Games Courses

ltia · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 14:18

Right - here's the thing: I'm a computing teacher/lecturer.

Also: I'm teaching games development next semester. I'm asking for advice, opinions or funny stories, basically.

I've taught games programming before but that was for a general programming subject. This one is specifically for games and includes stuff on the social effects of games and that. Now- the problem is that it's important that I'm impartial, so I can't only give them stuff about why games are great, for which there are plenty of proper academic articles. I can take the piss out of tabloid bollocks (I done a thing: http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b202/ltia_1234/gamesarebadlol.jpg), but it still needs to be balanced and I specifically need to find some non biased stuff about the negative effects of games.

I'm also aware that games courses lower than post grad are seen as being a bit shit, and I'm trying to think of ways to make it not shit. Which might be difficult.

As you people are excellent literate gamers, your opinions on such things (generally as well as the social stuff) would be muchly appreciated. It's a BTEC National course (level 3 - like A levels but all coursework*) and is 1 of 18 modules including developing a game, if you really want to know.

Cheers

*- unless i decide to give them an exam mwuhahahaa

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

well, I'm doing a BSc in Gaming Technology, so I hope they're not regarded as shit. As far as advice about content I think I'd concentrate on the growth in social gaming. Quakeworld to Second Life to Xbox Live. How multiplayer went from two joypads to two pcs and a crossover cable to IPX to Steam and finally full circle to two joypads connected though XBL. You could even use our little bezzie community as a 'theoretical' example (no names please). Just a thought

Dimrill · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 14:41

Gerroff! 2 Amigas and a null modem cable FTW.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

Alas, I never experienced that thrill Dimmers. I longed for 2 player stunt car racer but it was not to be.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

Itia, negative effects of gaming. Doom Levels were linked heavily to the Columbine Massacre. It's probably bullshit but worth mentioning anyway

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

DavPaz wrote:

Itia, negative effects of gaming. Doom Levels were linked by about 2 idiots to the Columbine Massacre.

FTFY.

Curiosity · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 15:06

What about people who become obsessed with gaming, nay addicted? Focus on the kind of thing when someone spends 20 hours a day on WoW or something. Or those foreign chaps who died from not eating/drinking whilst gaming, or whatever the sensationalist story was at the time...

Too much gaming can negatively affect relationships though, and possibly academic study.

Dimrill · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 15:08

Curiosity wrote:

Too much gaming can negatively affect relationships though, and possibly academic study.

The same can be argued by replacing the word "gaming" with any other, though.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

fair point, but it could still be noted as a landmark in games being blamed for real world violence. Like I said, probably bullshit, but Jack Thompson probably started by downloading the Eric Harris levels

metalangel · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 15:18

Dimrill wrote:

Curiosity wrote:

Too much gaming can negatively affect relationships though, and possibly academic study.

The same can be argued by replacing the word "gaming" with any other, though.

Indeed. Relationships affected by too much time drinking/gambling/motorbiking/tinkering with cars/in the garden shed/hunting/fishing/model railways or studies by too much drug taking/drinking/shagging/sleeping/watching utter shit on TV/wanking. Nothing to do with games. And I'm sure you could die during most of those.

ltia · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 15:29

You could also replace 'Doom levels' with 'Marilyn Manson', of course.

This is the thing - most of the negative stuff can be dismissed as cobblers. Still relevant to mention, though. The effects of gaming on idiots who don't play games.

I like the WoW one- that's a really good one. Someone actually died, man. Funny how I didn't think of mentioning this place as well.

Also: sorry, DavPaz. Didn't mean to dis your degree, or anything. I'm actually still in contact with an ex-student who I taught years ago, went on to do a degree in games dev and is now working at Rare, for example. It was slightly annoying when he graduated and got the job, as he used to give me a discount when he worked in HMV.

I suspect the crapness relates more to college courses.

AceAceBaby · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 15:34

It might be worth browsing the archives of http://terranova.blogs.com/

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

hey no need to apologise. Its actually a joint honours anyway BSc Gaming Technology and IT. For some reason the only way to do 3d graphics was if I took the Gaming Technology part too.

