The EGTV Show: The Videogames Election - Episode 3

Education, Education, Education.

Hang on, wasn't the election five months ago? Well spotted! Indeed, when we began this project some 10 months ago it was initially intended simply to chart the UK games industry's relationship with Westminster in the run up to 6th May, 2010.

But the scope of the work grew organically and dramatically over the months, as events led us in new directions of focus and research leading to today's publication of the final chapter in the series.

And though the election has long since passed, the full impact of the resulting Coalition and the nature of the new administration's relationship with Britsoft is still to a large extent being worked out. Now more than ever, gaming needs votes of support from parliament and the public.

Watch "Education, Education, Education" below and read on for more on how the programme came together.

As the echo of Tony Blair's '97 election soundbite suggests, Episode 3's target is education – in three distinct senses.

First, the standard of games courses at UK universities and how that relates to the so-called 'skills crisis' in games development – considered serious enough for the Government to launch an independent review into it.

Second, the potential of games and gaming technology as teaching aids to make learning more engaging, fun and in-line with the way kids consume information outside of the classroom.

And third, educating a wider public raised on a crude diet of scaremongering drivel by the Daily Mails of the world on the many positive and amazing ways in which games are being used to improve lives.

On the skills debate, the games industry argues that of the many 'games' courses on offer in the UK, few are producing graduates who are able to hit the ground running without extensive and costly retraining.

Meanwhile, games programming is a numbers game, and the generally dire standard of numeracy in Britain linked to the volume of students taking on core subjects computer science, is an ongoing concern.

The irony is, far from being "Satan's Sudoku" – as a spectacularly idiotic column in the Times once had it - videogames themselves can play an important role in the teaching of maths, particularly with younger children.

And that's children who ought to be told that having ninja number skills could one day lead them to make the very videogames they love playing today. But that isn't happening. Yet.

Gaming is a medium children exploit and understand instinctively, regardless of platform. While many educators remain stuffily and stubbornly Victorian in approach, others are increasingly clued-up and using gaming in the classroom.

Outside of it, meanwhile, the BBC's Children's department has long understood the role games can play in fulfilling its educational remit, just as, for an older teen audience, Channel 4 is demonstrating through its innovative range of interactive experiences.

The film – and the series – ends with a look at just a few of the many inspiring people using games to make a difference. The Wii Fit-fuelled fitness craze and notion that games can keep you healthy is a well-worn theme – but the Rotherham Institute for Obesity is taking it one step further, with gaming a vital feature of its pioneering work to tackle the 'obesity epidemic'.

And while you're never too far away from someone blathering on about how your granny throwing her Wiimote at the goldfish is proof gaming is now truly 'accessible', this ignores the many thousands of people with physical disabilities who can't share in the fun.

Or couldn't without the incredible efforts of organisations like GameLab, which produces games specifically for the deaf and blind, and children's charity SpecialEffect, which uses cutting-edge technology (which some of you may have checked out at Eurogamer Expo) to help even the most severely disabled to enjoy gaming. The results speak for themselves.

Featuring contributions from MPs and business leaders to gaming luminaries including Molyneux and Miyamoto, plus the unsung heroes of the industry, if Episode 3 has a message, it's that not only is gaming a fast-moving, exciting and challenging medium to work in, it's also one of which we can all be proud.

You can watch the film right now. Do let us know what you think.

Comments (11) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • layleeloo #1 1 year ago

    Excellent article. Thanks
  • kupocake #2 1 year ago

    Great stuff. Though I'm going to hell for giggling at one unfortunate family name.
  • MrWonderstuff #3 1 year ago

  • dr_zoidthrob #4 1 year ago

    ... and then there are those of us with 16 years in the industry, that still can't get a new job... :(
  • gruntboy #5 1 year ago

    Great article, nice conclusion to this series.

