mobile media and social it

7
LOCATIONBASED MOBILE GAMING A THEORETICAL WALKTHROUGH AND DISCUSSION ON DIGITAL GAMEBASED LEARNING AND LOCATIONBASED MOBILE GAMING ABSTRACT Many theorists believe that the learning system is not working ideal. Students do not learn efficiently, because it is boring and they have many opportunities to direct their focus on the computer screen instead. Something should be done, and one of the hypes is digital game based learning. Learning through games sounds like an idyllic solution, but is it really? The way learning games function today is not at all playful or engaging says Miguel Sicart (lecturer in game design at Center for Computer Game Research and head of the Media Technology and Games program at IT University of Copenhagen). Students do bring all their mobile devices to class, so there should be a way to exploit these digital tools to engage students more in the learning process. I will in this research paper give an introduction to the field of digital gamebased learning, present some of the research, and discuss the different arguments for and against digital gamebased learning and the difference between digital gamebased learning and locationbased mobile gaming. KEYWORDS Mobile media; Gaming; Education; Locationbased mobile gaming; Play I. INTRODUCTION Teens use mobile media all the time and everywhere. They are in fact probably the most ideal users of the cell phone [1 – Ling, p2]. When kids began to acquire cell phones and brought them to school, teachers would have problems to get the kids’ attention. This is still a problem in high school and at the university – the students have so easy access to fun and games on their mobile devices, which mean they have less attention on the lectures. Some places the cell phone have become prohibited because of bullying and cheating during exams [1]. The cell phone was a revolutionary device, which for the elder generations was new, different, and might seem somehow scary, and therefore this mobile device has been through a lot of doubt and judgements. Addiction might be one of the most discussed subjects now that the smartphone seem like the centre of many people’s everyday life. With the smartphone the cell phone moved from being a communication tool with the ability to make calls and send text messages to being able to connect to the Internet. This opened up to a world of possibilities, especially for “[2 – Goggin, p140] bringing the affordances of computing to the cell phone.” This intriguing small device has many possible potentials and the mobility makes it indeed available twentyfour/seven. If you try to count the amount of computer technologies you

Upload: signe-hansen

Post on 14-Mar-2016

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

location-based mobie gaming

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Mobile media and social it

LOCAT ION-­‐BASED  MOBILE  GAMING  

A  THEORETICAL  WALKTHROUGH  AND  DISCUSSION  ON  DIGITAL  GAME-­‐BASED  LEARNING  AND  LOCATION-­‐BASED  MOBILE  GAMING  

ABSTRACT  

Many  theorists  believe  that  the  learning  system  is  not  working  ideal.  Students  do  not  learn  efficiently,  because  it  is  boring  and  they  have  many  opportunities  to  direct  their  focus  on  the  computer  screen  instead.  Something  should  be  done,  and  one  of  the  hypes  is  digital  game-­‐based  learning.  Learning  through  games  sounds  like  an  idyllic  solution,  but  is  it  really?  The  way  learning  games  function  today  is  not  at  all  playful  or  engaging  says  Miguel  Sicart  (lecturer  in  game  design  at  Center  for  Computer  Game  Research  and  head  of  the  Media  Technology  and  Games  program  at  IT  University  of  Copenhagen).  Students  do  bring  all  their  mobile  devices  to  class,  so  there  should  be  a  way  to  exploit  these  digital  tools  to  engage  students  more  in  the  learning  process.  I  will  in  this  research  paper  give  an  introduction  to  the  field  of  digital  game-­‐based  learning,  present  some  of  the  research,  and  discuss  the  different  arguments  for  and  against  digital  game-­‐based  learning  and  the  difference  between  digital  game-­‐based  learning  and  location-­‐based  mobile  gaming.  

KEYWORDS  

Mobile  media;  Gaming;  Education;  Location-­‐based  mobile  gaming;  Play  

I.  INTRODUCTION  

Teens  use  mobile  media  all  the  time  and  everywhere.  They  are  in  fact  probably  the  most  ideal  users  of  the  cell  phone  [1  –  Ling,  p2].  When  kids  began  to  acquire  cell  phones  and  brought  them  to  school,  teachers  would  have  problems  to  get  the  kids’  attention.  This  is  still  a  problem  in  high  school  and  at  the  university  –  the  students  have  so  easy  access  to  fun  and  games  on  their  mobile  devices,  which  mean  they  have  less  attention  on  the  lectures.  Some  places  the  cell  phone  have  become  prohibited  because  of  bullying  and  cheating  during  exams  [1].  The  cell  phone  was  a  revolutionary  device,  which  for  the  elder  generations  was  new,  different,  and  might  seem  somehow  scary,  and  therefore  this  mobile  device  has  been  through  a  lot  of  doubt  and  judgements.  Addiction  might  be  one  of  the  most  discussed  subjects  now  that  the  smartphone  seem  like  the  centre  of  many  people’s  everyday  life.  

