Ken Thompson: 15 design principles for Team learning model business Games

I am learning about team experience in custom business games, which usually involves obvious computer elements. This area is full of traps and myths, and games can become too complex or become goals themselves. So I keep an eye on some practical business game design guidelines.

Jesse Schell's "Panorama Quest Game Design Art" is also an impressive reference book, but it talks about ordinary games, not commercial team games. In addition, http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/11629.html ">100 law is far beyond my expectations.

So unfortunately, I didn't find what I wanted, so I thought I should write it myself.

The first thing to be clear here is that my goal here is to customize the game based on the team experience model to help participants improve their understanding of the organization or business. The games are also designed to help participants observe and change their behavior, develop better team skills and improve their ability to cope with adversity.

Principles from Bioteams.com

Here are 15 principles-I believe there are more laws, but these apply to me:

1. Clear goals-what are the components of good performance? A certain degree of ambiguity is fine, but not too much.

2. Clarity of operation-how and when to do what you want in the game requires a clear explanation.

3. Promoting communication-the game should be based on real business issues, dilemmas or trade-offs, not answers. The right questions will bring rich communication and give players the opportunity to learn from each other. The most beneficial games should revolve around the company's specific problems, not the ordinary business challenges.

4. The fascinating context/persuasive storyline-the context and situation are very important, and this is where you get the player's time, attention and energy input.

5. The richness of communication, props, situations, and interventions outside the game-these are necessary conditions for stimulating participants ' imaginations and interactions. Do not implement these goals entirely on a computer. Real people are more attractive than embedding video and virtual characters.

6. Support Learning goals--the game should not be seen as the goal itself, or pass all the value alone. It should be subject to well-defined learning goals.

7. The necessary difficulty-"necessary" is a good word, it represents an appropriate number of things. Good games should not be too easy or too difficult (game state Note: High requirements but not loss of confidence). In addition, you should keep players in touch with increasingly tricky complexities-not a one-time response.

8. Termination-to be clearly presented, how far the participant is from the finish line, and where the participant's stage/round ends. Do not let them wonder if they have finished the content?

9. Unexpected-good game is reasonable and logical, but not entirely predictive. As in the real world, it is important to present changes and unexpected content, but do not create chaos, or you will be hit and confused.

10. Fun-It is important to implant a few new and bright elements, the excessive "serious game" is often very interesting, "game" is a powerful catalyst for learning. Don't underestimate the value of trivia and novelty, such as interesting sound effects.

11. Familiar business is a & concept-if users need to learn new unfamiliar terminology to run your game, then they do not have enough cognitive space or experience to interact with the real content of the game that needs to be dug up.

12. This is not a technology display window--the game should be based on the least technology to achieve its goals, not many.

13. This is not a calculator--the game of processing data (game Bang Note: Like a traditional data processor) is often too simple to interact with, and will soon become tedious. For example, the results can also depend on how the participants interact with their stakeholders and algorithm scores.

14. A larger climax-the game should move towards a particular climax and should be set as early as possible so that the game can come to an end.

15. Fair and reasonable-when participants are asked why they have achieved such a result during or after the game, the analysis should be logical, not to confuse them, or to feel doomed to failure from the start!

Via: Game State/gamerboom