanations of what they are and what I am looking for.

1. Game Overview: (30%) How is it as a game? Is it fun? Is it Interesting? How does it measure up esthetically? This includes visual and auditory components
   1. Gameplay:
      1. Content & Originality: What I am looking for: Well designed game, great usage of game play options and objects. Characters, vehicles, and other game elements are well developed and appropriate for the game. Shows original thought. Ideas are creative and inventive. The genre is recognizable and the game follows accepted norms. ~OR~ Has new take on known genre, displays particular insights. (IOW Shows understanding of standard gameplay and does not go against conventions. This is important because the goal of the game is educational rather than entertainment only.)
      2. Game Mechanics: What can you do in the game? Are the controls logical and easy to use? Does each ‘level’ fit the overall style of the game?
      3. Game Progression: Does each ‘level’ fit the overall style of the game? Do the transitions between levels (which need not be traditional levels) go from simple to challenging and are smooth and appropriate for the game?
   2. Art & Audio - How does it measure up esthetically? This includes visual and auditory components.
      1. Artistic Design: s it overall Visually Attractive? Does it make me want to try the game? Does it seem to be appropriate for the game?
      2. Set, Settings, Characters & Costumes: Does it seem to be appropriate for the game? Is it: Appealing. Distinctive. Sufficient variety. Original or appropriate.
      3. Audio: Does it seem to be appropriate for the game? Is it: Appealing. Distinctive. Sufficient variety. Original composition or appropriately credited.
2. Teacher Support: (20%)
   1. Is there adequate teacher support to make viable for use in a formal setting?
   2. Guides: How to use it.
      1. What I'm looking for: Exists and is easy to find. It is clear how to use this game. Includes: Description of game play. Content description (documentation) is well organized. I can see how the game will play. Any required special permissions/skills to install or run are clearly identified. Installation and execution processes are clearly identified and easy to read and follow.
   3. Plug'N'Play: How much work is involved in fitting this game into a lesson?
      1. What I'm looking for: This also includes operation: Is installation & basic functionality explained? Includes lesson plans with thorough instructions for using it in the classroom (or other target environment). Will not require large time investment to make it “teacher-ready”.
   4. Resources: Supplementary Materials
      1. What I'm looking for: Supplementary resources for teachers (background, how to use, where to get help) exist, and are both complete and readable.
   5. Community: Are teachers on their own?
      1. What I'm looking for: A community exists where teachers can go for help, support, to share. It is clearly identified and easy to find.
3. Educational Content (25%)
   1. Accuracy: Is it correct?
      1. Even though no game can be completely accurate, it is crucial that all of the facts associated with the learning objectives be correct, and that the needed concepts and principles are clear. There should be nothing here that is misleading.
   2. Objectives: Does it appear to fulfill the stated objectives?
      1. It is not possible to guarantee that any particular objective will be met in an educational object like this, but it is possible to assess whether or not it provides the necessary ‘raw materials’.
   3. Inclusion of Learning Objectives: Are they obvious (either in the game or in the support materials)?
      1. In a serious game it is essential that the desired learning outcomes be part of the required interactions of the game. It should not be possible to get through by brute force or by random chance. It should not be possible to get through the game while ignoring the learning objectives.
   4. Integration: Are the objectives integrated into the game? Is the required learning in the game PART of the game and not only found in pop-up screens of text?
      1. In other words, is it necessary to master at least some of the stated learning objectives in order to get through the game?¹⁾
   5. Assessment: Is the scoring / assessment in the game connected to the learning objectives (or is it easy to make them be)?
      1. The scoring in the game MUST be connected to the learning objectives.
4. Magic Bullet Rating (25%)
   1. How does it fare when viewed through the lens of the Magic Bullet Model?
   2. This section examines the game through the lens of the Magic Bullet model to see how well the various learning elements are balanced. This looks at both the overall balance and the educational components
   3. Overall Balance: Is the relationship between the what the player can learn and must learn, both inside and outside of the game appropriate for this game given its intended use?
   4. Can vs. Must: Is it possible to get through the game without learning anything (i.e. without meeting any of the educational objectives)?
   5. Operational vs Educational: Is the required operational learning appropriate for the game's intended purpose?
   6. Educational vs Discretionary: Is there an appropriate balance of learning and fun?
   7. Containment: Is the game (including support materials) sufficiently self-contained to justify its use in the given context?