Science is a game
Game On is a temporary exhibition at the Science Museum looking at the technologies that have changed gaming over the decades. It looks at the earliest games, different game types (action, simulation and puzzle games), game soundtracks, games associated with films and many other aspects of gaming. Visitors to the exhibition get the chance to play a wide variety of games, from pong to the Nintendo Wii.
Obviously getting to play a lot of games is immense fun. It's not just the game's ability to distract but there is a nostalgic attraction to some of the older games, which heightens the experience. However, does such an exhibition really belong in a science museum?
A science museum's remit surely should be to educate, inform and interest the public in scientific issues and also more generally in science and technology. Game On is really a history of games. It looks at how new technologies impact on how games are played - the Internet's influence on multiplayer games for example - but does not examine how these technologies work. And who would pay attention to any explanation while trying to collect all the coins or win the race? Here the Science Museum fundamentally fails its remit.
The exhibition does raise some questions. How well do play and science education mix? For example, how well can a game convey a scientific principle? Is it justifiable to have an educational 'loss leader', an exhibition which has a rather a tenuous link to the remit of the museum but attracts a lot of people who may explore other parts of the museum which deal more directly with science? I have my doubts.
3 comments:
"nostalgic attraction to some of the older games"
... the Science Museum is an institution for the history of technology (you could argue that is actually it's main role). Surely you could argue that playing old computer games is part of that - experiencing pixellated graphics for example?
I feel that the artefacts in a science museum should teach you something about the science involved or even the scientific discoveries neccessary for the technology and not just be there for us to look at and go "Wow, look how much things have changed".
fair enough, as long as you are aware that your idea of what a science museum "should teach" isn't the same as the definition(s) the museum itself always uses.
I'd like to know why you say it's "just" going "Wow, look how much things have changed" - the "just" sounds pejorative. Are you suggesting history is boring/ pointless then?
If you were writing an essay on this topic I'd also like to know why you think your idea of a science museum is better than the one expressed in game on. You are completely justified in that opinion, and you're not alone in holding it, but you would need to show your thinking.
Post a Comment