Uppsala - Stanford || Cross-Cultural Rhetoric Video Conference || November 29, 2011
Activity: Exchange of International Perspectives on Serious Gaming
I . Small Group Activities (in small group virtual rooms)
Time: 18:05-19:05 / 9:05-10:05am (60 Minutes)
Activity 1: Getting to Know Everyone in the Group (10 minutes)
Everyone introduce himself/herself. Describe your favorite game (video game, board game,
playground game, etc. – show an image, game piece, or other game-related artifact if you
brought one with you.) Talk briefly about video game culture in both countries. Ask
questions about each other’s universities, school traditions, or country culture.
Activity 2: Group Analysis of Serious Games (25 minutes)
Instructions: In your globally-distributed team, rhetorically analyze the different games that were assigned to
your group (note – all the games are linked through the Workshop page at
http://ccr.stanford.edu/workshops/2011.11.29/). As you exchange perspectives, use the focusing questions
below to guide your discussion.

What argument does the game make through its design and gameplay?

Who is the author of the game? Alternately, what company or organization sponsors it? How does
knowing the author/sponsor influence your understanding of the game’s argument and cultural
assumptions?

Who is the intended audience of the game? How can you tell? For instance, through the gameplay
(i.e., simplicity or complexity of game design)? Through the graphic design?

What type of game is it? For instance:
 A shooter game (which involves shooting weapons at targets)?
 A role-playing game (which asks the player to take on a specific identity and then
engage in a “story” as that character)?
 A strategy game (which asks the gamer to think through multiple options and strategize
during gameplay)?
 A simulation game (where the gamer explores a simulated scenario or event)?
A game might contain one or more of these elements. How do these design choices affect and/or
determine the argument that the game makes?

To what extent is the game driven by pathos (trying to produce an emotional connection with the
audience)? By ethos (working through appeals to authority or credibility)? By logos (trying to
appeal through facts and reason)? How does the kairos of the game factor into the success of its
argument?
Activity 3: Collaborative Creation of a Serious Game (25 minutes)
Instructions: Having analyzed several serious games on your group’s theme, use the collaborative
whiteboard to sketch out a plan for your own “Serious Game” on this same topic. You will be showing this
whiteboard to the rest of the groups during final presentations, so please include at least some of the
following information on it.
1. Your group theme (Global Conflict, the Environment, Human Rights, etc. – check the Preparation
Sheet if you can’t remember your group’s theme)
2. The name of your game
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The goal of your game (what do you want players to learn by playing it?)
The audience for your game
Type of game (shooter, mini-game, role playing game, etc.)
A brief description of gameplay
Any other details (about character design, setting, levels, etc.) that might be of interest
Concept art/sketches or storyboards of the game, setting, or characters (images can be hand-drawn or
you can copy images you find online)
Pick one person who will be the spokesperson for your group during the presentations at the end of the video
conference. Be sure to save your whiteboard and also to export it as a jpg to your desktop when you are
done.
IV. Reporting Back through Presentation of Collaborative Learning (in virtual room A)
Time: 19.10-19.30 / 10:10-10:30 (20 minutes)
Each group will have 3 minutes to describe its game to the rest of the Stanford and Orebro students using the
whiteboard as multimedia support. We will move in order from Group A to E.
V. After the Video Conference: Reflection
Write a 100 word comment to the post about our video conference at
http://crossculturalrhetoric.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/uppsala-stanford-international-perspectives-onserious-games/ . In your comment, briefly describe the game you designed. In addition, address at least
some of the following questions:



What were your group’s observations about the specific games that you looked at?
What was most memorable about the video conference?
What did you learn about rhetoric, communication, and gaming across cultures?
Keep in touch with each other on Facebook!
** Thank you for your active participation! We hope you enjoyed this opportunity for speaking and writing
with real audiences across the globe.**