
Science-based games – a collaborative list - mettamage
https://github.com/stared/science-based-games-list
======
simias
I really don't think those github lists lists are the right format. You want
something were people can endorse some recommendations over others, maybe post
comments etc...

Here all the curation work falls back on the "maintainer", who has to decide
where to draw the line when accepting or rejecting pull requests.

If the maintainer/editor is very strict and reviews each PR thoroughly then
the format is no different from any blog post where the author accepts
feedback and recommendations through comments or email.

If the maintainer/editor accepts most PRs with little review the list quickly
becomes overcrowded and generally useless since it's not possible for the
community at large to correct it.

I guess one could easily design a website where you let users create resource
lists based on certain topics and you let the community at large contribute
recommendations and vote on them. You could even make money out of it by using
affiliate links. I don't know if something like that exists already.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Maybe they're not the right format, but they do work, and I don't think what
you proposed would be better. Here are some benefits of the GitHub lists:

1\. They use a very popular platform, on which most potential contributors
have an account and probably use it daily.

2\. They offer no-bullshit interface that presents you what you want to
collaborate on and tools to do that, not trying to distract you with anything
else.

3\. _Nobody is trying to make money off it_ , there are no affilate links,
ads, or other monetizing bullshit, which is _precisely_ why those lists are
much more reliable and trustworthy than what would be posted on a hypothetical
service you propose.

I agree that GitHub doesn't offer all the things such lists could use (like
voting), but it's close enough, and to move those lists elsewhere you'd have
to solve the network effect of #1.

~~~
simias
>1\. They use a very popular platform, on which most potential contributors
have an account and probably use it daily.

I'd argue that "science-based game" could interest many more people than the
subset of github users. If it was a list of programming resources then maybe,
but even then many coders don't have a github account. I wager that "community
curated list of resources" has a much bigger potential user base than github.
"A list of resources to learn guitar", "a list of resources to learn Chinese
history", "a list of portuguese language telenovelas" etc...

>2\. They offer no-bullshit interface that presents you what you want to
collaborate on and tools to do that, not trying to distract you with anything
else.

Uh, dealing with pull requests is a no-bullshit interface to add an entry to a
list? What percentage of the population do you think understands what a pull
request is, let alone how to create one? What if there's a conflict and the
maintainer asks you to merge and update it? That's not exactly facebook-level
friendly right there.

>3\. Nobody is trying to make money off it, there are no affiliate links, ads,
or other monetizing bullshit, which is precisely why those lists are much more
reliable and trustworthy than what would be posted on a hypothetical service
you propose.

How so? If the lists become untrustworthy people will stop using it and the
website loses money. There's no incentive for the website to mess with the
lists themselves. And if you're thinking about "corruption" to bump certain
resources to the top it could happen regardless of the rest, and it could be
even more tempting if you don't actually have an other way to make "legit"
money.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _I 'd argue that "science-based game" could interest many more people than
> the subset of github users. If it was a list of programming resources then
> maybe, but even then many coders don't have a github account._

In terms of contributing, fair enough - but for just viewing, GitHub lists are
public.

> _What percentage of the population do you think understands what a pull
> request is, let alone how to create one?_

If you edit directly on the GitHub website you don't have to deal with that,
as it is mostly handled for you automagically in the background. It's not
Facebook-level friendly, but then again this little barrier to entry probably
does wonders for the quality.

\--

Re point 3, I could respond sentence by sentence, but what I really mean is
that the site sets the tone and the culture on it.

I can trust user-submitted lists on GitHub due to its culture. I wouldn't
trust a user-submitted list on an ad-ridden site and/or the site that
significantly rewards people for contributing. Commercial interests destroy
the quality and trustworthiness of information, so the best place to post such
lists is a place that doesn't care about the content it hosts.

GitHub works because it's ad-free, free to use for contributors and readers
alike, and doesn't try to monetize hosted content directly. So they don't set
a money-making tone for their service, and they don't generally interfere with
user-submitted content.

\--

Still, I think the core reason GitHub is used is that GitHub is _good enough_
, and is already popular with the developers.

------
stared
List maintainter here.

As the description says, you are invited to contribute!

One question - do you prefer it Markdown way, or YAML + some searchable
features, with screenshots? (Inspiration: [http://ndres.me/kaggle-past-
solutions/.](http://ndres.me/kaggle-past-solutions/.))

And thank you mettamage (vide
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14661821](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14661821))!
:)

~~~
JoeDaDude
Board games too?

[https://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/206920/favourite-
accu...](https://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/206920/favourite-accurate-
science-games)

~~~
XaspR8d
Yeah when I saw the title, my brain immediately went to Sierra Madre Games
(particularly _BIOS: Genesis_ and _High Frontier_ ), which are incredibly-
designed simulation machines under the guise of tabletop games.

------
lstodd
Cool.

I'd nominate Dwarf Fortress for the geology and anatomy bits, and all the
rest, though I hesitate to classify that.

~~~
stared
Or, AFAIK, you can build Turing-complete stuff. However, I prefer to avoid
adding games so complex/advanced.

Science has to be its _main_ part of mechanics, rather than some subpart, as:

"Any sufficiently advanced game is indistinguishable from a science-based
game."

