Kids Are Learning History From Video Games Now (theatlantic.com) 84
More students are being exposed to historical narratives through game play -- but what exactly are they being taught? From a report: Analyzing video games is particularly difficult for two reasons. First, their influence is hard to track: Teachers may not even notice that the student asking why the Ottomans didn't colonize America or what happened to Burgundy may have a view of history that was molded by Paradox games. "The student in your class that knows what Prussia is is the student that played Europa Universalis IV," Devereaux said. And second, unlike other cultural mediums, "games are about systems; they're about the mechanics," Devereaux told me. Those systems and mechanics are how video games can "teach" people history. The presence of such mechanics, though, does not mean that players will necessarily understand them. "The major challenge is getting players to recognize and think explicitly about these systems," Marion Kruse, an assistant professor of classics at the University of Cincinnati and a dedicated gamer, told me.
In my experience, Europa Universalis is particularly effective at teaching users about its systems. Playing in Spain in Europa Universalis, you'll learn the power of a good marriage when you see that Spain is actually the result of a personal union between the crowns of Castile and Aragon. If you're unlucky enough to choose a country in the Balkans, you will quickly understand the full force of the Ottoman invasions of Europe. Invade the Soviet Union in Hearts of Iron, Paradox's Second World War simulator, and you'll be reminded why Napoleon and Hitler both failed to subdue Russia: "General Frost." The processes the player engages with teach them claims about how the world works -- what The Atlantic's Ian Bogost has called "procedural rhetoric."
Paradox's titles don't take a single view of history, but each game does provide a framework for understanding a particular historical period, buoyed by a number of procedural claims. Take Europa Universalis. The game essentially simulates the story of Europe's rise from a relative backwater to a continent that dominated the world. That means that no matter what exact course the game takes, it usually results in the consolidation of large, powerful, centralized states in Europe and their rise to global primacy. The game uses a mechanic of "institutions," such as the printing press and the Enlightenment, which appear in a preset order at 50-year intervals, almost always in Europe, before slowly spreading around the world. Without these institutions, new technologies can be adopted only at much greater cost, meaning that over the centuries Europe slowly pulls ahead of the rest of the world technologically. The player is taught that what made Europe exceptional was the adoption of these institutions, which allowed technological growth to flourish and thereby gave European countries the advantage they used to dominate the world.
In my experience, Europa Universalis is particularly effective at teaching users about its systems. Playing in Spain in Europa Universalis, you'll learn the power of a good marriage when you see that Spain is actually the result of a personal union between the crowns of Castile and Aragon. If you're unlucky enough to choose a country in the Balkans, you will quickly understand the full force of the Ottoman invasions of Europe. Invade the Soviet Union in Hearts of Iron, Paradox's Second World War simulator, and you'll be reminded why Napoleon and Hitler both failed to subdue Russia: "General Frost." The processes the player engages with teach them claims about how the world works -- what The Atlantic's Ian Bogost has called "procedural rhetoric."
Paradox's titles don't take a single view of history, but each game does provide a framework for understanding a particular historical period, buoyed by a number of procedural claims. Take Europa Universalis. The game essentially simulates the story of Europe's rise from a relative backwater to a continent that dominated the world. That means that no matter what exact course the game takes, it usually results in the consolidation of large, powerful, centralized states in Europe and their rise to global primacy. The game uses a mechanic of "institutions," such as the printing press and the Enlightenment, which appear in a preset order at 50-year intervals, almost always in Europe, before slowly spreading around the world. Without these institutions, new technologies can be adopted only at much greater cost, meaning that over the centuries Europe slowly pulls ahead of the rest of the world technologically. The player is taught that what made Europe exceptional was the adoption of these institutions, which allowed technological growth to flourish and thereby gave European countries the advantage they used to dominate the world.
Re: (Score:2)
The Pilgrims, with buckles on their hats, invited the Indians over for a big feast to give thanks for surviving their first year. Let me cut out turkeys in the shape of my hand print to celebrate!
