Platform: Browser (Chrome or Firefox preferred)

Art Style: 2D, Anime, SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics)

Genre: RPG, Interactive Fiction, Educational

Price: Free

I would like your thoughts on my game design:

In this multiplayer online game, you attend classes and hang out at various locations in the game world (ex. library, local shops, arcade). NPCs populate the world along with human players as students and teachers. Gameplay comprises of answering questions in class and talking to other students (NPCs or players). Your character can be customized, and there is no set story. There's also an in-game clock and day-night feature.

Here is my current list of class subjects:

• Vocabulary (word roots, etc.)
• Mathematics (from addition to calculus)
• Art and Animation (how to make game sprites, animation tips and tricks, shading)
• Music (teaching things like guitar scales, how to read sheet music, and more)
• Creative Writing

Do you have suggestions for features or gameplay? I'd like to know if there's anything in particular that could make this game more fun and accessible to people of all ages.

StarMire,

First of all, I'd like to thank you for responding; however, I feel you misunderstood what I was asking.

In the original post, I did say that this is for people of all ages (not a children's game), and I also asked for more gameplay suggestions. I am very frustrated with today's "educational" games which tend to have very little educational value (aside from adding 2 + 2 to shoot zombies, or something like that...). You might be surprised to know that many people actually want to learn new things, and are often discouraged because many of the available means of learning tend to be dull and uninteresting (ex. many textbooks).

What I want to do is provide an alternative.

So while I do appreciate your input, I would not have posted to this forum if I wanted a list of reasons why what I'm trying to do is difficult or unfeasible. All I wanted was gameplay suggestions. Thanks anyway.

No, I really don't believe you would. Downvoting somebody's reply (particularly since I was the only one to reply) is not a good way to "thank" somebody for responding. You're sending mixed messages.

I understand you're trying to be diplomatic, but this just comes off as dishonest, and makes me less inclined to help you (and I would warn others against doing the same, since you're being so defensive).

And yet, although you're making it very hard for me to respect you, I think educational games are very important (and that there should be more of them), so I'll try again to clarify, and help you understand my point (although you will probably downvote this post too).

I didn't misunderstand, and that's irrelevant anyway. You do have a certain demographic, and it is apparently teens/young adults. I would call those 'kids' and not children. Probably people in high school or university.

Anyway, there's no such thing as "people of all ages", which is both a common and meaningless phrase. Saying you want to design a game for "all ages" demonstrates your inexperience in design. It's like saying you want to make an MMORPG where people can do anything.

Candyland is a game that's billed for all ages, along with others of that type, because their mechanics are highly random to balance out wins and losses due to differences in general skill and competence; but they aren't really for all ages, because they're profoundly tedious after a couple playthroughs to anybody old enough to grasp strategy.

It doesn't matter whether this is for young children, teenagers, or senior citizens, my point still stands.

Games (fun ones anyway) are meant to introduce us to something extraordinary that we can't do in life. Nobody wants to sit in a virtual classroom as you describe. Not children, not kids of college age, not the middle aged, and not the elderly.

If you read my post more carefully, rather than being fixated on being defensive to my valid criticism, then you would see that I offered you positive gameplay suggestions and encouragement to that end.

I am too! Modern educational games are largely very bad.

And you know what? I'm trying to build an educational game, so I'm very interested in this subject, and I'd really like to help you.

The solution to making something legitimately educational and entertaining at the same time is not trivial. Using addition to kill zombies isn't it, and putting people in a virtual classroom isn't it.

Do you want to know that the solution is? See my last post where I gave it to you.

Would you like me to expand on that explanation? I'd love to.

But maybe you can cut back on the sarcasm and rudeness:

That wasn't necessary.

I'm trying to be nice, and take time out of my day to help you, because I think what you're trying to do is important. VERY important.

BUT I would not be helping you if I didn't tell you that you're going about this the wrong way.

You need to create a context in which the skills are relevant (2+2 is not relevant to killing zombies; that's a bad example of creating relevance), to motivate the student to pick them up in the game.

Do you want more suggestions, or more targeted suggestions? Are there any problems with my suggestions that don't fit your goals?

Great, I'd love to help you. Why don't we discuss this like rational adults, and leave the rudeness/sarcasm and whatever else at the door?

StarMire,

I downvoted because I did not find your response constructive or helpful (I do that with any post I read on anyone's topic). If I cannot offer helpful information, I do not comment. Please review my past posts for reference. There was no other reason. I do apologize if I offended you, and I don't understand why you are upset.

StarMire,

I downvoted because I did not find your response constructive or helpful

No, you chose to ignore the helpful and constructive advice in my post, because you didn't agree with it. You are biased on this subject, because you are emotionally invested in your game (as any creator can be). You received the feedback that you needed, and if you take the advice, you will find it both helpful and constructive. What you need is some perspective.

Do you think a noob who just started using game maker yesterday and wants to make a WOW killer agrees with the helpful and constructive advice to start smaller? And yet, it's the advice that is needed. Your concept is misdirected. Educational games are great, but you're trying to go about this the wrong way, and you've demonstrated naïveté with regards to the demographics you need to appeal to.

