Computer Science models often attempt to simulate aspects of a real world scenario within the microcosm of a smaller computer created environment. Often these models cannot possibly include all of the variables present in a situation, so the computer scientist “programmer” must choose which variables to keep in, and which to leave out. The weather model is a good example: there are just too many variables to ever possibly program them all in, so the programmer of the model must pick and choose what they think are the “most important” in order to create a useful tool that will still “simulate” a certain aspect of the environment semi-accurately. Coffee Shop is an environment in the same vein. The user modifies one or more variables and observes the reaction. Observing several “runs” of this Coffee Shop model under different variable insertions, the user learns the “behavior” of the system, and which variables and “strategies” might work best under the specific situation being modeled. If the user learns to vary the price of their coffee, in search of a “optimum” revenue and customer response, then these might be useful lessons to apply for any student interested in owning their own business someday. If the user learns that $10 is a good price to charge for coffee, then this is the fault of the Computer Science modeler, not the user. There aremillions of Computer Science models out in the world that “come close” to being useful, but “are not perfect.” If the Computer Science modeler wishes to create a useful model, as close a representation to the actual real world being modeled is often required. Otherwise, your interdisciplinary co-creator, say from Biology, may have to advice you of situation in the “real world” so as to attempt to create a useful model.
However, engineering is filled with examples that blur the lines between simulation and game. For example, Mechanical Engineering students are often trained on a simulation environment called AutoCAD. This piece of software (CAD = Computer Aided Design) allow the user to create a physical object (most ME Departments have a AutoCAD machine hooked up to a metal machining tool – so the computer will actually “print out” your part, in aluminum say, if you want it to). AutoCAD allows the user to create a 3D representation of the part they are thinking of, on the computer screen, to rotate the object, add additional parts if necessary, and even see how moving gears would interact within the part. Okay, so what happens if a Mechanical Engineering student actually finds this environment “fun” (many of these students did become Mechanical Engineering majors because they want to do this for a living remember). Perhaps it stimulates their “creative juices” in the same way that Legos did for them as a kid. As Charles Cotton describe in The Game Design Reader, "Gaming is an enchanting Idleness and Averice: An inching Disease, that makes some scratch the Head, whilst others, as if they were bitten by a Tarantula, are laughing themselves to death." Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman then continue, "Games have long been hardwired to the pleasure center of a gamer's brain, turning play into an act of nearly religious devotion. Who among us has not been snared in the spell of a Tetris, Zelda, or Snood? Yet, when it comes to describing just how games make us feel, even magical words fall short. How does one describe the joy of mastering a six-finger controller scheme in less than an hour, or the thrill of spinning out of control down a virtual race track, brakes shot and the engine running wide open? What words characterize the social and strategic flow of Texas Hold'em or the feeling of envy and pride when your Starcraft clanmate bumps you down on the leader boards? How does one capture such itchy witchery?" (Salen, 2006). I include this quote because it does a excellent job of describing many of the outside readings I have found for this course. Their problem? Clear definitions are not presented easily. I will also give an example from a personal interview. My brother is very much into videogames. He plays them all the time. However, when I ask my brother why he finds the fun, he is at a loss for a clear reason (Dwight Jelinek, personal communication). It is like this is a funny question for me to ask because the answer is taken for granted: "I find games fun because they are enjoyable. Because they are entertaining." (Dwight Jelinek, personal communication). Which poses the question of what happens as this field of "videogames used in learing" becomes a more accepted academic field (which I am undoubtedly sure it will)(example: UNM already has an entire major based partly on the idea I recently learned. It's called OLIT, and the website is located here: http://www.unm.edu/~olit/olit_courses_main.html#Undergrad)(Example: "Instructional Use of Computer Simulations" is one of their course). I think in the future, it is likely to be taking for granted that videogames and Legos are "fun" and "enjoyable" the same way it is taken for granted DNA is composed of nucleotides. Has AutoCAD now become a “game”? If the user has AutoCAD open in one screen on their computer, andTetris open in another screen on their computer, and they find them both equally fun and enjoyable, then who is to say which is a game and which is not. Casti in Would-be Worlds