http://fortressat.com/ Wed, 22 May 2013 03:55:52 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://fortressat.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3345#josc80306 Unfortunately, the trend in education for a long time has been toward rote learning: listen, memorize, regurgitate on a multiple choice test. (But life is an essay test.) Even the computer certification tests are like this, not really related to the real world. We don't teach people any more how to think. Which makes it hard to teach game design! lewpuls Fri, 22 Jun 2012 01:30:33 +0100 http://fortressat.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3345#josc80262 Nice article Lew. I work on this with my son. I don't want him to just memorize how to plug and chug equations in math. I want him to understand why he is doing something and some of the background and uses of this. I've always been a person that wanted to understand the whole, in order to break down the parts. Dair Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:29:08 +0100 http://fortressat.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3345#josc80242 This is some great writing right here. This speaks to luck in games, complexity in games, design decisions, heuristic learning . . . this is A+ subject matter for F:At. It also speaks to the nature of how "game" is delivered by the designer. A designer has every opportunity to finish his work -- to write the ending to his story. But that's a novel not a game, and it's unsatisfying to people who prefer to take an active part in the narrative. What pieces a designer chooses to cast in stone (the rules) and what pieces to leave undone (the aspects that provide the "play" part of the game) is majorly fertile ground for debate. S. Sagrilarus Wed, 20 Jun 2012 19:26:49 +0100