Game Design Document Development With Grade Sevens Date: April 1,

Location: Toronto

Participants: Grade sevens and myself

This visit was not originally planned. The Montréal team assumed that email and a wiki- space would be the main modes of communication between the grade seven participants in Toronto and the interns and professionals in Montréal. As the project was being conceived we consulted with the teacher regarding this plan, but we did not consult directly with the students. One of the challenges of working with schools is that it is never easy to access the students. During the planning phase, I had not yet received consent and assent forms from the students and their parents. I imagined that once we were able to connect online, through email and the wiki- space, issues of communication would be resolved and there would be a constant flow of information back and forth between the participants in both cities related to game-design decisions. Unfortunately, this was not the case. Through this process I realized that when it comes to technology, it is difficult to impose new habits into the ecosystem of regular technology use.

Originally, communication about the project was to take place during the grade seven computer class. I thought this formal engagement with the project would guarantee participation at least during one class period per week. Remembering passwords and remembering where to find the link to the wiki were challenges for the students, and in the end the idea of regular participation during computer class did not work out. Being a teacher myself, I am sensitive to the possibility of complicating the life of the teacher. Participation during computer class turned

out to be too much of an interference for the teacher and the students. This conclusion, however, was stretched out over a long period of time. For the three weeks following the initial visit, we attempted, with some success, to communicate through the wiki-space and email. This brought us into the holiday season of 2014 which was a non-productive time. On January 21, 2015, the regular Montréal meetings resumed and we attempted to pick up where we left off with the grade seven participants. We completed the analysis of their concept sheets on February 5, at which time we continued to try to share information via the wiki-space. We were able to conduct the storyline vote online, but we were not able to engage online to the degree that we had hoped. We came to this conclusion in early March. When the Montréal team realized this was the case, we began to devise an alternate plan. Strategies moving forward came down to Skyping with the students or going to Toronto for a face-to-face meeting. The teacher was not in favour of the Skype idea and preferred the idea of a face-to-face meeting. Because I was the only one who could attend, the team, lead by a support intern, created a video introducing everyone on the 14 team in Montréal as a replacement for more direct contact.

The plan for this visit was to create a simplified version of the game design document (GDD), based on the following categories: characters, plot, inventory, point system and aesthetics. Basically a GDD keeps track of all of the details related to each category. The plot section for example would describe the main story of the game and the back-story leading into the main plot, and any details that unfold as the game progresses. We pulled examples from the GDD for a game Nancy Drew’s gaming company was developing, and simplified them for classroom use in the form of “missions” (see GDD “character mission” example appendix E).

This was one of the interns who joined us for a short period of time, contributed the video and helped to create the 14

During the visit, students broke into groups based on the category area they were interested in developing (characters, plot, inventory, point system, and aesthetics). After accomplishing the missions, each group presented their ideas. If there were discrepancies discovered between groups, they would have had time to tweak the idea to ensure everything made sense to each group. The inventory group was the only group that consisted of only one student. I worked with her while also recording the participants as they discussed their missions.

The excitement was obvious in the room as they began working on their missions. I was overwhelmed in a positive way by the energy in the room. Given our limited time my biggest concern was how to ensure that the missions synched up with one another. Students began cross- pollinating ideas without the need for guidance or facilitation. Groups talked to one another, sharing ideas and adjusting details through discussion, while demonstrating the characteristics of a highly energized situation.

The following dialogue is an example from this session . In this section, the character 15 group spoke to the point system group. Students 1 and 3 were from the character group. Student 2 was from the point system group. The inventory group consisted of one person who was also present (Student 4). Small letters are used here simply to identify each line of dialogue for reference.

a. Student 1: you want to make it more realistic and kind of just like at the same time in a game so like maybe you can like make some characters like humans (sleeping in the bed)(student 2: “or maybe you, oh ya ya ya!), or some kind of obstacle in the mini-game (Student 3: ya, ya like).