describes a computer simulation of the game of American football called Football Pro '95 created by Sierra On-Line (Casti, 1998). Casti says the computer gamer "is effectively able to create a laboratory with which to experiment with the NFL." However, a very interesting thing about this example is that Sierra On-Line clearly created this computer program to be played as a "game." In fact, among the users of Football Pro '95, Casti is perhaps an anomaly in seeing the program from the academic point of view as a "simulation" rather than how most users likely saw it, as "simply a game" (Casti, 1998). Casti describes "FBPRO95 is an example of the kind of surrogate world that aims to explain a high-level phenomenon (the final score of a football game) by appealing to the interactions among lower-level agents (the players and coaches of the two competing teams)" (Casti, 1998). Casti goes on to describe models based on the solar system or Newton's mathematical functions for particle interactions, however, the ideas are the same. The interesting thing here is the implied definitions: Casti seems to saying a "computer model" or "simulation" is something that can be designed as a useful "tool;" while a videogame may be something that is defined as simply "fun.". (So if you think the "computer model" is "fun" to interact with and work with, then you have crossed your definitions and you have to just quit and go home). One difference often seen is that Tetris has a “running time pressure” and “points” and many engineering simulations do not. But actually this is incorrect. The “time pressure” in these simulation environments is provided by the “deadlines” established by professors, bosses, or industry. And the “points” for good or bad performance are often determined by teacher’s grades, or monetary compensation, or employment continuation in the real world. Therefore, Coffee Shop is a game that can also be considered a Computer Science “model,” and AutoCAD is an engineering tool that can also be considered an education simulation-type game. Basketball, for example, is a game with a "artificially imposed deadline." Why does the game have to end at that specific time? The choice is completely arbitrary. There is simply the agreement that the game will end on such and such a deadline. This deadline adds to the intensity of the game and to the velocity of the players. Players might play at very different speeds if they knew they had to play for three or ten years.
Other examples of simulation use in engineering and elsewhere include the following: modeling of logic circuit interactions (like AutoCAD but for Electrical Engineers. EE’s can also burn these onto real life chips with Xilinx), modeling chemicals, chemical interactions, and molecule transformations (AutoCAD for Chemical Engineers), modeling of predator-prey species interactions (love the Biologists), modeling of the solar system and universe (Astrologists create some of the coolest displays onto a “dome” shaped screen), modeling city creation, city planning, and resource managements (Construction Engineers and City Planners consult these types of simulations, but can anyone say SimCity), and modeling tragedies for reaction planning (Forrest Firefighters have been known to get with Computer Scientists to create a model of the travel of forest fires based on geography and environmental conditions. And people like the Department of Homeland Security use computer models to plan the proper evacuation of say a football stadium in the event of terrorist attacks at varying locations). Anyway, there are a million examples of these, but Tetris is a simulation type computer model if you think about it. The definition of a “game” may have to become only: that (virtual) environment the user finds “fun” and “interesting” and “stimulating” to interact with.
For engineers, describing a problem in an increasingly detailed and vivid way so as to explore the problem (possibly in the company of other engineers) is a method of “working through” a problem when no other activities to solve the problem seem readily apparent. In addition, simulations allow an engineer to test out (or at least visualize), possible solutions sometimes. AutoCAD has the advantage of rotating a “possible solution” through space and looking for flaws and additional solutions with your other engineering partners. But really, AutoCAD is like a stimulation game: it has the challenge of “fitting pieces together” and “getting them to work right” (like Tetris), but also “the challenge of creativity.” AutoCAD allows you to “explore the problem area” in a very visual way, and there are rewards of “feelings of accomplishment” when you get it right and come up with a clever solution. It’s just that in today’s world, a person can “make a living” from this videogame, making it no doubt a “serious game” because you can feed your family if you are good at it. But AutoCAD is a very complex piece of software, so how does one learn to use it? The weird part is, AutoCAD itself teaches you, which brings us to the topic of paper 3.
Works Cited
Casti, John L., 1998. Would-be Worlds: How Simulation is Changing the Frontiers of Science,
Wiley.
Jelinek, Dwight, personal communication (12/5/08).
Salen, Katie, and Zimmerman, Eric, 2006. The Game Design Reader, The MIT Press,
Cambridge, Massachusetts.
No comments:
Post a Comment