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, American children learn a silly caricature of the first Thanksgiving, but they also learn the important historical lesson that American settlers were really nice to the natives.
Re: (Score:2)
-those that ignore history are doomed to um, learn it the hard way.
Re: (Score:3)
If your country is 1000s of years old, well, why aren't you doing any better? The jokes on you.
Geography, resources and historical happenstance. Oceans, lack of viable competition, guns/germs/steel. WWII.
I'm American but I know American exceptionalism is a myth. The land and circumstances are exceptional, the Americans not so much, just lucky mostly. And that lesson is one you can learn from video games, or even board games. To wit, starting position matters.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Doing any better at what, exactly [youtu.be]?
Re: (Score:2)
Only if one believes that America is a uniform group instead of a melting pot. Some more than others cherish their history.
Re: (Score:2)
Only if one believes that America is a uniform group instead of a melting pot.
Maybe I don't understand your analogy, but a melting pot results in uniformity.
You can try it yourself with a box of crayons.
Re: (Score:2)
You certainly did not learn History from School (Score:2)
In Australia at least, the history taught is dreadful. All about writing essays about, say the Incas, nothing about content that tells them about the modern world.
Most kids would know that there were two world wars that involved Germany, and something about the holocaust, but nothing about the rise of Hitler in a western country which is the really important thing. Cold war, Vietnam, Iraq, China? Forget it. But they do learn how to format a citation properly.
Re: You certainly did not learn History from Schoo (Score:1)
Well, maybe if, like you obviously, you went to the Tiny Town First Farm Skool of Jebus.
The rest of us got a pretty rounded education covering topics denied to most Americans, such as Comparative Religious Studies and Critical Thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
No, my kids go to good schools.
They may indeed learn about Critical Thinking (whatever that really means), along with general research skills. Not much religion.
But very little actual history.
And recent movies are awful, in that they just make up whatever history they think will help the plot. Usually the real events are actually far more interesting.
Is it healthy to obsess about history? (Score:2)
The Watchmen TV show got one thing right. Nostalgia is the most dangerous drug...also South Park's memberberries also handled the subject well. When you fail in
Re: (Score:2)
I prioritize what I value...and the past is not something I value. I have no desire to spend more time thinking about it than it is useful to do so. I wish my pre-college education was less focused on easy-to-teach subjects like history and the subjects I could have actually used.
The important thing to learn from history class is not what happened when and why and who and how etc etc. You can look that shit up and if you actually have reason to use it then you'll retain it. The important thing to learn is that the future is shaped by the past, through the present — in short, that actions have lasting and manifold consequences. This is the kind of thing that not only sounds obvious but is obvious, but the nature of potential consequences is not, nor is the potential extent.
That
Re: (Score:2)
It is a bit more than that. History never repeats itself but it often rhymes. For example, a knowledge of Vietnam and the Soviets in Afghanistan should have had some influence over our policy there. But that past simply does not exist for most people.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, someone needs to be familiar with history, and if it's not decision makers, they need to be consulting them. But the average person only needs to be generally aware of history, and then also aware of their own familiarity with it or lack thereof, which is the real rub when everyone thinks they know everything. I for one know I know dick about history, so when I want historical context I go a'googlin' for articles written by people who know more than I do. Isn't that how knowledge is supposed to work?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, it is the voters that are the ultimate decision makers, so they are the ones that need to know.
We are, for example, not helping the Ukrainians because Biden et. al. want to go out on a limb to do so, but rather because the Ukrainian won the social media wars. It would be political suicide for any government to ignore them. Popular opinion is very important.
Re: (Score:2)
Any empirical data to back that up against the common notion that knowing the about the past does as well serve as a cautionary tale?
Do you think it's a ok to ban books on events like the Holocaust or Slavery in the US? After all, according to your reasoning, nothing good can come out of it.