With  the  smartphone  the  cell  phone  moved  from  being  a  communication  tool  with  the  ability  to  make  calls  and  send  text  messages  to  being  able  to  connect  to  the  Internet.  This  opened  up  to  a  world  of  possibilities,  especially  for  “[2  –  Goggin,  p140]  bringing  the  affordances  of  computing  to  the  cell  phone.”    

This  intriguing  small  device  has  many  possible  potentials  and  the  mobility  makes  it  indeed  available  twenty-­‐four/seven.  If  you  try  to  count  the  amount  of  computer  technologies  you  

Page 2: Mobile media and social it

carry  around  when  at  work  or  in  school,  it  will  probably  surprise  you.  You  might  have  a  laptop,  a  cell  phone  or  smartphone,  an  mp3  player/iPod,  a  digital  watch,  a  digital  camera,  and  so  on…  There  are  computers  all  around  us,  and  we  interact  with  them  all  the  time  –  sometimes  intentionally;  sometimes  you  do  not  even  think  about  it.  

Nowadays,  the  majority  of  students  bring  there  laptops,  tablets,  and  smartphones  to  class,  and  –  speaking  of  own  experience  –  this  can  be  very  distracting,  because  of  the  easy  access  to  everything  else  than  having  attention  on  the  lecture  and  write  notes.  Of  course  this  depends  on  the  interest  in  the  teaching.  All  have  access  to  the  wireless  Internet,  and  almost  everyone  will  have  a  smartphone,  laptop  or  tablet  computer,  so  why  not  take  advantage  of  the  immense  availability  of  mobile  digital  devices?  If  you  could  be  able  to  use  mobile  media  effectively  in  school  during  class,  students  might  be  engaged  on  another  level.  

Thus,  I  find  the  field  of  digital  game-­‐based  learning  and  location-­‐based  mobile  gaming  interesting  –  is  it  applicable  to  make  the  mobile  devices  useful  to  the  lessons  instead  of  disturbing?  

Marc  Prensky,  Jane  McGonigal,  and  Henry  Jenkins  suggest  implementing  gaming  into  school.  They  believe  gaming  is  something  millions  of  people  actually  like  to  do,  and  that  there  are  many  possibilities  in  implementing  games  in  school  activities  [3  –  McGonigal,  video].    

For  us  students  it  surely  sounds  like  an  ideal  solution  to  boring  classes  and  repetitive  homework,  but  what  about  the  teacher  perspective?  The  teacher  perspective  is  very  important,  because  they  are  the  persons  who  have  to  actually  implement  it  and  work  around  it.  Therefore,  I  had  an  interview  with  Miguel  Sicart  to  hear  about  his  critical  view  on  learning  games.  This  leads  to  my  overall  thesis  statement:  

A. THESIS  STATEMENT  

Students  today  likes  to  game,  and  mobile  gaming  affords  interesting  perspectives  that  can  be  useful  to  innovate  the  learning  environment.  

Research  Question:  

How  does  mobile  gaming  affords  learning?  

II.  GAMING  CAN  MAKE  A  BETTER  WORLD  

In  a  TED  talk  from  2010  Jane  McGonigal  talks  about  how  games  like  World  of  Warcraft  enables  players  to  play  heroes  and  save  worlds.  The  excitement  of  being  on  the  verge  to  an  “epic  win”  is  the  way  people  should  feel  in  real  life  situations,  and  she  argues  that  it  is  possible  to  create  games  that  will  solve  real  life  problems  [3].  

When  studying  at  the  IT  University  of  Copenhagen  you  see  and  experience  the  world  of  gaming  close  up,  even  though  I  am  not  a  gamer  myself.  Gaming  is  an  extremely  huge  part  of  many  people’s  life  and  therefore  also  a  big  part  of  global  media  and  the  gaming  industry  [4  –  Goggin,  p99].  

