Line 42: |
Line 42: |
| I think it's great. Three points: | | I think it's great. Three points: |
| 1) Users probably don't want to play many games of the same operation | | 1) Users probably don't want to play many games of the same operation |
− | (e.g. x+y=10), and the teacher probably doesn't want to create a new game
| + | (e.g. x+y=10), and the teacher probably doesn't want to create a new game |
− | for every operation. You should allow users to select a range of
| + | for every operation. You should allow users to select a range of |
− | operations (e.g. numbers up to 12, + - and *) and have the game select a
| + | operations (e.g. numbers up to 12, + - and *) and have the game select a |
− | random operation from the set for each game.
| + | random operation from the set for each game. |
| 2) There are some interesting possibilities for using network collab | | 2) There are some interesting possibilities for using network collab |
− | between users and teachers, but work on that last. To start, users should
| + | between users and teachers, but work on that last. To start, users should |
− | just punch in the operation (or range of operations) when the activity
| + | just punch in the operation (or range of operations) when the activity |
− | launches. Teachers can just tell the students what settings to use, and
| + | launches. Teachers can just tell the students what settings to use, and |
− | then look at the screens to verify.
| + | then look at the screens to verify. |
| 3) The visual structure of the game seems almost identical to Gnome's | | 3) The visual structure of the game seems almost identical to Gnome's |
− | Tetravex. In the spirit of Open Source, you should consider reusing the
| + | Tetravex. In the spirit of Open Source, you should consider reusing the |
− | Tetravex gameboard display code.
| + | Tetravex gameboard display code. |
| --Ben | | --Ben |
| | | |
| *Wade Brainerd (via email) | | *Wade Brainerd (via email) |
| | | |
− | Looks great Mark! Feel free to get in touch with me if you need any
| + | Looks great Mark! Feel free to get in touch with me if you need any |
| help with implementation. | | help with implementation. |
− | I agree with Greg that this would be a good target for PyGame.
| + | I agree with Greg that this would be a good target for PyGame. |
| Regarding the game design, you should consider adding some sense of | | Regarding the game design, you should consider adding some sense of |
| progress, or else players will get tired quickly. Some ideas: | | progress, or else players will get tired quickly. Some ideas: |
− | - Start with two cards, gradually ramp up to 9.
| + | - Start with two cards, gradually ramp up to 9. |
− | - There needs to be a good "snapping" mechanism when dropping, so
| + | - There needs to be a good "snapping" mechanism when dropping, so |
− | users don't get frustrated by trying to line the cards up.
| + | users don't get frustrated by trying to line the cards up. |
− | - Adding the ability to rotate the cards in 90 degree increments would
| + | - Adding the ability to rotate the cards in 90 degree increments would |
− | add to the challenge.
| + | add to the challenge. |
− | - Your notion of customization seems limited to replacing the square
| + | - Your notion of customization seems limited to replacing the square |
− | with a graphic, which might obscure the number. Is this really a good
| + | with a graphic, which might obscure the number. Is this really a good |
− | way to customize it?
| + | way to customize it? |
− | - I agree with Ben that when you start the game you should first
| + | - I agree with Ben that when you start the game you should first |
− | select which types of puzzles (* + - / etc) you want, how many
| + | select which types of puzzles (* + - / etc) you want, how many |
− | squares, whether rotation is allowed. No need for the teacher to be
| + | squares, whether rotation is allowed. No need for the teacher to be |
− | involved.
| + | involved. |
− | - Why limit it to numbers? E.g. how about comparisons like "X is
| + | - Why limit it to numbers? E.g. how about comparisons like "X is |
− | heaver than Y" and on the sides of the cards are things like
| + | heaver than Y" and on the sides of the cards are things like |
− | "elephant", "bacteria", etc. Or "X is newer than Y", etc. This is
| + | "elephant", "bacteria", etc. Or "X is newer than Y", etc. This is |
− | where customization would be cool. Let the teacher define a
| + | where customization would be cool. Let the teacher define a |
− | relationship, and input a series of terms, and define which pairs meet
| + | relationship, and input a series of terms, and define which pairs meet |
− | that relationship. This would be called a "set", and could be
| + | that relationship. This would be called a "set", and could be |
− | exported to the Journal.
| + | exported to the Journal. |
− | Good luck with your project!
| + | Good luck with your project! |
| | | |
| *David Farning (via email) | | *David Farning (via email) |
Line 89: |
Line 89: |
| 1st grade niece played with it for over half an hour. It will be a | | 1st grade niece played with it for over half an hour. It will be a |
| hit on her XO. | | hit on her XO. |
| + | |
| david | | david |
| | | |
| *Greg DeKoenigsberg (via email) | | *Greg DeKoenigsberg (via email) |
| | | |
− | Mark, this looks like a brilliant little activity. Simple, fun gameplay, extensible. Really great.
| + | Mark, this looks like a brilliant little activity. Simple, fun gameplay, extensible. Really great. |
| Some thoughts: | | Some thoughts: |
| 1. I'd love to see this as primarily a PyGame activity, with just enough "Sugar" to run it on Sugar | | 1. I'd love to see this as primarily a PyGame activity, with just enough "Sugar" to run it on Sugar |
− | easily, but also easily available as a Windows or Mac activity. If done well, this is precisely
| + | easily, but also easily available as a Windows or Mac activity. If done well, this is precisely |
− | the sort of activity that could cross over. (Which is, in fact, how I'd like to see most Sugar
| + | the sort of activity that could cross over. (Which is, in fact, how I'd like to see most Sugar |
− | games built.)
| + | games built.) |
| 2. Always think a little bit (but not too much) about assessment. The student knows they're | | 2. Always think a little bit (but not too much) about assessment. The student knows they're |
− | getting better because they are "leveling up". The teacher knows the kid is getting better
| + | getting better because they are "leveling up". The teacher knows the kid is getting better |
− | because... how? Game data is pushed up to a server... somehow? Dunno if anyone is paying
| + | because... how? Game data is pushed up to a server... somehow? Dunno if anyone is paying |
− | attention to this question, but it would be great if there were a simple way to allow teachers to
| + | attention to this question, but it would be great if there were a simple way to allow |
− | aggregate "high score" data, which really doubles as assessment data in cases like this.
| + | teachers to |
− | A great start. I look forward to seeing what it becomes.
| + | aggregate "high score" data, which really doubles as assessment data in cases like this. |
| + | A great start. I look forward to seeing what it becomes. |
| --g | | --g |
| | | |
| ==Comments== | | ==Comments== |