A thought experiment: for example take a look at the situation between Ukraine and Russia.
Now if Russia
Nostalgia is the deadliest drug (Score:2)
Do you think it's a ok to ban books on events like the Holocaust or Slavery in the US? After all, according to your reasoning, nothing good can come out of it.
Focus on comprehension more the condescension. I explicitly stated you need to learn about the history, not dwell in it. If you think that means ban books on slavery, that says more about you...either you really lack reading comprehension or you're itching for a reason to accuse people of banning books on the Holocaust or slavery. If you grew up in the USA, like I did, there was a ton of history class...far less on subjects I actually use. I think 1-2h a day for 12 years was a bit much, especially sinc
Re: (Score:2)
The conventional wisdom would be that nostalgia is caused by too little knowledge about history or a heavily skewed representation where only the seemingly nice parts are being taught while all the ugly parts are omitted.
No, I did not grow up in the US. I partially grew up in Germany. Wasn't born there though. Originally I am from Romania which at that time under Ceausescu had a different (Neo-Stalin-ish) approach to teaching hist
Oregon Trail, anyone? (Score:2)
This isn't exactly new. I mean, who here hasn't died of dysentery at least a few times?
Re: (Score:2)
Covid-19 simulator.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Red Alert 1-3
Re: (Score:2)
I really didn't know an army of robosoliders and laser tanks under the command of Corporal Hicks fighting mutated monsters led by a bald discount Rasputin was even possible to skew as US-centric propaganda, but today on the internet I learned.
Oh, you mean the original where it was a multinational NATO-style effort against a global terrorist organization that had run rampant murdering its way across Africa and central Europe? Or C&C RA, where it was a multinational NATO effort against a Soviet Union / N
I'm sure the CCP is working this. (Score:2)
They already have outsized influence in gaming, because money > * [theguardian.com].
I learned more about geography from Paradox (Score:2)
But I was always the history-obsessed kid. I was trying to correct them in the forums. Sometimes they took my suggestions in the next game (CK2 has Barons!), but not always ("Works as Designed" how I hate that phrase).
In terms of what happened, EU2 was actually better at this than EU3/4 because EU2 had events that would force history onto the game. You'd actually get the event chain that bent the cross in the Holy Crown of Hungary whether game conditions warranted it or not. EU3/4 are better at explaining h
Re: (Score:2)
This thing is EU4 so moddable [gamerant.com] that a lot of vanilla game problems go away.
A bit simplistic view of history (Score:2)
Invade the Soviet Union in Hearts of Iron, Paradox's Second World War simulator, and you'll be reminded why Napoleon and Hitler both failed to subdue Russia: "General Frost."
While weather played a significant role, there were other factors that resulted in Operation Barbarossa's failure. Reducing history to a few simple truths isn't learning it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but if you're trying to find common ground between the failures of two different invasions across different eras by two different countries, then you have little choice but to reduce history to those few simple truths, e.g. don't try to conquer territory much bigger than yours, unless it's largely unoccupied (the Russian conquest of the Siberia) or populated by people at a much lower stage of economic and technological development (the European conquest of the Americas).
While I agree in part, you could add failure to properly plan and resource the invasion and strategic decision making to the list of common factors. Napoleon reached Moscow in September, and didn't face cold weather until the retreat, and by then he had lost some 3/4 of his army. So saying "General Frost" paints a poor picture of what actually happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but if you're trying to find common ground between the failures of two different invasions across different eras by two different countries, then you have little choice but to reduce history to those few simple truths, e.g. don't try to conquer territory much bigger than yours, unless it's largely unoccupied (the Russian conquest of the Siberia) or populated by people at a much lower stage of economic and technological development (the European conquest of the Americas).
While I agree in part, you could add failure to properly plan and resource the invasion and strategic decision making to the list of common factors. Napoleon reached Moscow in September, and didn't face cold weather until the retreat, and by then he had lost some 3/4 of his army. So saying "General Frost" paints a poor picture of what actually happened.
