IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v45y2014i1p93-124.html

Opening Cinematics

Author

Listed:
  • Katelyn Procci
  • Shan Lakhmani
  • Talib S. Hussain
  • Clint A. Bowers

Abstract

For the development of serious gaming, it is necessary to articulate the specific features that lend themselves best to the creation of effective learning games. Given the limited resources of the typical serious games developer, time and money should be spent in a way such that features with the greatest return on investment take priority. Opening cinematics, a popular feature of games, was examined through the lens of three major theoretical perspectives that promote learning, specifically situated learning, emotional arousal, and goal orientation. A series of three experiments was conducted to determine if the inclusion of opening cinematics was able to change the goal orientation of players as well as improve the effectiveness of a serious game used to train U.S. Navy recruits shipboard damage control procedures. The data suggest that opening cinematics were not worth the immense development investment. Game design suggestions and potential topics for future research are provided.

Suggested Citation

  • Katelyn Procci & Shan Lakhmani & Talib S. Hussain & Clint A. Bowers, 2014. "Opening Cinematics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(1), pages 93-124, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:45:y:2014:i:1:p:93-124
    DOI: 10.1177/1046878113508515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1046878113508515
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1046878113508515?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rosemary Garris & Robert Ahlers & James E. Driskell, 2002. "Games, Motivation, and Learning: A Research and Practice Model," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 33(4), pages 441-467, December.
    2. Kimberly D. Elsbach & Pamela S. Barr & Andrew B. Hargadon, 2005. "Identifying Situated Cognition in Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 422-433, August.
    3. David Crookall, 2010. "Serious Games, Debriefing, and Simulation/Gaming as a Discipline," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 41(6), pages 898-920, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Apinya Dhatsuwan & Monamorn Precharattana, 2016. "Blockyland," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 445-464, August.
    2. Marcin Wardaszko & Błażej Podgórski, 2017. "Mobile Learning Game Effectiveness in Cognitive Learning by Adults: A Comparative Study," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 435-454, August.
    3. Elizabeth Koh & Yeo Gee Kin & Bimlesh Wadhwa & John Lim, 2012. "Teacher Perceptions of Games in Singapore Schools," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 51-66, February.
    4. Jessy Barré & Daphné Michelet & Anais Job & Jennifer Truchot & Philippe Cabon & Catherine Delgoulet & Antoine Tesnière, 2019. "Does Repeated Exposure to Critical Situations in a Screen-Based Simulation Improve the Self-Assessment of Non-Technical Skills in Postpartum Hemorrhage Management?," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(2), pages 102-123, April.
    5. Michael Filsecker & Michael Kerres, 2014. "Engagement as a Volitional Construct," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 450-470, August.
    6. Carolina Islas Sedano & Verona Leendertz & Mikko Vinni & Erkki Sutinen & Suria Ellis, 2013. "Hypercontextualized Learning Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(6), pages 821-845, December.
    7. Klaus Eisenack, 2013. "A Climate Change Board Game for Interdisciplinary Communication and Education," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(2-3), pages 328-348, April.
    8. Timothy C. Clapper, 2014. "Situational Interest and Instructional Design," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(2), pages 167-182, April.
    9. Silke Geithner & Daniela Menzel, 2016. "Effectiveness of Learning Through Experience and Reflection in a Project Management Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(2), pages 228-256, April.
    10. David Kaufman & Louise Sauvé & Lise Renaud & Andrew Sixsmith & Ben Mortenson, 2016. "Older Adults’ Digital Gameplay," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(4), pages 465-489, August.
    11. Jonna Koponen & Saara Julkunen, 2015. "Theoretical Principles of Simulation-Based Sales Communication Training," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(2), pages 137-147, April.
    12. Aad Slootmaker & Hans Hummel & Rob Koper, 2017. "Evaluating the Usability of Authoring Environments for Serious Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(4), pages 553-578, August.
    13. Christelle Mariais & Florence Michau & Jean-Philippe Pernin, 2012. "A Description Grid to Support the Design of Learning Role-Play Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 43(1), pages 23-33, February.
    14. Andrew J. Rosman, 2011. "Auditors' going‐concern judgments: rigid, adaptive, or both?," Review of Accounting and Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(1), pages 30-45, February.
    15. Frank Ulrich & Niels Henrik Helms, 2017. "CREATING EVALUATION PROFILES FOR GAMES DESIGNED TO BE FUN: An Interpretive Framework for Serious Game Mechanics," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 48(5), pages 695-714, October.
    16. David Kirschner & J. Patrick Williams, 2014. "Measuring Video Game Engagement Through Gameplay Reviews," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 45(4-5), pages 593-610, August.
    17. Korina Katsaliaki & Navonil Mustafee, 2015. "Edutainment for Sustainable Development," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 46(6), pages 647-672, December.
    18. Jop van den Hoogen & Julia Lo & Sebastiaan Meijer, 2016. "Debriefing Research Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 47(3), pages 368-388, June.
    19. Jong Uk Kim & Rajiv Kishore, 2019. "Do we Fully Understand Information Systems Failure? An Exploratory Study of the Cognitive Schema of IS Professionals," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1385-1419, December.
    20. Marco Greco & Nicola Baldissin & Fabio Nonino, 2013. "An Exploratory Taxonomy of Business Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 44(5), pages 645-682, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:45:y:2014:i:1:p:93-124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.