Page 3: Mobile media and social it

Gaming  on  cell  phones  has  evolved  a  lot  after  the  smartphone’s  arrival  and  the  access  to  the  Internet.  This  has  made  multiplayer  games  possible  on  your  mobile  device,  and  thus  has  made  gamers  consider  this  way  of  gaming  with  others  as  a  regular  thing.  

Playing  games  is  something  we  have  done  since  childhood,  and  having  fun  is  one  of  the  best  ways  to  learn.  So  why  not  make  school  funnier  by  playing  games?  

Suggesting  that  the  learning  and  training  system  is  broken,  Marc  Prensky  says:  “[5  –  Prensky,  p2]  So  what’s  going  on?  Is  it  the  system?  Is  it  society?  Is  it  the  environment?  Is  it  the  parents?  Of  course  each  plays  a  major  role.  But  in  almost  all  the  analyses  that  we  read  or  hear,  one  point  of  view  is  surprisingly  absent  –  that  of  the  learner.  What  is  it  actually  like  to  be  an  elementary,  high  school,  college  or  business  training  student  today?  The  answer,  overwhelmingly,  is  –  it’s  BORING!  Boring  compared  to  television,  boring  compared  to  computer  games,  boring  compared  to  movies,  boring  compared  even  to  WORK!  Pretty  much  any  teacher  or  trainer  will  tell  you  it’s  difficult  to  compete  with  what’s  out  there.”    

He  also  explains  how  this  is  really  not  the  students’  fault,  even  though  they  might  be  the  ones  playing  video  games  in  class  and  getting  distracted  by  funny  webpages:  “[5]  People  live  in  the  world  into  which  they  are  born,  and  do  the  things  of  their  time  that  appeal  to  them”.  So,  Prensky’s  believe  is  clearly  that  the  fault  lays  on  the  education  system  and  the  trainers,  and  he  is  supporting  the  idea  of  digital  game-­‐based  learning.  

Among  others  as  well,  he  consider  these  learning  games  as  efficient  for  students  gaining  the  engagement  in  education.  Basically  these  games  are  kind  of  like  a  computer  game,  where  some  certain  values  will  be  learned.  But  how  do  we  know  if  people  will  actually  learn  this  way?  

III.  HOW  DO  PEOPLE  LEARN?  

The  answer  to  this  question  is  definitely  not  easy,  if  not  impossible,  to  defend.  The  ting  is  that  learning  is  a  very  individual  matter,  and  how  people  learn  the  best  is  very  different  from  one  person  to  another.  Prensky  believes  that  there  is  too  much  focus  on  what  to  learn  compared  to  who  and  how  to  learn  [6  –  Prensky,  p3].  He  states:  “[7  –  Prensky,  p5]  Despite  the  fact  that  there  are  many  creative  trainers  and  teachers  out  there,  the  vast  majority  of  our  education  has  become  a  series  of  informational  or  logical  presentations  or  readings,  followed  by  some  sort  of  quiz  or  examination.”  

This  system  is  called  the  tell-­‐test  [7]  system,  and  it  is  basically  about  broadcasting  knowledge  to  a  class  of  students,  and  then  expects  them  to  be  able  to  pass  a  test  or  exam  at  the  end  of  the  course  to  measure  what  they  learned.  

Prensky  is  truly  against  this  way  of  learning;  he  simply  does  not  believe  it  is  working,  especially  not  for  younger  people  [7].  They  simply  do  not  find  it  engaging  compared  to  so  many  other  things  they  can  do  instead  on  their  mobile  media.  I  agree  that  it  is  not  the  ideal  way  of  learning,  but  it  does  indeed  depend  on  the  subject  of  a  class.  If  you  are  already  interested  in  the  subject,  you  will,  to  some  extend,  have  attention  on  the  lecture.  Still,  I  as  well  see  a  problem  with  this  tradition,  because  students  are  rarely  interested  in  all  classes,  and  sometimes  it  could  be  nice  with  some  more  appealing  teaching.  

Page 4: Mobile media and social it

So,  there  is  a  need  for  making  school  less  boring  and  more  engaging,  and  it  also  seems  there  is  possibilities  in  the  digital  mobile  devices  that  has  made  its  way  into  the  classroom  without  having  anything  to  do  with  education,  yet.  Previously,  writing,  printing,  and  reading  were  the  technologies  of  literacy.  Now  we  have  some  New  Media  Literacies  [8  –  Jenkins,  p4]  that  we  should  teach  our  students.  Henry  Jenkins  explains:  “[8]  Schools  and  afterschool  programs  must  devote  more  attention  to  fostering  what  we  call  the  new  media  literacies:  a  set  of  cultural  competencies  and  social  skills  that  young  people  need  in  the  new  media  landscape.  Participatory  culture  shifts  the  focus  of  literacy  from  one  of  individual  expression  to  community  involvement.  The  new  literacies  almost  all  involve  social  skills  developed  through  collaboration  and  networking.”  Therefore,  Jenkins  among  others  suggests  that  we  should  think  in  new  ways  of  education.  

