06 Jan 2010 [ Prev | Next ]

Daily Update: Jan 06

I've reported marks for all the Ex 2 submissions that were in the slot as of about 3pm. I enjoyed reading them, and learned quite a bit about your gaming preferences (and about games I haven't played).

As always, please let me know if you have any questions about upcoming work.

Upcoming Work

Online Participation

  • Before I quit for the day (around 5:30 or 6) I will close down the discussion for the first day's topics. If you haven't returned to reply/respond/reflect on the issues your peers brought up, you have a bit more time.
  • Susan has done a fantastic job putting good content and engaging with me on her blog.  She started posting early, she has insightful things to say, and she responds quickly.  I hope to see more evidence of peers talking to each other, too.  Great work, Susan. 
  • Cody's response to peer-chosen readings attracted a comment from someone connected to a website that hosts debates; the poster recommended his own resources on the violence-in-games debate. The commenter is doing a little self-promotion on our blog, but I didn't flag it as spam because the content really is relevant.  This is early evidence that if you post something online that's relevant and current, people outside the class will find it useful.
  • I liked Matt's observation about the humanity of Pac-Man, and it looks like the stirrings of a good conversation are brewing on Keith's comparison of a traditional and new games review article, Jeremy's discussion of the merits of Pac-Man's simplicity, and Beth Anne's comparison of the of the thoughtful Myst review and the informative Lego Indy 2 review.
  • I also enjoyed reading pepole's reactions to Mystery House, Rogue, and Adventure.  (Keith, I've posted a link to a site that lets you play Rogue, so perhaps the video will make more sense now.  Let me know.)
  • Jessie added a video clip to liven up her review of Assassin's Creed II (I think we know what game you've been playing lately, Jessie!)
  • Shellie says she's never thought so much about "fun" before, and she finds it's kind of fun to look closely at fun. (I'm looking forward to hearing more from you on that as the course progresses, Shellie.)
  • There's a lot more great stuff out there. What did you find that you thought was worth talking about? If you create a blog entry in which you link to the online discussions you think are worth promoting, not only will you be able to find those discussions later, you will encourage other people to follow the link and join in.
Remember that one of the ways you can earn credit for the peer review is by being the first to post a comment on a peer's blog entry, and I am asking everyone to post 2-4 comments on peer blogs for every assigned reading.  Let your classmates know when they've shared a thought that helps you, and join in your voice when your classmates ask for your opinion. 
Readings & Reading Quizzes

Tomorrow morning, the readigns for the first section of Koster are due. 

Update, 5:30pm: The GriffinGate quizzes for the introduction to Williams & Smith and Koster from x-109 are open. 

They are (generously) timed, not because I really think each one will take 60 minutes, but so that you will have the time to search and re-read.  These quizzes are open book, but you should already be familiar with the readings before you start the quizzes.

This set is due at 11:55pm on Thursday, and your score will be reflected in your online participation grade.  (Since this is the first serious batch of GriffinGate readings quizzes, I've set the system to accept half-credit late submissions for another 24 hours.)

I'll be happy to answer any questions.


I've posted 20 minutes of an introduction to the concept of theory in game studies.  It's one of the discussion topics for tomorrow.  Post a thoughtful response on your own blog, and then create the two-way links that I mentioned in yesterday's note.

Peer Review

Note that there is a related activity, a peer-review exercise, that was open this morning at 11 and continues for 24 hours.  From within Turnitn.com, you'll be asked to read 3 game reviews written by your peers, and answer some questions about each one.  Then your answers will be sent anonymously to your peer. (Be honest, but also be constructive.  Your negative points will have more merit if you can also make solid good points about strengths.)

NGJ Proposal

Also due tomorrow morning is your proposal for a new games journalism article.  (See tomorrow's schedule for the link to that page.)


Leave a comment

          1 2
03 04 05 06 07 08 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30