In the case of Germany, the Wehrmacht, despite what people keep hearing, did reach almost all their goals on their projected timeline. In some cases they were ahead of schedule. The key issue, beyond everything else, was Hitler's meddling. Army Group Center was on track to go after Moscow, but Hitler overruled his generals and diverted most of the group's strength to the south to take out the Russian armies there (which, in a twist of historical irony, were located in and around Ukraine). Had he continu
Re: (Score:2)
Hitler's Panzers East [amazon.com] is a great book which outlines Germany's dash to take Russia out of the war, how the plan took place, what worked, what didn't, how they adapted and, most importantly lays to rest the notion Germany didn't beat Russia. They did. Right up until Hitler got involved.
In addition, Hitler demanded when planning Operation Barborossa not to determine that an invasion was not recommended and may not succeed. Powerful leaders an take a country down a path of destruction based on their own belief they are always correct.
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, the Russians are having trouble with frostbite while going into Ukraine.
Re: (Score:2)
While weather played a significant role, there were other factors that resulted in Operation Barbarossa's failure. Reducing history to a few simple truths isn't learning it.
Yes and that's where game play comes in. It's up to the players to craft an Operation Barbarossa that works, the game just gives the player the environment that it happened in.
It would make for a pretty boring game if the player were forced into absolute historic realism as you seem to be suggesting.
Re: (Score:2)
While weather played a significant role, there were other factors that resulted in Operation Barbarossa's failure. Reducing history to a few simple truths isn't learning it.
Yes and that's where game play comes in. It's up to the players to craft an Operation Barbarossa that works, the game just gives the player the environment that it happened in.
It would make for a pretty boring game if the player were forced into absolute historic realism as you seem to be suggesting.
You missed my point. I agree that would be a boring game, which is why i did not say a game should be historically accurate. My point was that games are not necessarily good teachers of history because they must pick a few things and adjust others to make the game interesting and playable. As a result, many nuances and other factors are missed and a distorted view of what actually is the historical facts ensues.
Re: (Score:2)
As a result, many nuances and other factors are missed and a distorted view of what actually is the historical facts ensues.
One of the nice things about Paradox games is that they do incorporate a lot of nuance in their games. Sure, you'll always have qualities that are abstract in a game but Europa Universalis or Hearts of Iron are much more of a "history simulator" then any of the Civ games ever were. I know in playing Europa Universalis 2 as a kid I was able to fill in modest amounts of the glaring omissions in global history from my high school education.
Re: (Score:2)
As a result, many nuances and other factors are missed and a distorted view of what actually is the historical facts ensues.
One of the nice things about Paradox games is that they do incorporate a lot of nuance in their games. Sure, you'll always have qualities that are abstract in a game but Europa Universalis or Hearts of Iron are much more of a "history simulator" then any of the Civ games ever were. I know in playing Europa Universalis 2 as a kid I was able to fill in modest amounts of the glaring omissions in global history from my high school education.
No doubt some are better than the other, and can be a gateway to wanting to learn more. That's the upside. I was lucky to have a history teacher taht encouraged us to learn about all sides of a story to better understand what happened and why. I blame hm for my obsession with history.
Weirdness of the West (Score:3)
Stay away from Civ6 (Score:2)
I got nuked by Ghandi.
Re: (Score:2)
Our words are backed by nuclear weapons!
Re: (Score:2)
How do so many people manage to misspell Gandhi when it's spelled correctly in all the Civ games?
Now? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Civ in particular could do a much better job. Though you learn some stuff from it that is genuinely applicable, and/or accurate, a lot of it is just bananas. It would be nice to have a game series like Civ, but more realistic in general. The real genius of the Civ series is what they do and don't have you manage, which keeps the game playable. But the hexes (or squares) and movement points and just how many people does that unit represent anyway? It's strange because some things work much like they do in re
Re: (Score:2)
If you mean a "better job" in being a simulation then there is room for improvement if that was the way the series wanted to move. Civilization is okay as a simulation but a lot of the fun derives from the game loops which may not play too nicely with history.
