I do feel like there is a lot of potential for textbooks going digital. Several of the readings talked about having interactive pages with quizzes and in-depth descriptions. Engaging students actively in their lessons could potentially help them to retain the information they have been learning. Digital textbooks are also incredibly cheaper than physical textbooks. Often times students can’t even sell their books back and end up owning an expensive book they do not want or need.  Even with selling books back, the money back received is usually not very much.

Bogost breaks down four areas of these simplistic Facebook games that cause users to be frustrated while still addicted. These areas are Enframing, Compulsion, Optionalism, and Destroyed Time. Personally, I have seen all four of these areas in several games I have played myself, or have witnessed others play (i.e. Vampire Wars, Farmville).

One example for Optionalism, in Vampire Wars, you have to continually go back to the game to gather money (which in the case of this game is considered “blood”). However, if you earn enough blood, you can make purchases that allow you to gain more blood even while you are away from the game! Bogost states “social games are games you don’t have to play”.

An example of compulsion and destroyed time would be simple rewards that are priced extremely high. While surveying Cow Clicker, for example, I saw that you are able to purchase items. As I scrolled down the page to see what was available, I found that YOU CAN BUY A T.A.R.D.I.S!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A T.A.R.D.I.S. (or Time and Relative Dimension in Space) is a Space/Time Machine from my beloved British TV show Doctor Who. Now, why my cow would need a T.A.R.D.I.S I have absolutely no idea, but at that moment, I swore to my not yet existent cow that he would have one! Lucky for me, it only costs 2,250 mooney, so, if you don’t mind…I have some work to do….

In closing, I hereby curse Bogost for his success at creating a “mundane, outward obsession whose worst trick is to disguise itself as fruitfulness” (Bogost).

Another part of our readings (and videos) for this week talked about the good that video games can do for the classroom and for the world. I think using a game to help learn is a great strategy. Children are now growing up in a world that is heavily visual. I can’t think of a better way to teach visual learners than with an interactive and very visual method, like a video game. I also enjoyed the video about using video games to help solve world problems. Gamers are problem solvers; they are meticulous, paying attention to every detail, and they are relentless. Gamers will spend hours to solve problems in game. By making games that mirror real-world problems, I think it’s very possible that many of the world’s problems could be solved, or at least get on the right path to being solved.

Melissa Wilkins and I (Stacey Stoneking) created a lovely PowerPoint for our discussion of Rushkoff’s Program or Be Programmed!!! We will be presenting it in class, but if you would like to follow along or revisit it later, click the link above!!!

Thanks!

Toodles!

If we clear our minds and not worry about programming, maybe we will have room to utilize that technology.

, chapter 3 and 4, the author presents a compelling argument on how we need to pay attention to how our technology is being programmed and how if we do not, we shall pay the consequences and instead be programmed. I agree with some of what the author says. I believe that people should be aware of the technology that they use, it’s purpose, and how it is made. However, I do not think that it is necessary to know how each technology is programmed. We make millions of choices everyday. It would be useless to figure out every minute detail of how a certain technology is programmed. This is why engineers create the product and we simply use it. It would be a waste of time and inefficient if we sat there and constantly tried to figure out the programming behind a technology.

Image Credit

Rushkoff states, “But in actual experience, our pursuit of choice has the effect of making us less engaged, more obsessive, less free, and more controlled. I think the opposite is true (52). If we left the programming to engineers, we have the opportunity to become more engaged in the technology and use it efficiently without worrying or fretting about how the programming works behind it. We become less obsessive because we are not always trying to figure out something that should be left to the experts, and doing so actually makes us less controlled.

Imagine how crazy our lives would be if we would go a single day where we questioned how each of our technology was made. It would take me days just to figure out how my ipod is wired or the wiring behind my laptop or even simple technology like a pen or how my student id swipes through a machine and lets me ride the PRT. If we simply left programming to the experts, we actually have the chance to resourcefully use our technology and let it affect our lives in a positive manner.