MaliA · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 16:20

Well, there's EvE TV, which was a weekly half hour dedicated to EvE online. You could drop the presenters of that an email (ask Kovacs or myself for contact details)

Curiosity · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 16:44

Dimrill wrote:

Curiosity wrote:

Too much gaming can negatively affect relationships though, and possibly academic study.

The same can be argued by replacing the word "gaming" with any other, though.

Oh, of course. I think all the scaremongering around gaming is as stupid as the next non-Anne Diamond person, but was trying to think of ideas he could feasibly use.

sinister agent · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 7046

I wonder if there are any modules in Enlgish Literature courses about the negative effects of reading?

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

ltia wrote:

I can take the piss out of tabloid bollocks (I done a thing: http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b202/ltia_1234/gamesarebadlol.jpg), but it still needs to be balanced and I specifically need to find some non biased stuff about the negative effects of games.

Why does it? If you were teaching physics would you have to include bits about auras to make sure it's not biased?

ltia · **Posted:** Sun Jan 04, 2009 20:24

I could say that, actually.

But yeah, I suppose there are bad social implications, as well as good ones. Just like anything that can take up people's time, really. It's just that the positive stuff is more obvious.

A better analogy might be about what noticable long term effects mobile phones have - there are opinions, but nothing really certain enough (assuming I'm right, as I'm no expert).

Dudley's analogy would be more to do with whether you should tell people in a science class that some people think that there are auras (or people believe creationism....) and that it's gumpf. Which I think would be crazy. It's different when your talking about a soft sociological type thing. I think you would mention what people idiots think and discuss why that might be.

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

I'd say the equivilent of telling them it's gumpf in the science class is what you're already doing with the tabloid mockery.

Hero of Excellence · **Joined:** 23rd Nov, 2008 **Posts:** 674

ltia wrote:

It's a BTEC National course

So you won't be getting the brightest students in their age cohort, basically?

MrD · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 2139

I'm on a BSc Computer Games Technology degree course. I only did it because it was my UCAS 'second choice', and I couldn't do my first choice. The alternative was waiting a year and paying £3k/year instead of £1k/year tuition fees. My degree includes a year's 'placement', where students are supposed to find a company and bully them into offering a relevant position for a year. It's basically a crapshoot where you could win a year's working in a decent job at a well known studio.

THE COURSE IS COMPLETE SHIT.

If my placement year hadn't gone so well, I wouldn't know what I would have done. It's really validated the entire degree. Without the placement, the degree is worthless. It's worse than worthless, it's a Bachelors in Computer Games Technology.

Mind you, it is a valid ticket for acceptance onto a Masters degree (AT A DIFFERENT UNIVERSITY IN A DIFFERENT FIELD), so it's not a complete loss if you complete it. But you would have to the a Masters basically unprepared. (Going to rely on your CGT knowledge base? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH)

I desperately feel for those on the course who pay the £3k/year fees.

Zardoz · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:12

sinister agent wrote:

I wonder if there are any modules in Enlgish Literature courses about the negative effects of reading?

It can lead to Glastonbury if you're not careful though.

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

Ah I see you've made the same mistake as I made with the film "Burn after Reading".

Malabelm · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:27

I went on a games course in college about 5 years ago, but quit after 6 months.

It started off well, with plenty of enthusiasm and a teacher who knew his stuff from working with games for 30-odd years. Paul Walker, I think his name was. Nice chap. He taught us how to think, pick apart games and understand their core principals.

Then the college started pissing about, treating the course like it was all play and didn't matter. The tutor left, and the course was taken up by someone whose experience can be summarised as "I've dabbled in 3D Studio Max". Needless to say, the course descended into chaos; the new tutor didn't know how to captivate the class and keep all the 16-year olds in check (the previous tutor wasn't afraid of telling the students when they were being dicks, and you really didn't want this guy to shout).