As one of Sid's rules goes, "Do your research after the game is done." [gamedeveloper.com]
Granted, the series today is vast enough that researching is going on during all stages of development. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Civilization taught me that a well-drilled phalanx unit can destroy a battleship. If it had been created 50 years earlier, the world might be a much different place.
Re: (Score:2)
Civilization taught me that a well-drilled phalanx unit can destroy a battleship.
Which to be fair is absolutely true, if they can get on board. Perhaps the real lesson was: use your battleships to bombard coastal positions, don't bring them into dock and engage the enemy in hand to hand combat. Or, more generally, if you use your forces unwisely you may lose them.
It's less clear how the same phalanx unit could bring down a stealth bomber though - clearly their ability to throw spears far exceeds mine.
Kids were learning history from 8-bit PCs (Score:1)
Commodore 64, Apple II-series, and many more computers and dedicated gaming consoles of the 8-bit era had games that taught history.
Some of them even taught history accurately - well, as accurate as school textbooks anyways.
This isn't exactly new (Score:3)
I am one of the original developers of Age of Empires 1 & 2 back in the late 1990s.
Ensemble Studios would get a lot of fan mail, and among them were many letters from people who told us that playing the game inspired them to learn more about the actual history behind and around the civilizations and battles referenced in our games.
It quickly taught us to always be clear and up front that "this is just a game, optimized for fun and not accuracy, but if you are interested we encourage you to consult your library and schools to learn more about the people and events.. (blah blah. something like that..)"
So it wouldn't surprise me if some people get the idea that events as portrayed in a video game actually reflect the real history (falsely or incompletely)
Re: (Score:2)
You can learn a lot from modern games like Grand Turismo, too [penny-arcade.com]. Glad things have become more accurate. /s
Re: (Score:2)
Ha, I havent read PA in over a decade. As happy as it makes me that they're still around what's with the art style now? Gabe's face looks like a squirrel's and their heads are over 50% hair.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's because Gabe actually feels ugly in real life, so that's how he draws himself.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, I met both of them once at an E3 years ago and actually got to chat with them for several minutes about "the new Gameboy Advanced", they mistook me for one of the Mega Tokyo guys as I was wearing a shirt by them (who wears their own shirt?) and my hair was styled in a similar fashion to one of the comic's versions of themselves. Neither of them are going to win a male modeling competition but the first thing that came to mind when I met "Gabe" was not squirrel.
"Tycho" at least seemed like a real nice gu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, still seems funny at least.
Europa is a different beast (Score:2)
Relating Age of Empires to Europa Universalis in this context is like relating Monopoly to modern strategy board games. You're just not going to get much of an idea of what the former is from the prior as the complexity levels are so wildly different between the two.
In other words, AOE is pretty much like any other RTS of its era (although well done), just skinned for a historic context. Europa goes one hell of a lot deeper than that.
Put Deux Ex in civics class. (Score:2)
n/t
Re: (Score:2)
A biological organism is a question asked by nature, and answered by death.
You are a different kind of question, with a different kind of answer.
My views of history and culture (Score:2)
And for the past 35 years, world events have verified that the early Civ games were spot-frikkin-on in a lot of ways. Its why I was never afraid of Russia winning the cold war. It’s also why I have no fear that China will be the next hyperpower. Communisms and despotisms win over the republics and democracies? Not a chance. Too many unhappy and unproductive citizens in the long run.