This  is  very  true.  We  have  a  new  media  landscape,  but  most  young  people  already  have  these  cultural  and  social  skills,  because  they  grew  up  with  these  technologies  as  so-­‐called  digital  natives.  

Therefore,  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is  time  to  take  the  next  step  further.  And  lots  of  researchers  already  have  with  digital  game-­‐based  learning.  But  is  this  actually  a  good  idea,  has  everything  been  taking  into  consideration  –  for  example  the  teacher  perspective?  On  the  next  section  I  will  discuss  some  of  the  arguments  game  design  teacher  Miguel  Sicart  has  against  these  learning  games.  

IV.  LEARNING  GAMES  –  WHY?  WHY  NOT?  

Van  Eck  presents  three  different  ways,  which  educators  have  already  implemented  games:  “[9  –  van  Eck,  p6]  have  students  build  games  from  scratch;  have  educators  and/or  developers  build  educational  games  from  scratch  to  teach  students;  and  integrate  commercial  off-­‐the-­‐shelf  (COTS)  games  into  the  classroom.”  

Way  number  two  is  the  one  that  describe  my  view  of  what  digital  game-­‐based  learning  is  mostly  about,  because  you  actually  design  specific  games,  which  can  help  people  with  certain  learning  outcomes.  The  thing  about  these  games  is  that  they  are  not  exactly  easy  to  build  in  a  game-­‐way-­‐fashion.  

In  my  interview  with  Miguel  Sicart  he  elaborated  on  the  importance  of  play  in  games:  “learning  games  does  not  understand  how  complicated  play  is.  […]  There’s  this  myth,  this  idea  that  playing  is  learning  recognition,  social  interaction,  and  so  on.  But  we  do  it  because  play  affords  those  things.  But  it  also  has  a  very  constructive  and  destructive  capacity  –  when  we  are  in  a  game  we  immediately  start  building,  and  much  more  if  we  are  in  a  sort  of  multi-­‐agent  setting  –  many  people  playing  the  game  –  for  example  in  a  classroom,  where  the  rules  of  how  you  play  a  game  with  your  friends  is  going  to  be  different  than  with  my  friends.  We  can  play  Monopoly  in  extremely  different  ways  even  though  the  game  is  the  same.  But  learning  games  do  never,  I  think,  adapt  to  this  capacity  of  play  being  creative  and  appropriated  and  destructive.”  I  want  to  emphasize  the  word  destructive,  because  he  had  a  very  good  point  here.  When  you  play  a  game,  you  will  sometimes  lose,  and  that  is  also  what  makes  it  even  more  pleasurable  to  win  the  next  time.  

Sicart  has  a  three-­‐fold  argument,  where  he  explains  his  scepticism  towards  digital  game-­‐based  learning.  The  first  argument  is  that  it  will  not  work  outside  controlled  settings:  “when  we  test  these  things  we  are  always  recreating  fake  environments.  Games  do  not  adapt    -­‐  

Page 5: Mobile media and social it

many  learning  games  theorists  do  not  think  about  the  importance  of  context  of  play  in  the  development  of  these  games.  They  think  that  by  deploying  a  game  with  a  particular  set  of  values  it  will  work,  the  kids  will  learn,  and  we  move  on.  And  that’s  not  the  point,  because  learning  is,  as  many  other  things,  socially  situated  and  it’s  extremely  contextual.”  The  learning  games  designed  today  evolves  around  a  screen,  and  this  is  what  Sicart  means  by  not  being  contextual.  Richard  Van  Eck  also  describes  how  context  is  an  important  aspect  when  it  comes  to  learning.  He  refers  to  the  principle  situated  cognition:  “[10  –  Van  Eck,  p4]  learning  that  occurs  in  meaningful  and  relevant  contexts”,  and  he  means  that  games  might  be  effective  by  creating  context  within  the  game.  This  way  of  context  is  not  the  same  kind  of  context  Sicart  talks  about.  