I gave you precisely what you asked for. And you may care to notice, nobody else did.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you. If you want advice, take it graciously rather than being defensive and defaming the ones who give it.

Like I said, I'll help you if you want, but you'll have to change your attitude and be less defensive.

I won't address the viability of your approach for now--I don't feel that I have sufficient information to be confident of my feelings on the matter (although that should not be taken to reflect on StarMire's comments on the subject--I don't know what StarMire's body of knowledge might be).

If I may ask, is this intended to provide serious schooling--essentially providing an alternative source of education--or is it intended to be supplementary to more rigorous schooling? Have you looked into alternative schooling models for inspiration? I'm not expert, so these may not be the best options, but offhand I'm aware of "studio schooling" and an interesting experiment in student-driven education (the talks to which I've linked there are fairly short--a little over 6 minutes and 17 minutes, respectively, I believe). It might be worth looking around in TED's "education" section for additional inspiration, too.

No, I don't intend for it to be an alternative source of education (like a home-school program, as I was home-schooled for several years prior to high school). I actually wanted to make a game that's like Cooking Mama, in terms of content. The only difference is that my game will have a focus on a few different topics (like math and music). The thing that made Cooking Mama and other food games like it fun is the gameplay. The player is, in a way, indirectly learning how to cook and make different dishes. I really loved the minigame, stress-free style of gameplay. That's something I'm interested in expanding into other genres.

So it's not necessarily formal, but more offhanded. I wanted to make something like this, but I'm not sure how I should structure the gameplay. I would have included this in the main post, but I didn't consider it until just now.

Thanks for the links! I'll look into that as well.

Some thoughts...

I haven't played Cooking Mama but I would assume that part of what makes it enjoyable is the ability to experiment and see what the results are (demonstrations of cause and effect where users influence elements can be quite interesting). And as you said, it's something that people can get a sense of how it might relate in the real world. So, perhaps you can get similar enjoyment if players are given the ability to experiment in different ways relating to different subjects you want to approach. Or if an experiment isn't quite intuitive for the subject, maybe a puzzle or task of some kind that at least shows the usefulness and application of the various subjects. I would suggest that experiments or puzzles be something that's done outside of any kind of exam element you might want to include. Since a fundamental part of what you intend is for things to take place in a classroom, it might make sense to present experiments and puzzles as the actual "class" when a player enters the room. However if this is the only place where such things occur, you might be making it more difficult to demonstrate how various topics might relate to the real world.

There's also an in-game clock and day-night feature.

You also used the words "multiplayer online game". I do get the appeal of creating a living online world but I would recommend that you take a hard look at whether doing so might detract from whatever educational experience that you're trying to provide. Especially since it's been well established that people often don't play nice when they're online.

I like the idea of using puzzles and experiments as gameplay. Thanks for the suggestion.

However if this is the only place where such things occur, you might be making it more difficult to demonstrate how various topics might relate to the real world.

You're absolutely right about that. It would make more sense for the players to actually use the knowledge first-hand. To use a Cooking Mama example, the player prepares a dish with step-by-step instructions along the way. I want to draw inspiration from that model without copying it. I'll think of a way to do this. I'm definitely rethinking the classroom idea now.

Is there something that you envision the player doing at night that you haven't mentioned?

You also used the words "multiplayer online game". I do get the appeal of creating a living online world but I would recommend that you take a hard look at whether doing so might detract from whatever educational experience that you're trying to provide. Especially since it's been well established that people often don't play nice when they're online.

Well, at first the day-night feature was just something that I wanted to include. But now I think I can justify this feature with gameplay. For example, say I want to teach the player how to play the guitar. In a minigame or puzzle game format, he or she could play a live show on stage at night. A real fret board (or sound board) is displayed on screen, and the player can experiment with different melodies or scales. After finishing a song, the player can be scored based on accuracy or creativity (I'll have to think about scoring methods). During the day, more shops are open and the player can purchase more gear (using in-game currency). I think that might be more fun than going to a guitar class in a classroom for sure.

As far as the multiplayer aspect goes, I wanted to give players the opportunity to collaborate, but I didn't factor in the downside to that. If it were a multiplayer online game, I suppose I would have to find moderators to keep the game open and inviting for everyone. Otherwise, it could potentially become an environment that no-one would want to participate in. I've played online games with others before, and I have to admit that the good comes with the bad.

On the other hand, I can think of many positive outcomes of having multiplayer functionality as well. To use the music example again, a group of players could form a band and simultaneously perform a song using different instruments (guitar, bass, drums, keyboard). The thing that separates this from Rock Band is the actual content and gameplay. Instead of hitting notes as they pass over a circle for all the instruments (Rock Band), the players can use guitar frets, bass frets, cymbols and tom toms, and keyboard keys to create their own songs. All the instruments are shown as graphics on the screen for the player to interact with. It could be like the individual guitar or drum simulations in a full game. The possibilities are endless, but I do need to consider whether or not the good out-weighs the bad, and decide on the multiplayer accordingly.

I think I have a real game design now. I'm removing the classroom for all skills that don't have a practical use there. Instead, I'll create individual minigames for various locations.

Thanks again!