    Though I feel compelled to comment on the interview piece with Clive Robert from DR in relation to selling techniques used to pitch Train2Game. I close relative of mine - 18 year old male, out of work, disillusioned with his prospects and a keen gamer - saw the Train2Game advertising on TV and called up. After taking a test for which he was "one of the highest scorers that week" (a common tactic for distance learning hard-selling), he was then "interviewed" and told that he could have a place on a Train2Game course, but needed to make up his mind then and there otherwise the place would have to go to somebody else. To boot, he was also told that he would be guaranteed a job in the games industry if he completed the course. This took place just over 1 month ago.

    I've no reason to doubt that DR have done what they can to address the early issues of hard selling by MIS's sales people, but frankly DR are not close enough to those sales people to do anything meaningful about it, other than to find themselves another partner. So by association they have a moral responsibility to their prospective students, in my opinion.

    I appreciate that the case I describe is anecdotal and could be dismissed as exception rather than rule, but I find it disappointing that Johnny has simply raised the question of "what about this problem?", been given a placating answer and then not gone on to ask Clive Robert exactly how they've gone about addressing the problem. I acknowledge that challenging Train2Game isn't the focus of this piece, but feel it deserved a bit more attention than it was given.
  • lockload #6 1 year ago

    Yet another quality episode in this series

    They are easily good enough to be on tv
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/10 @ 19:22
  • Tomo #7 1 year ago

    Brilliant. Definitely the best one of the lot. Some really touching moments and lots of stuff I didn't know about actually. Very insightful.
  • Fatbobbybob #8 1 year ago

    Bravo another quality episode. I totally agree about the maths issue. As a skill it's useful in so many different ways and not just relative to coding.
  • Vin #9 1 year ago

    Excellent episode.

    This series needs a larger audience - get it on the features & analysis page on the BBC site.
  • MistMeUK #10 1 year ago

    Great watch, thanks.
  • DoctorMike #11 1 year ago

    You criticise the BBC for asking the wrong question, but boldly state "The game makers of tomorrow are failing to receive the skills they need today!" This last comment horrified me. Generic courses do give ammunition to the prejudice still shown by Braben and the like, but they are not the majority of awards on offer. The irony is that courses that are Computer Science/Software Engineering with some token game stuff tacked on were heavily criticised for being "bums on seats" a while ago. Undergraduate awards that attempted to embed Ludology (games studies and theory) were "Micky Mouse". Application to STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Maths) courses across the UK are massively down year on year. The advice of "do a proper degree" - i.e. Physics - is laughable, when schools don't even teach traditional Science anymore. To be honest, I'm getting rather sick of Industry telling me there's no dialogue going on, when we have had to fight/cajole/court the contacts we have at Newport; most don't exactly make it easy, Blitz being an exemplary exception, which is why TIGA's support of educational links is so important. Not seeing much if this from UKIE!

    Making games, especially in as large an inter-disciplinary group as possible, with the hard science/tech/art&craft behind it (depending on your discipline) is what is important. That's what we try to emphasise at Newport. And making games is something you can do for free, at home in your spare time. Universities can/should be providing Industry tools (PS3/PSP dev kits, etc) but more importantly, a supportive/creative community of peers and informed staff. Making games requires team work, good communications, experience of working in a diverse community of practice. Most importantly, universities allow students to learn by really messing up, reflecting on mistakes, and becoming autonomous self-disciplined and adaptive to new challenges.

    Extra-curricular activities beyond cookie-cutter courseworks are critical. Newport (and others!) supported X48, Dare to be Digital, the Global Game Jam, and Games-EDU last year. Giving students a chance to show they truly understand the game development pipeline, and significant news and events in the Industry, like this Livingstone Hope Review. We have made representation to the third party researchers doing the groundwork for this, to try to lobby for a better representation of universities. Let us hope that they take on-board our continued disgust at misguided, unfairly critical dogma aimed at an excellent, underfunded and under threat HE sector, currently scared stiff by the Comprehensive Spending Review an a likely 80% cut in teaching revenue.