Sicart’s  second  point  is  that  the  games  are  not  that  different  from  a  book.  They  still  need  a  teacher  or  a  guide  to  ‘walk  you  by  the  hand’  for  understanding  and  learn  from  the  game:  “When  we  make  computer  games  for  learning  we  follow  this  really  old  fashioned  input-­‐output  system”.  Sicart  is  not  against  using  digital  mobile  media  in  a  classroom,  but  he  believes  the  screen  is  the  enemy  for  this  purpose.  A  much  more  interesting  device  is  the  smartphone,  because  it  is  small,  and  you  do  not  have  to  look  at  it  when  interacting  with  it.  

His  third  and  most  important  problem  with  learning  games  is  actually  the  first  mentioned:  learning  games  does  not  understand  the  complexity  of  play.  Sicart  strongly  believes  that  play  is  the  key  element,  and  this  is  a  hugely  ignored  thing  in  the  design  of  learning  games:  “So  it  seems  to  me  that  we  don’t  recognize  that  it’s  not  the  games  we  learn  from  -­‐  it’s  through  play.  And  learning  through  play  needs  dealing  with  all  this  complexity  about  how  we  create  rules;  how  we  negotiates  rules;  how  we  sometimes  engage  in  a  spiral  of  destruction,  and  becomes  almost  nasty  and  evil.  It’s  like  all  those  things  are  sort  of  ignored.  We  build  this  game,  we  deploy  it  in  a  classroom,  and  it  works  because  the  game  works.  Instead  of  saying  we  build  these  play  situations;  we  build  these  play  contexts,  and  through  these  play  contexts  things  may  happen.  And  for  me  the  keyword  is  ‘may’  –  it’s  not  the  termination.”  

So,  there  is  a  problem  with  the  ‘may’  when  it  comes  to  researching  and  testing  learning  games.  When  researchers  wants  to  develop  a  learning  game  they  need  money,  and  for  the  money  they  have  to  promise  some  kind  of  result.  That  means  they  have  to  build  a  game  that  works  –  they  cannot  ask  for  money  to  build  a  game  that  may  or  may  not  work.  And  that  is  a  critical  point  to  Sicart’s  view  of  learning  through  play:  “It’s  not  100  %  efficient.  But  then  again  –  no  learning  system  is  a  100  %  efficient,  so  we  are  demanding  from  games  the  kind  of  magic  that  we  cannot  deliver.”  

And  that  is  the  essential  problem  with  learning  games,  according  to  Sicart.  He  does  not  see  the  research  going  anywhere  unless  there  will  be  an  entirely  new  assessment  on  the  field.  

 

V.  LOCATION-­‐BASED  MOBILE  GAMING  

Digital  game-­‐based  learning  might  soon  be  out-­‐dated,  but  that  does  not  mean  we  should  forget  about  learning  through  games  and  play.  They  key  is  to  NOT  only  design  for  the  screen,  but  to  get  a  new  perspective  on  education  –  how  can  we  use  mobile  phones  and  mobile  gaming?  The  mobile  phone  does  not  have  to  be  in  the  classroom,  since  it  is  not  tied  to  one  location.  Sicart  explains:  “The  mobile  phone  on  the  other  hand  is  getting  much  more  

Page 6: Mobile media and social it

interesting  as  a  tool,  and  I  think  that  is  what  we  are  not  having,  ‘cause  this  thing  –  I’m  holding  an  iPhone  –  is  full  of  sensors.”  

The  mobile  phone,  or  the  smart  phone,  compared  to  the  computer  has  sensors,  and  knows  things  about  itself,  for  example  its  location.  Delacruz,  Chang,  and  Baker  describe  how  students  can  learn  science  through  location-­‐based  mobile  game.  One  example  is  the  game  Outbreak  @  the  Institute,  where  the  students  learn  how  diseases  spread  [11  –  p.  251].  Location-­‐based  mobile  gaming  (LBMG)  uses  mobile  devices  with  GPS  instead  of  tying  the  learner  to  a  platform.  “[12  –  p.  252]  The  technology  used  in  LBMGs  supports  mobility  and  interaction,  allowing  movement  in  physical  space  to  become  central  to  the  game.”  

