Abstract
A common notion in games for learning is that the player must win the game. But is it always necessary for the player to win in order to ‘get’ the message that the game is trying to portray? When we think back on our most memorable learning experiences, we find that these lessons are often things we learned through failure rather than success. There is a class of games where ‘winning’ doesn’t look the way we typically expect it to look. Some games do not allow their players to win, and their underlying message is more akin to that found in a cautionary tale. We refer to these games as games you can’t win, and they form a distinctly different approach to game design. Games such as Sweatshop (Littleloud, 2011), Darfur is Dying (MTVu, 2006), and September 12th (Newsgaming, 2005) are games you cannot conceivably win, and they are designed that way deliberately. This paper presents a critique on serious games that are unwinnable by design. We examine the concepts of games and learning, the design of unwinnable games, design strategies for unhappy and/or unwinnable learning games, and ways to measure the success of games you can’t win. We also briefly consider potential issues and future directions, and we conclude that the messages delivered via games you can’t win are more powerful than those of games in which you can win.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A stopping rule is characterized as a mechanism for deciding whether to continue or stop a process on the basis of the present position and past events, and which will almost always lead to a decision to stop at some time. For example, if one has difficulty opening a jar, then the stopping rule would be stop turning the lid when it comes off.
References
Becker, K. (2007). Wicked ID: A Conceptual framework for considering instructional design as a wicked problem. Canadian Journal of Learning Technology, 33(1), 85–108.
Bowman, N. D., Weber, R., Tamborini, R., & Sherry, J. (2013). Facilitating game play: How others affect performance at and enjoyment of video games. Media Psychology, 16(1), 39–64.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. doi:10.2307/1511637.
Canossa, A., El-Nasr, M. S., & Drachen, A. (Eds.). (2013). Benefits of game analytics: Stakeholders, contexts and domains. In Game Analytics (pp. 41–52). London: Springer.
Cox, J. (2014). What makes a blockbuster video game? An empirical analysis of US sales data. Managerial and Decision Economics, 35(3), 189–198.
DeGrace, P., & Stahl, L. H. (1990). Wicked problems, righteous solutions: A catalogue of modern software engineering paradigms. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Yourdon Press.
Entwistle, N. J. (2005). Contrasting perspectives on learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, & N. J. Entwistle (Eds.), The experience of learning: Implications for teaching and studying in higher education’ presents the results of research from a series of related studies into the way students learn in higher education (3rd ed.). Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Assessment.
Gee, J. P. (2009). Deep learning properties of good digital games: How far can they go? In Serious games: Mechanisms and effects (pp. 67–82).
Joseph, B. (2009). Why Johnny can’t fly: Treating games as a form of youth media within a youth development framework. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(1), 253–266.
Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424.
Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012). Designing for productive failure. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 45–83.
Merrill, M. D. (2001). First principles of instruction. Journal of Structural Learning and Intelligent Systems, 14(4), 459–466.
Meyer, N. & Roddenberry, G. (1982). Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek Movie series. USA: Paramount Studios.
Parker, J. R., Sorenson, N., Esmaeili, N., Sicre, R., Gil, P., Kochlar, V., et al. (2009). The booze cruise: Impaired driving in virtual spaces. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 29(2), 6–10.
Parkes, W. (Director). (1983). Wargames [Motion picture]. United artists, Sherwood productions.
Pivec, M., & Kearney, P. (2007). Games for learning and learning from games. Informatica, 31, 419–423.
Ravaja, N., Turpeinen, M., Saari, T., Puttonen, S., & Keltikangas-Järvinen, L. (2008). The psychophysiology of James Bond: Phasic emotional responses to violent video game events. Emotion, 8(1), 114.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1984). Planning problems are wicked problems. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in design methodology (pp. 135–144). New York: Wiley.
Rosenhead, J. (1996). What’s the problem? An introduction to problem structuring methods. Interfaces, 26(6), 117–131. doi:10.2307/25062196.
Ruggiero, D. (2013). The effect of a persuasive game on attutide and affective learning. Ph. D. Doctoral Dissertation, Purdue University.
Sajak & Farki (Developer), Fission impossible [web game], Science Alberta Foundation (Publisher), game site: http://www.wonderville.ca/asset/fission-impossible
Schank, R., & Neaman, A. (2001). Motivation and failure in educational simulation design. In Smart machines in education (pp. 37–69). MIT Press.
Sharritt, M. J., & Suthers, D. D. (2011). Game-based representations as cues for collaboration and learning. In Discoveries in gaming and computer-mediated simulations: New interdisciplinary applications (pp. 163–188). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Shute, V. J., & Ventura, M. (2013). Stealth assessment: Measuring and supporting learning in video games. MIT Press.
Squire, K. (2002). Cultural framing of computer/video games. Game Studies, 2(1), 1–13.
Tanenbaum, J. G., Antle, A. N., & Robinson, J. (2013). Three perspectives on behavior change for serious games. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM annual conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 3389–3392). ACM.
Tate, R., Haritatos, J., & Cole, S. (2009). HopeLab’s approach to Re-Mission. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(1), 29–35. doi:10.1162/ijlm.2009.0003.
Van Eck, R. (2008). COTS in the classroom: A teacher’s guide to integrating commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) games. In Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education (pp. 179–199).
Watson, W. R. (2007). Formative research on an instructional design theory for educational video games. Ph.D. Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Ruggiero, D., Becker, K. Games You Can’t Win. Comput Game J 4, 169–186 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40869-015-0013-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40869-015-0013-9