Now, the later Civ games kinda screwed that up - they aband
Re: (Score:2)
The first Civilization game was released at the end of the fall of the Soviet Union and the Cold War, so yeah, you wouldn't have been too concerned about Russia winning with or without it. But Communism was waaaay overpowered, certainly in II, can't really remember 1 with real clarity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The best there is, is SMAC. Brian Reynolds has majors in history an philosophy and it shows. As one reviewer on YouTube said "a single of the quotes or short films when you discover tech or build a special project contains more meaning than other whole games" Fully agreed. Sometimes I listen to these in audio only on my music player....more than one hour of statements each of which deserves a thesis....
Introduce the 'World History Replay' in class (Score:1)
I was always amazed by the brief 'replay' that was displayed in Civ1, after losing yet another game.
This view of all civilisations that were in power _at the same time_, each on their own continent,
was something that I never received in history class at school.
Long after Civ1, this same idea was implemented with painstaking effort into https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
If only the history teachers would devote 20 minutes of class time to THAT video !
Pfft. (Score:2)
Kids learning History? (Score:2)
So? Adults are learning history... (Score:2)
Adults "relearn" history from Faux News and whatever social groupthink gives them dopamine... and Americans never learned much to begin with.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1) it's pretty bad to pay for faux news. but free propaganda isn't a big step up.
2) They are truthful; used to be more balanced but what idiots consider balanced is part of the problem today. They don't give time for liars or failures in pursuit of mindless "balance" like the mainstream media does today. The crackpot shouldn't even get time next to the scientist to begin with. I would say their shift since the 90s is less about them and more about the increased fanaticism on "the other side." PR people w
Define history (Score:2)
Ceaser 3 taught me about romans, in 1999 (Score:2)
"Now" ?! Never heard of "Oregon Trail" from 1971 ? (Score:1)
Those who ignore the past are doomed to write nonsense headlines.
https://classicreload.com/oreg... [classicreload.com]
Assassin's Creed (Score:2)
If anyone has ever played Assassin's Creed 2, they'll know that the game has a ton of historical references and almost every other landmark has pages upon pages of text that tells you about the historical significance of the building. At the same time, the game is very loosely integrating itself with historical events which makes it really interesting. It's not as cut and dry like reading facts out of a book but you kind of part take part as a lost 3rd party that get to witness some of these historical even
meh...sort of true (Score:2)
First, even getting kids interested in history or (Egad!) picking up a book is a major accomplishment.
So the fundamental impact of these sorts of games is positive - as long as you're not one of those people who insist that history is an irrelevant litany of the acts of dead white men or some other nonsense. Because it's certainly a counter-narrative to that, and if your intent is indoctrination, then any potential refutation of your dogma would naturally be a problem for you.
But yes, absolutely, a game li
Re: (Score:2)
First, even getting kids interested in history or (Egad!) picking up a book is a major accomplishment.
So the fundamental impact of these sorts of games is positive - as long as you're not one of those people who insist that history is an irrelevant litany of the acts of dead white men or some other nonsense. Because it's certainly a counter-narrative to that, and if your intent is indoctrination, then any potential refutation of your dogma would naturally be a problem for you.
But yes, absolutely, a game like these absolutely begs a host of questions by delivering mechanisms designed according to their developer's assumptions. ANY discussion of history bears the weight of its author's biases, whether that is Hobbesian mechanisms, or the significance of the absence/suppression of women from East Asian philosophies.
Part of understanding history always must be source analysis. A wise teacher would use that as an educational springboard to discuss sources, assumptions, and the necessity of both reading critically AND deliberately including diverse viewpoints in one's research and conclusions.
Certainly it's at least as valid as stupid invented divisivist nonsense like the 1619 project.
I agree, Another aspect is that the biggest problem is getting the learner to engage with the material. Games help to solidify that information. My son knows the location of every major European city, but knows nothing about US Geography. That's based on the Paradox games he has played. History is a part of these games, but not the only component. The games drive curiosity, but the actual learning has to be left to the student. In the end you have to trust that the player understands that games are not acc
West of Loathing (Score:2)
C-64 - Battle through time (Score:1)
Hmm. What about VFK? (Score:1)