Gaming Horizons’ impact is based on a programme of work that produced an extensive, evidence-based range of outputs targeted at relevant stakeholders: policy makers, researchers, developers, educators, young people and their families. We believe that our recommendations and scenarios represent a rigorous, systematic attempt to influence policies and practices, based on a dialogic redefinition of what video games are and what they can achieve in various contexts, including of course education and learning.
The project produced a large number of insights and recommendations, here is a selection:
a) The Analysis of the H2020 Discourse on ICT and gaming more specifically shows a gap between the stated political aims and the actual implementation priorities. On the one hand, themes of Responsible Research and Innovation are, without doubt, visible within the European R&D agenda. In particular, compared with its predecessors (FP6 and FP7) Horizon 2020 represents a more explicit attempt to account for a range of societal, environmental and cultural concerns associated with technological innovation. On the other hand, there appears to be a discrepancy between the rhetoric of ethics and social responsibility in the high-level strategic discourse, and the way these themes are featured in the more operational documents - the funding calls above all.
b) Our mandate as a sister project was to expand the horizon of what games are capable of, and this led us to engage with the world of mainstream and independent game development, which largely operates in highly competitive market conditions outside of the existing frameworks of European funding. These developers - often small studios - expressed significant reservations about the current institutional frameworks to support serious and applied games in Europe. While they are very interested in the potential of games to tackle socially and culturally relevant themes, they find themselves pressed between the rock of the market and the hard place of European funding, viewed as constraining and rife with creativity-stifling requirements.
c) Games have great potential for learning, thanks to their motivating capacity, their engaging power and their ability to create active and student-centred learning opportunities. However, harnessing such potential in formal education is far from easy. Students’ positive acceptance of game based education cannot be taken for granted: gaming is by definition a free exploratory activity; hence, playing when, where and what the teacher decides contradicts the very nature of play. Besides, students do have personal preferences as far as games are concerned, that make game choice a very critical decision. This is particularly true for some serious games where the playful/gameful dimension is a mere cosmetic layer added to instructional interactions. Special attention should also be paid to gender and cultural differences, digital divide issues, and special education needs in order to avoid exclusion, demotivation and frustration. Respecting preferences and differences requires being open to creative and personalized learning strategies, as well as availing of a broad knowledge of all the possible options.
