What is the difference between a game and a simulation?
I am often asked "what is the difference between a game and a simulation?" I introduced a HIVE framework to suggest that Virtual Worlds, Games, and Simulations were nested concepts, better understood as discrete parts of a continuum than either as synonymous or totally separate.
The difference between game and sim is in both the media itself and the attitude and goal of the player engaging it.
Allow me to go a bit deeper. One useful analogy for a virtual world is the synthetic world of a swimming pool. So I created this chart of how the various activities one can do in a pool line up with both games and simulations.
As always, I welcome your feedback.
is the award-winning textbook to soft-skills simulation genres, widely considered as the indstry standard reference for corporations, academics, and militaries.
is an award-winning, detailed, first person case study of the creation of Virtual Leader, a concept car for the future of education that has since been proven to develop Leadership as determined by rigorous outside research, and awarded a patent and the title "The Best Online Training Product of the Year." 
5 comment(s):
After reading your description, is it correct to say that serious games do not lead to mastery?
Personally, I think games are a wonderful way of practicing concepts, which in turn can lead to mastery. Games can be especially useful when the permutations and combinations of behaviors expected from learners is too large for educational simulation. For example, the game - Capitalist - is a good example of a serious game that can lead to mastery.
Oh and I forgot mention..."I can't wait to read your new book!"
Thanks!
I believe that Serious Games do not predictably lead to an easily transferable mastery, and instead raise some key issues and increase comfort level in and awareness of a subject.
Having said that, some people (let's say one percent) will play World of Warcraft and gain transferable professional value in managing virtual teams. Further, the notion of playing around with content may be critical. How many great scientists gained key insights from "screwing around" with an old lawnmower engine in their backyard.
What about boredom, engagement, and fun as categories in your chart?
I believe each of the layers have their own engagement and boredom. Each layer should push one forward. So a game might be engaging if one is at the general interest level, but frustrating and boring if one wants some necessary skills.
Post a Comment