Germination X is a social game developed by FoAM, an artistic research collaboration which focuses on art, science nature and contemporary realities. The multiplayer game is about permaculture, and the agents (or “plant spirits”) experimentally interconnecting people and their plant avatars to others. Each action of a player and what they represent affects another. There are seedlings, sprouts, blossomings and death. Emotional reactions are signaled to other players through simple animations and color changes as the ecosystem evolves.
Developed by artists and programmers Germination X demonstrates that often making games is the best way to learn and in turn teach others (Gee 2005). Germination X is an arm out of FOAM’s larger ambition called Grow World Games some of whose goals include to using plants or decentralized peer to peer technology in gaming ultimately connect people with an both an experience and tangible information on how plants, particularly within the methods of permaculture exist in symbiotic relation to their contemporary human counterparts. Available for an interview was Germination X’s primary develop Dave Griffiths who’s development blog on the game is here.
The Germination X is available to play here.
Please tell us who you are, your role in designing games and why you became interested in “serious games”?
My background is in computer graphics programming for the games and film industries, but for the last 3 years I’ve been working for FoAM, an interdisciplinary research group who encourage me to work in a more generalist manner – working with people from different backgrounds and learning skills in wildly different areas.
I’ve also been heavily involved with software art and artistic projects
that use games in different ways for quite a long time. For me, “art
games” and “serious games” are both taking advantage of the way games
allow players to take on different perspectives as they play – this
makes them very powerful in terms of exploring ideas.
How does your approach to gaming make it unique from other similar games out there?
Germination X is designed to take its raw materials from the mass of online farming games, but builds around a world inspired by alternative agricultural methods (permaculture) to see how this changes the game experience.
We are also making use of a research AI system called FAtiMA, developed by the Lirec project which supports Germination X. FAtiMA models social relationships and emotions – we are exploring how using this kind of model effects player’s understanding of their relationships (with the AI characters, plants and each other) in a social game. Permaculture is mainly concerned with the relationships between plants, so it’s exciting to bring this all together.
What do you hope participants will come away learning or experiencing from your game?
I mainly want to inspire curiosity, when a game such as this represents a certain issue, I’d like players to come to their own conclusions – to explore it with them as equals rather than having some hidden “correct answer”. So the main thing is curiosity, which requires a certain depth, some mysteriousness. The best thing is when players tell me what is going on, because this means the game has allowed them to think creatively and openly.
What have been the challenges, obstacles at creating this game of your vision?
The thing I worry most about is consistency – that the world and the themes represented make sense, nothing breaks the player’s suspended disbelief. This is always the big issue, and in this game this has caused the most discussion and debate with people I’ve worked with.
What kinds of interactive assessment methods are you taking to making the goal of your games are likely to be reached?
With the help of the Mobile Life Centre (part of the Swedish Institute of Computer Science) we are setting up a series of focus group testing sessions which will give us feedback on the nature of the relationships in the game. Group discussions while playing, and responses to more leading questions at the end will be recorded.
Also, the game has been online and public since it’s first running version, and player’s actions are logged in a minimal way which allows me to immediately see the results of changes I make. This has been quite a huge discovery for me – the form of immediate feedback this makes possible. This open testing, in conjunction with it’s open source
development, has meant I’ve been able to get quite a bit of feedback from brave early adopter players.
We have yet to enable this in Germination X, but in a previous game (Naked on Pluto) we have AI agents who ask players questions relating to the theme of the game (in that case privacy in social networks) which then get automatically posted to a blog external to the game. I think building in feedback this way, whether it’s about the issues or the game
itself, is really important.
What do you see as the advantages/disadvantages for using games in educational use?
I think games have vast educational potential – simply because from my perspective, most of what I consider learning happens via playing. I can only understand something properly if I can pick it up, shake it, take it to pieces and rebuild it in some way (whether that’s cars, Finnish language or linear algebra).
The problem is that this approach to learning doesn’t seem to fit very well with existing educational ideas. There seems a sense of the potential, but perhaps a lack of understanding of how to achieve this. I guess one problem is that people who do “get it” are perhaps put off by education, and so are not in the right place.
Where do you see the potential of digital games as a force for individual/community change in the future?
There is something about entering a game world that allows you to take on the perspectives of people you might not normally agree with, and understand the conclusions they reach. This was most clearly demonstrated by a workshop by Selena Savic on a game prototype that examined the differences between the business strategies of super
markets and local stall markets: http://kucjica.org/eat-it/ The workshop was carried out on a bunch of mainly left leaning open source artists, all whom when playing the supermarket side took on all the monopolistic strategies they could with wild abandon! So I hope the potential of these kind of approaches might add to a shift in politics and decision making (on personal or community levels) away from restricted partisan modes of thought.
What advice would you give a novice game builder who is considering using or designing games to use in participatory agents of change?
If computers and programming are not a natural medium for you then start with drawing, models, bits of lego, make a board game, act it out with your body. It should be possible to get basically all the decisions made this way before touching a computer. Document everything, blog about it, get as much outside input as possible.
I see a lot of educational or serious games fail because they attempt to take an existing game and “bolt it on” to an issue – this rarely works. You have to take the game design seriously, and struggle with it to fit the theme or issue you are interested in. Everything in the game has to represent the theme consistently somehow.