The  fact  that  the  learner  will  not  be  set  in  a  specific  location  makes  it  possible  to  place  the  learner  in  a  relevant  context.  Delacruz,  Chang,  and  Baker  states  how  “  [12]  anchoring  abstract  phenomena  and  information  in  concrete,  physically  accessible  settings  makes  the  relevant  physical  context  part  of  learning.”  This  is  the  kind  of  context  Sicart  refers  to  as  important  when  designing  games  and  play  in  an  educational  milieu.  Outbreak  @  the  Institute  is  a  very  good  example  of  how  the  mobile  devices  can  be  used  efficiently  to  learn  students  about  something  in  a  real  context.  The  context  might  not  be  real  reality,  but  the  game  will  make  it  feel  real,  and  the  students  have  to  walk  around,  have  discussions,  and  try  to  solve  a  ‘real’  problem.  They  will  not  be  sitting  in  front  of  a  screen  and  click  with  a  mouse  in  a  simulated  game.  Sicart  explains  the  difference  between  laptops  and  mobile  phones  by  saying:  “So,  while  the  laptop  is  a  stupid  machine  in  terms  of,  you  know,  it’s  dumb,  it’s  encapsulated  in  itself,  the  mobile  phone  affords  much  more  interesting  behaviour,  and  it’s  portable;  it’s  kind  of  more  innocent.”  He  describes  the  laptop  as  being  ‘dumb’,  because  it  is  ‘encapsulated  in  itself’,  and  therefore  the  user  cannot  explore  anything  physical.  This  is  what  the  mobile  phone  and  other  mobile  devices  can  by  participatory  simulations  [13  –  p.  253].  

Participatory  simulations  take  the  explorations  off  the  desktop,  and  can  teach  problem  solving  and  critical  thinking,  when  you  get  the  learner  to  actively  interact  with  the  system  [13].  A  key  sentence  from  Delacruz,  Chang,  and  Baker  is  that  “[13]  players  experience  the  simulation  from  a  first-­‐hand  experience  through  embodied  action.”  

Participatory  simulation  is  only  one  way  of  using  mobile  devices  to  learn.  Augmented  reality  is  another.  Sicart  explains  how  he  might  find  mobile  devices  interesting  to  use  in  school  in  the  future,  when  everyone  has  smartphones  and/or  tablets:  “if  we  think  that  devices  as  smartphones  or  tablets  will  be  present  in  the  schools  of  the  future,  I  think  one  way  of  thinking  about  how  to  learn  or  how  to  include  learning  through  technology  is  to  avoid  the  myth  of  the  screen  and  just  look  at  these  objects  as  sensor  devices.  And  say,  if  a  kid  is  not  going  to  be  looking  at  the  screen,  if  it’s  going  to  use  all  the  other  elements  that  this  technology  has,  then  how  can  we  use  it.  For  instance,  using  the  camera  to  collect  evidence  and  upload  to  a  shared  database.  Or  use  augmented  reality  to  engage  and  make  things  more  interesting.”  In  the  interview  he  explains  how  you  could  use  augmented  reality  on  a  tablet  for  example  in  a  history  lesson  about  Copenhagen.  The  students  could  go  to  ‘Rundetårn’  and  look  at  the  city  through  their  tablets  or  smartphones.  Then  they  might  see  how  the  city  has  changed  during  the  years,  and  answer  different  questions  by  scrolling  through  the  time  periods.  

There  are  different  ways  of  using  digital  mobile  technologies  to  make  learning  mere  efficient  and  fun.  But  why  are  these  mobile  games  worthy?  Next  I’m  going  to  look  into  the  educational  affordances  of  mobile  gaming.  

Page 7: Mobile media and social it

AFFORDANCES  OF  MOBILE  GAMING  

 

 

 

“Exactly,  even  dumber  devices  –  I’m  interested  in  affording  play  even  through  dumb  devices  that  still  have  some  digital  elements  to  it,  but  also  fairly  dumb.  Cause  the  dumber  the  device  is,  the  less  focus  it’s  going  to  take,  and  then  we  can  focus  on  other  things.  So  I’m  a  little  bit  fanatic  of  dumb  devices  or  sensor  based  devices  rather  than  input  based  devices,  so  if  an  object  knows  where  it  is  and  its  surroundings.  So  it’s  much  more  interesting  that  the  computer  knows  where  it  is  instead  of  knowing  where  you  are  –  then  the  input  can  be  done  in  a  very  different  way.”  

“.  And  I  think  that’s  why  it’s  important  that  some  people  are  already  trying  to  think  of  this  idea  of  transformation  of  play,  which  I  think  is  much  more  interesting  –  where  the  game  is  just  a  part  of  transformation  of  process”