Well, maybe you could go into more detail on what you consider rudimentary. Maybe it's sufficient, maybe not. To me, at a rudimentary level, you should at least be able to create a simple game yourself right? You should be able to create a tic tac toe game or a pong game.

But this probably won't be enough to keep your students interested. The next level up would be creating basic types of games such as space shooters (like Galaga) and platformers (like Mario). Or maybe even a simple turn-based rpg.

If you can teach students up to this level, then you'll have given them enough learning for their own minds to come up with novel games. But if you don't understand how to do this yourself and expect your students to somehow learn this on their own, then that would be doing them a disservice.

Well, maybe you could go into more detail on what you consider rudimentary. Maybe it's sufficient, maybe not. To me, at a rudimentary level, you should at least be able to create a simple game yourself right? You should be able to create a tic tac toe game or a pong game.

But this probably won't be enough to keep your students interested. The next level up would be creating basic types of games such as space shooters (like Galaga) and platformers (like Mario). Or maybe even a simple turn-based rpg.

If you can teach students up to this level, then you'll have given them enough learning for their own minds to come up with novel games. But if you don't understand how to do this yourself and expect your students to somehow learn this on their own, then that would be doing them a disservice.

I think I'm going for option 2. Option one would qualify as cheesy.

It seems what you are describing is a completely different course. I'll put it bluntly: I want to design a course where kids MAKE video games. Because time is limited (it will be a one-year course with no pre-requisite- to start), I will cover general aspects of game design, then teach software, then have the kids make the video games. Again, enough user-friendly programs and high school classes in game DEVELOPMENT (happy? ) exist that this is reasonable. It will be a matter of my selecting how in-depth to go

Absolutely. What I'm getting from others' posts in this thread, and what I tried to express in my previous post, is that there will be a fairly low ceiling on the maximum depth that most students will be able to reach in a course like the one you have been describing. Your goals as you've outlined them seem to be rather on the optimistic side, at least at the start of the thread, but have become somewhat less so with each new page. Not impossible, not necessarily unreasonable, but optimistic; particularly when wanting the course to emphasize both creative freedom for your students at the same time as emphasizing a complete video game within a year or semester.

It's no fault of yours, but we see dozens and dozens of people coming to these forums every year who insist that making video games just has to be easy and fast, especially with all the modern software that exists. They refuse to hear that they could even maybe be slightly wrong in their assessments. I was one of them, once. And we see how far they go, the obstacles they encounter, projects they complete (if any), and so on. Never, ever, ever have I seen someone overestimate or even accurately assess what's required to make the game they are imagining.

Like I said, I have no idea. I just want it to be as cool as it can be within the realm of learnable-do-able.

Cool can mean very different things to different people. I'd take complex game mechanics and interesting choices with terrible graphics any day over pretty, simple, and linear. Lots of people would choose in the other direction. Neither is wrong, but one class may not cover both equally well at the same time. Are there any of the student projects you've linked to that especially stand out as examples of what you'd like your students to be able to create by the end of the class?

Good point. I need to look at finished student work. That seems to be the piece missing in this discussion. Then we can be on the same page. But I do think that ANY video game making will be very cool and exciting for the students. And by the way, I always follow through. There will be projects!

I was just about to post my recommendation for good free/beginner places to start for something this unrealistic - until I saw more of the 'pedagogical' talk from GameTeacher.

Let's just face the truth: We've been out-pedagogicalized by the Master.

GameTeacher knows everything about teaching, and students these days are so brilliant, they don't even need teachers - so the whole case is mute.

"Good luck" GameTeacher, may the Pedagogy be with you.

PS

I heard a rumor that GTA 6 and Fallout 5 is already finished by a small class of students whom, get this, was taught by a teacher who doesn't know anything about the subject of Game Development. Cool, huh?

Haha, so much negativity. But I don't think it's unreasonable for a teacher to learn a code-free game making software and teach it to their students. I see no reason why he shouldn't pursue it. At a high school level it would be a really fun class, and I would certainly take it.

See, the problem with starting with a lie, is that you have to keep on lying.

Here we have a 'teacher' (presumably paid) who can't afford to buy anything. Huh, how strange?

I tried the site you recommended but you have to have a paid subscription.

I've never seen any one try so hard to pretend to be a member of faculty by dropping the word "pedagogy" at every opportunity.

Imagine an art teacher today that isn't familiar with digital art. Do you know any?

See, the problem with starting with a lie, is that you have to keep on lying.

Here we have a 'teacher' (presumably paid) who can't afford to buy anything. Huh, how strange?

I tried the site you recommended but you have to have a paid subscription.

I've never seen any one try so hard to pretend to be a member of faculty by dropping the word "pedagogy" at every opportunity.

Imagine an art teacher today that isn't familiar with digital art. Do you know any?

Would you consider toning it down a bit? The evidence for your accusation is pretty thin, and right or wrong there's no reason for rude, constant harangues. Even if gameteacher were trying to get information indirectly (for some unfathomable reason), that's not against any rules.

Would you consider toning it down a bit?

Interesting.

Within that budget/timeframe/scope; Blender 3D would be the optimal hassle free choice. (i.e. no registration required, availability of tutorials, built-in game engine, 3D sculpting etc.)

I was just about to post my recommendation for good free/beginner places to start for something this unrealistic - until I saw more of the 'pedagogical' talk from GameTeacher.

Let's just face the truth: We've been out-pedagogicalized by the Master.

GameTeacher knows everything about teaching, and students these days are so brilliant, they don't even need teachers - so the whole case is mute.

"Good luck" GameTeacher, may the Pedagogy be with you.

PS

I heard a rumor that GTA 6 and Fallout 5 is already finished by a small class of students whom, get this, was taught by a teacher who doesn't know anything about the subject of Game Development. Cool, huh?

Why's this guy so angry? Issues...