The final straw came when the college took the 18+-year olds to E3. Control had been taken from the lady who'd planned everything the previous year, and instead was handed to one of the senior heads of the college. Nothing had been booked properly, so we flew out to LA and found that none of us had accommodation for the week. Then we got into the exhibition centre and found we weren't allowed in (the previous year's students had been allowed in fine). It took 2 hours of the tutors being upstairs talking to officials before they finally granted us some passes. I'd already made my mind up about quitting the course by then.

I think the main problems with these pre-degree courses (I can't comment on degree ones) is: they attract people who think making games is all about pissing around, and the same view is taken by the people running them; the courses don't get the resources they need to succeed.

MrD · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 2139

My current course is that it's designed for people who don't have any experience.

Trying to get people from nothing to good enough to work in industry in the time alotted is difficult, so this course really doesn't seem to bother.

Anybody who enrolled on the course and had any idea of the kind of work they would be doing has already read around the subject to some degree and is way beyond what the course teaches them.

Everybody else is shocked and goes 'WHAT? GAMES USE NUMBERS?! But I was no good at numbers in school! Oh what a world! Can't I -not- use numbers?'.

MrD · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 2139

Some random advice I wrote about programming and CGT wrote:

The way to get good at this nonsense is to read stuff (preferably finding an example of somebody who's done it properly) and try it yourself.

The problems arise when they expect people to create things with no experience (otherwise there would be a programming experience requirement for the course), and teach people during the period of examination (the alloted time for the coursework).

Making interactive software isn't easy at the best of times, but if you're working from nothing and you're being told bits on a weekly basis and you have to have a final product at the end of a set time, you're going to end up with alternating layers of code that look something like this:
* experimental shit code based on your answers to the first tutorial session.
* experimental shit code that tries to turn the previous code into a working, moving example.
* experimental shit code based on your work in the second tutorial session, which relies on the existing shit code you've already written.

By the time you've been taught enough to make a complete game you've got little time and a choice between using your shit code stack, or starting from scratch. Neither of these are good ideas when you're low on time.

You could read around the subject, but then why go to lectures and tutorials? And if you're not going to go, why'd you go to university?

Did you go to university to learn from the professionals?

I've found a good way to teach somebody programming methods is to let them get on with what they want to do, and use your role to help them find the answer to 'Why?': specifically 'Why are you doing that?', which is what developing is really about. With nobody looking over what you're doing and questioning your lines, functions or methodologies, you're just going to be randomly writing whatever until you come across an example of what 'right' is.

Maybe that's what the lab sessions are supposed to be like. Doesn't really turn out like that though, because very few people want to sit there and talk over bits of code with some stinky whoever after/before a long lecture, and the stinky whoevers are more preoccupied with using the lab session as a second lecture.

It would help if we got feedback from the courseworks...

Quote:

B - NEEDS MORE WORK ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF OO.
B - TOO SHORT.

There's not really a whole lot of learning going on because nobody seems to indicate what's 'right', or 'what's the right way'. Actually... I guess 'what's the right way?' is the second question you should be asking. The first question is 'what do I have?'. You've got to have a good grasp of the/a language before you can begin to implement anything more than a vague floaty design. And that can take some time by itself.

Hero of Excellence · **Joined:** 23rd Nov, 2008 **Posts:** 674

MrD wrote:

Anybody who enrolled on the course and had any idea of the kind of work they would be doing has already read around the subject to some degree and is way beyond what the course teaches them.

Everybody else is shocked and goes 'WHAT? GAMES USE NUMBERS?! But I was no good at numbers in school! Oh what a world! Can't I -not- use numbers?'.

I kind realised I wouldn't be 'right' for anything involving computers after emailing around computer science admissions tutors and being told, Maths A-level, Maths A-level, Maths A-level. :spew:

That was before I had chosen what A-levels I was going to do, but in full knowledge that I couldn't pass Maths GCSE. Oh well.

Dudley · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 8679

Good choice, I got an A at Maths GCSE and still struggled to an E in the A-Level.

That said, I got a CS course that didn't demand the A-Level and after 3 years in industry, writing accountancy software no less I've done no post GCSE maths.

