Towards Relevant Research: Collaboration 101

 

 

Description: As increasing numbers of schools and universities create programs for game studies and game research, the gap between applied work and theory becomes more apparent. What are the topic areas and research problems that developers would most like to see explored? What should students and researchers examine, measure, build and ponder in their stead? This panel of veteran developers will discuss both technical and humanistic approaches to games research, weighing the pros and cons of specific approaches. In addition to evaluating current work, the panelists will discus their own pet projects and failed experiments, sharing insights about the areas most likely to benefit from extended, academic research. Discussion will balance "blue sky” thinking about potential projects and collaborations with honest, no frills talk about the realities of “keeping it relevant”.

Idea Takeaway: Concrete feedback about current research and development efforts, as well as long-term thinking about the potential collaboration between academic researchers and commercial development teams. Outline of strategic, high-level goals for research and degree programs, with a focus on low-hanging fruit in various topic areas.

Intended Audience and Prerequisites: This session is intended for students and researchers who are interested in what topic areas are of interest to the game development community, and for developers who are interested in improving the focus and impact of academic games research.

 

 

 

Initial Thoughts/Background

 

At the Education Summits and such, people ask “Why aren’t developers using more research work to their advantage?” or “Why aren’t researchers doing work that’s more relevant to games and game production?”… Depending, of course, on which camp they are in.

 

One developer suggested that it’s “a combination of ignorance, inertia, and some very real problems to solve”. That seems true of… just about everything that doesn’t get done. How can we get a clearer idea of what’s actually happening, and make some concrete steps towards future collaboration?

 

Here’s a short list of some broad topics we might consider:

 

 

 

 

Technical Research

 

Tech R&D is a broad and popular topic – covers things like (but not limited to):

 

§  QA and usability testing

§  NPC Behavior work

§  Parallel processing techniques

§  Pipeline complexity management

§  Tuning/design tools

§  Graphics research (i.e. Real Time Global Illumination)

 

However, there isn’t a lot of communication about what’s being done. Researchers are generally unaware of what goes on in a typical development houses; Developers don’t often know about current research (graphics is the big exception here). Is this from want of interest, lack of time… flat-out secrecy?

 

     Questions:

 

§  Why isn't there more visibility on both sides of what the other is doing?

§  What things can occur more easily in corporate space?  In academic space?

§  What areas of research are being explored in academia?  What areas would we like to see?

§  Have you worked with academia on tech research?  Was it successful?  Was it worth it?

§          How can we "outsource" research areas to academia?  Is it expensive?

 

 

 

 

 

Game Programs

 

Clearly, games are “hot” in academia:

 

§  Southern Methodist University’s new Guildhall program plans to graduate 32 students from its first year (December 2004) - eventually graduating 100 students a semester (!!). Tuition is $37,000 a year. This program, along with Digipen, Full Sail, the Art Institutes and Savannah College of Art and Design all advertise heavily in Game Developer and on Gamasutra.

 

§  CMU, MIT, Georgia Tech and Northwestern University are all developing programs – some (like CMU) focus on a vocational approach, delivering Masters degrees and working with EA to establish concrete placement commitments – while others (Like Georgia Tech and Northwestern) focus more on the interdisciplinary arts and sciences angle.   

 

      General Questions:

 

§  Which is better, a specialized game school (Full Sail 15-month program) or a broad education (4-year institution)?  What are their benefits/pitfalls?

§  Do they seem to be going in a good direction in general?  Are they creating good future game industry employees?  How could they do it better?

§  Devs: Have you worked with any games programs, or hired anyone from a game program?  How did it go? Are game programs producing people you would hire?

§  Acad: Have you worked closely with any developers? How did it go? Who would you like to hire, ideally, from the industry? What kinds of requirements are there for teaching given a (mostly) professional background?

 

     From Academic Summits

 

§  What can academics do that industry will pay money for? Anything?

§  What makes a good game studies program?  To what extent should it be focused on tech?

§  How closely should a school curriculum be tied to commercial tools and dev practices?

§  How are we going to teach this stuff?  Where are the good books?  Who's going to teach it?

§  Is Ludology/Narratology relevant to developers?  How can we improve this critical vocabulary?  How can we encourage devs to be more active in these conferences?

§  How can we encourage devs to go to non-industry conferences?  Which conferences are relevant?

 

 

 

 

 

Students

 

A lot of the potential for progress in academia rests with people just now graduating from undergraduate, masters and PhD programs.

 

But many game students are "newbies" – unaware of the constraints of real development and full of novice ideas about games. While these students are generally DIY (you have to be pretty creative to study games within most schools), apprenticing to the community is difficult, expensive, time consuming. A lot of them are still waiting/looking for a connection.

 

Here's a tiny sample of the students in the Game Studies group on Orkut:

 

·      One student is in Philosophy, (barely) getting by on government funding (European) and studying “Game Definitions”...

 

·      Another was in Psychology, but moved to CS to be able to do research on Women in Games. She writes soap scripts to pay the rent (in Amsterdam)…

 

·      One member (an instructor at Art Institutes California San Diego) is applying for an assistant professorship and hoping to explore the connection between film and games. In here copious spare time, she directs the Women in Game Development Virtual Development Team…

 

§  Another, who interned at NYU (and has an MFA) is looking to complete a PhD in Game studies at Brown. But he's scrounging for funding. It looks like part will come from the English Department, part from a joint academic/arts program between Brown and RISD…

 

§  I will graduate with a PhD in Computer Science and AI. My funding, for the most part, came from TAships and fellowships in CS. My advisor could justify some of my funding as part of the robotics research at NWU. From what I can tell, this is rare.

 

      Questions:

 

§  What kinds of roles are there in your company for students?  Interns?  Understudies?

§  How can we get students the kind of data/code/artifacts they would need to do relevant, pointed work?

§  What do we recommend for students seeking to work in the game industry? How about just partnerships/information?

§          Is it valuable for someone to study games in school?  Why? Is passion about games more or less important?
 

 

 

 

Indie Dev

 

There’s been lots of talk about how “risky” and “creative” or “innovative” work is not supported by the current publishing model.  How can the academy support innovative/creative research that’s relevant to commercial games?

 

      Questions:

 

§  Is academia the place for disgruntled developers to teach?

§  How can developers help academia explore new and innovative game design concepts?

                            

 

 

 

Future Developments:

§  What are your forward-looking thoughts about where we go from here, what we'd like to ideally see, etc?