Sandy's Soapbox

"We at Capitol College are an engineering school that likes hands-on projects, and we're just adding a game design degree. So we'd like to run a 'Gaming & Engineering Midway' featuring 3 different challenges and multiple stations. Sid Meier defined a game as "a series of interesting choices", and we've designed these to take only 3-9 minutes for a participant to try. The challenges are for students and adults, and we'll also post these as handouts online for educators. Visitors can also design their own game ideas, and the best will get featured on the gaming website 'RPGnet'. Most of all, we emphasize that the same talents used to solve a game can also 'solve the world' using engineering principles!"

An unsurprising bit about how I teach, is that I often use games. I think game-like challenges, not just build challenges and contests, are an effective learning tool.

For an example of a build challenge, a classic engineering challenge is the Egg Drop. In its various forms, it boils down to: make a cage (possibly from a restricted list of materials) that makes a container able to help an egg survive an X foot drop. It's easy to accept that build challenges lead to good engineering. Accepting that a pure game can teach best practices and analytic thought isn't much further of a stretch.

NASA has two different 'build a satellite' exercises that really highlight the different approaches in an engineering game. At JWST, they have the online game Build a Satellite. In this, you select from a subset of goals and instruments to quickly make your first guess at a satellite. It then reports back either that you violated a constraint, or that your design is viable-- and which existing satellite your design most matches.

In contrast, AURA's Engineer a Satellite is a constraints-based hands-on exercise using either Legos or (as given on the web) household items. It includes a power budget worksheet and has a weight limit on the build. So, you have to do math--- in my opinion, a plus. It really highlights the trade-offs you need to design a satellite.

The two exercises are a useful comparison. One is light on science and high on visuals, and serves to illustrate the design process. The other gets you more involved in the trade-offs, but still in a hands-on and accessible manner. Both are game-like activities that are also build-style activities.

At MakerFaire, we'll be moving more towards the game aspects and away from build. Instead, we're looking at games that involve the analytical thought skills that are also needed for good science and engineering. Here are our current working draft designs. I was pleased to find the second one already exists as a product at my Friendly Local Game Story, which suggests this is a good direction to head.

Pencil-cars Light Cycles (2 player competitive)

"Competitive topography" isn't a field yet, but it should be. 2 goals, 2 line-chasing cars, 2 players, 1 winner. You each start drawing a line for your car to follow, and the first to reach the opposing goal wins. The catch is the cars automatically follow any line they encounter and will get confused when lines cross, so you have to think out a good route.

Mini Laser Maze (solo challenge)

Real-time figuring out of an optical path. A pizza-sized box has a laser maze with 3 laser pointers bouncing around some mirrors. The lasers go to light sensors and beep if the path is broken. They have to move the mirrors to make a path from A to B without setting off the alarm.

Lego Drone Map (solo competitive)

Simulating autonomous drone missions using legos, what could go wrong? There's a flat grid with hidden obstacles and scoring circles. They 'build' a playing piece using up to 5 colored lego blocks, that's their robot-- each block is a one-use special like 'speed', 'hop', 'blast', etc. Then they 'program' it by choosing 5 movement cards (straight, right turn, etc). They then flip over each card and move the robot, then whenever it hits an obstacle that obstacle is revealed and they decide which block to escape it. They get points for how many scoring areas they tag. So it's a mix of choosing their robot design and path, then seeing how it fares, exactly like designing autonomous drones.

Three challenges, a booth designed by a mad scientist and manned by students, all at a fair celebrating do-it-yourself culture. What couldn't go right?

Until next month,
Sandy at rpg.net