The problem with maths is you get to A-Level and they take all the numbers away.

devilman · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:48

Dudley wrote:

Good choice, I got an A at Maths GCSE and still struggled to an E in the A-Level.

That said, I got a CS course that didn't demand the A-Level and after 3 years in industry, writing accountancy software no less I've done no post GCSE maths.

The problem with maths is you get to A-Level and they take all the numbers away.

I also got an E at A-Level. I only took Maths as I was told I'd need it for an IT degree. In the end, I didn't do a degree, work in IT and have needed nothing more than basic maths since leaving school. Ho hum.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

I got an A. And this was back when they were still hard, too.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 12:55

You're so proud you had to tell us twice.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

myp wrote:

You're so proud you had to tell us twice.

I'm sure I don't know what you mean, Wee Man.

myp · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 13:00

Forum revisionism! The holocaust didn't happen!

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 13:10

Mr Chris wrote:

I got an A. And this was back when they were still hard, too.

Me2

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

A in GCSE maths, C at A Level, all forgotten by start of uni. That was pointless

Derek The Halls · **Joined:** 31st Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 3742

I did Maths A Level. For about a month before my head asplode. I did physics too and got an E at AS level after failing the first time.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

I got an A in A level physics, too. It was my favouritest subject. I then did nothing with it, of course.

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 13:23

Mr Chris wrote:

I got an A in A level physics, too. It was my favouritest subject. I then did nothing with it, of course.

I always suspected something wasn't quite right.

MrChris · **Joined:** 1st Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 30498

MaliA wrote:

Mr Chris wrote:

I got an A in A level physics, too. It was my favouritest subject. I then did nothing with it, of course.

I always suspected something wasn't quite right.

I is Leet Sciencer

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

Quick! I need the formula for torque! Can't anyone help me?

myp · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 14:38

Careless*Torque = Cost/Lives.

DavPaz · **Joined:** 27th Jun, 2008 **Posts:** 38614

Torque+Torque = Speedy Broadband fun apparently

Sir Taxalot · **Joined:** 5th Apr, 2008 **Posts:** 4756

Dudley wrote:

Good choice, I got an A at Maths GCSE and still struggled to an E in the A-Level.

...

The problem with maths is you get to A-Level and they take all the numbers away.

Snap. Although we had very bad teachers for the first year and I sort of stopped trying. Bad me.

I found A-levels fun. Well, the bits of life around that time that weren't in the class room. So I found being 17/18 fun, then.

Hero of Excellence · **Joined:** 23rd Nov, 2008 **Posts:** 674

Sir Taxalot wrote:

I found A-levels fun. Well, the bits of life around that time that weren't in the class room. So I found being 17/18 fun, then.

A-levels were great. No homework apart from the yearly coursework, a lot of the freedoms of university (I did A-levels at an FE college), lots of socialising, all absolutely swell in retrospect. Much more fun that the three year shitstorm of stress that was my undergraduate era.

Back to the GCSE Maths thing. My school entered nearly everyone for the 'lower' tier, maximum grade available on that was D, so I was kinda stuffed. I didn't get to do the degree courses I wanted to do either, which still stings, as they wanted a grade C at GCSE along with the A-levels.

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49239

I did GCSE maths at 15, then 'some other thing' maths at 16. Was never really sure what that was.

Hero of Excellence · **Joined:** 23rd Nov, 2008 **Posts:** 674

Craster wrote:

I did GCSE maths at 15, then 'some other thing' maths at 16. Was never really sure what that was.

AS Level? As in the old pre-2000 version?

MaliA · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 18:31

myp wrote:

Careless*Torque = Cost/Lives.

999 bananas

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49239

No, it wasn't. I don't think.

AceAceBaby · **Posted:** Mon Jan 05, 2009 19:49

AO level?

Cras · **Joined:** 30th Mar, 2008 **Posts:** 49239

Could have been. No idea what one of those is, to be honest.

Be Excellent To Each Other

Games Courses
They're rubbish, aren't they?

Who is online

Be Excellent To Each Other

Games Courses They're rubbish, aren't they?

Who is online

Games Courses
They're rubbish, aren't they?