Coding technique described on pages 135, 141 & 149 15

b. Student 2: *or like if you touch the human your progress gets reset and also like* (tf, p) you use your coins to buy the bedbugs (someone: yes!).

c. Students 3: okay like, *can i say something, can i say something?* (*tf) there is gonna be this okay so do you remember the ghost that was like a dj and had the bunny on its back, i can imagine that that’s a ghost that lives there and he gives you stuff to go and kill to go and try and take out (them) (Student 2: No I).

d. Student 2: …feel like that makes the game way too easy - i feel like you have to pay in (points) (student 3: or how about or how about you) you get a discount once you friend him. e. Student 3: or how ‘bout you find things around the house instead of buying them but you

have to go inside the (house) (Student 2: no!).

f. Student 2: we were thinking that you find coins by like searching (items) (Student 3: ya but).

g. Student 3: where do you get the items from?

h. Student 2: *no like no like* (*pitch) ok so like when you go into the hotel (tf), you search items like search under a lamp post, you might find (like) (Student 1: you can find like) two coins or something.

i. Someone says: ya.

j. Student 1: for that you can find like a little bit, like how you start off with an amount (ya), and then also (tf) like you get points like helping people out (ya) (ya) um, so like (student 4: and you try not…hmm) if one of your ghost friends needs help like digging up their coffin or something, than they’d be like oh thanks for that friend, by the way here’s 50 (coins) (student 4: ya, ya) (student 2: ya).

k. Student 2: ya, we were thinking that like um that those would be side quests like you don’t need to but like it’ll boost your (score) (ya).

l. Student 1: and you might get like more (money) (student 4: student 2!)

m. Student 4: each time befriend someone or become better friends with (them) (Student 2: they follow you) you rank up or something and then you’ll gain more points

n. Student 2: oh YA!

o. Student 1: like helping your friends can also be like a mini-game so helping your (ghosts) (Student 4: oh um sometimes) (me: girls) um like um

p. Me: what should we do about? should we still have little mini-presentations? or (ya) do you still have details to work out?

q. Student 2: we kind of all have just one (giant) (me: all of you)

r. Me: just communicated naturally (Student 2: ya ‘cause that’s for me…)

s. Me: except for (aesthetics) (Student 2: okay), (student 4: we were talking with aesthetics also), (you need) to make sure, okay so maybe we’ll just have a big group meeting (student 2: also)

t. Student 2: we were thinking that um when you like lose a mini game, s’like there are mini- games all around, s’like when you’re like *so there’s like a day and night cycle*, (*pitch) so then at night you’re trying to prank Monsieur Le Fromage *so then like, you have to like buy things* (*tf) from like this like dj guy, and you can buy like cans of bedbugs, or like like skunk spray or something and then you like you like (me: laughing), prank the guests so that Monsieur Le Fromage runs out of business, so that’s probably like the end game like you make M. Le Fromage go bankrupt

u. Me: ah, and then you build it up from (scratch) (student 2: ya! then you build your own). v. Me: that could be a whole part 2 actually.

(audio transcript, December 7, 2015)

The facility with cross-pollination of ideas illustrated here is a testament to the culture of the classroom itself. I have gotten to know this group over a period of a year and eight months, and also know their teacher well. The students themselves are close, and the teacher’s approach to teaching involves many opportunities for collaboration. Students are also often challenged to work together to solve open-ended problems. This capacity for collaboration may be unique to this class but it would be interesting to compare a similar situation in another type of classroom context.

In response to the general buzz in the classroom the teacher said:

You couldn’t start this virtually, but there’s nothing like face to face - at this stage of the project you broke through difficult part and now it’s the exciting part generating story ideas, and you couldn’t achieve the same detail or enthusiasm without being face to face …there’s an immediacy to it as well… you can read somebody’s idea, but by the time you’ve got the idea out you’ve lost a lot of the joy (audio transcript, April 1, 2015) This was one of my favourite moments and quotes of the entire project. The joy of an idea was maintained through the immediate reception of the idea, and the momentum built as the ideas moved back and forth, were transformed, and evolved through and around the conversation of the students. This joy that came from growing ideas face to face could not have been replicated online.