(Saw somewhere on HN "Any sufficiently advanced text editor is
indistinguishable from a dedicated app." Yes, I know it's from
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke%27s_three_laws.))

~~~
lstodd
I don't understand neither your objection to complexity, nor how to determine
"the main part of mechanics" in a sufficiently complex game.

What's the main part of the mechanics in DF? I play it for 7+ years and I have
no idea. Most likely, there isn't any.

Still I learned much - directly and by piqued interest - about geology - way
before attempting to deliver magma to the surface. Years, in fact.

I feel that such focus on "main part of mechanics" is wrong.

It's like you'd accept a pool simulator because it's "main part" is the
combination of perfectly elastic collision and conservation of momentum and
reject KSP because "it's too complex".

Of course it's complex. How do you expect to learn anything if it's not?

------
tmbsundar
Great work and initiative.

A quick suggestion:

The bullets seem to be at the same level for the name + link of the game and
the characteristics of the game. This gets a little confusing as in some cases
I thought the second or third bullet point is also another game but lacks
hyperlink - thus tried clicking them.

Hence, if you can make them as sub-headings/ sub-bullets or may be within
parentheses or some visual differentiation, it will be great.

------
mettamage
Wow, amazing how this blew up!

My own list is here [1]. It's a bit of a mess.

My focus is slightly different. I focus on educational/entertaining. It's also
in Dutch/English. I think lists like these are important. I've noticed when I
was studying game psychology (master @ University of Amsterdam) that teachers
have too little of an idea on how to create educational games that are also
quite entertaining.

Allow me to translate the most interesting entries of my list:

__Educational Games That Are Entertaining (sorted by perceived entertainment,
in my experience -- yes it is subjective)__

Parable of the Polygons: already on the Github list

The Bézier Game: Loved this game! I learned about how to use the Bezier tool.

Factorio: entertainment game. I found out it really really really helps for
programmatic thinking because secretly you write functions all the time and
think about the inputs and outputs of systems. My CodeCombat friend learned a
thing or two about scalability issues as well through this game.

Miegakure: not out yet, but 4D experiments! -- expected perceived
entertainment

Fragments of Him: experience how it is to lose your loved one

Flexbog Froggy: CSS flexbox game

CSS Diner: learn CSS selectors

Vim Adventures: the whole reason this HN submission blew up

CodeCombat: learn coding, a friend of my played it before he went to a coding
school. In his opinion, it doesn't teach you coding all the way -- it's
because you use their own API and cannot relate it to the real world fully --
but it gives you an amazing head start.

Ovelin.com: guitar hero IRL (also piano's now)

SineRider: learn about sine equations

Re-mission: makes the disease cancer discussable and allows people to learn
about it (targeted at patients) and reminds them to take their medicine -- I
didn't play this but heard good things about it.

__Games that are educational if you have the mindset__

There are entertainment games (i.e. the educational games that I listed above)
but by being a serious player you can make more games educational. Here are my
favorite examples (I didn't play WoW but I read a paper about it). Strictly
speaking Factorio should be on this list, but in my opinion the creator cuts
himself short by not stating it's an educational game.

World of Warcraft (in a language that you don't know): research showed it
teaches you language _provided_ you have 100 to 200 hours of basics in already
[2].

Flappy Bird: learn all about why you get frustrated.

[1]
[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l04gq4HyBsWNqYoNsLJ8MMU-...](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1l04gq4HyBsWNqYoNsLJ8MMU-
Zd2nv3DQRgOP3CxL9W0)

[2] I can't find the paper now via Google Scholar, I'll add a comment after a
couple of days. I'll be at a location where I can access the paper in physical
form.

Edit: I'll gather all the links of the games later.

Edit 2: I miss games like Civ (primed me to look more into politics -- serious
player list) and Minecraft (both educational and serious player list). I miss
a lot of games actually.

~~~
mettamage
Game-design principles that I distilled:

\- It's easier to make an entertaining/educational game if your game is short
-- 15 to 30 minutes.

\- Friends make a game more fun (e.g. happened with me with Factorio)

\- Good design makes everything more fun (also seen with the game show Extra
Credits)

\- You can piggyback on proven game formulas -- e.g. Vim Adventurs or Code
Combat (RPG like) -- and alter them (or not!) -- e.g. Ovelin.com

\- You can make use of metaphors/fantasy to train people their skills in
another area (e.g. Factorio with programming). This is the biggest key on how
to make games more entertaining that currently remains unused. A study shows
that making a game more engaging could heighten motivation for playing but
lower learning in several cases [1].

[1] Title: The Effect of Familiar and Fantasy Aesthetics on Learning and
Experience of Serious Games -- Authors: Erik D. van der Spek, Tatiana
Sidorenkova, Paul Porskamp and Matthias Rauterberg -- Link:
[http://ai2-s2-pdfs.s3.amazonaws.com/b242/0ca8de756bb3dc0bf23...](http://ai2-s2-pdfs.s3.amazonaws.com/b242/0ca8de756bb3dc0bf23b4791b5784fd8022a.pdf)

------
quickben
Awesome!

------
newswriter99
Depression Quest has no business being on that list.

"understanding depression (esp. for ones who never experienced it)"

Even the description is elitist and pretentious. Everyone has experienced
depression. It's an extremely common mental disorder. DQ is nothing more than
a lackluster text-based visual novel (if you can call it that) cashing in on
an easily exploitable group.

~~~
stared
As person who added it to the list, I maintain that it has a place here. (And
yes, I know it is controversional. And yes, I have had depressive episodes.
And I had been leaving with a close person with depression for a prolonged
time.)

Description may be not ideal - so feel free to propose a different one (via
PR).

> Everyone has experienced depression.

Not everyone. And people who have never had it go into annoying and
counterproductive 'get over it' as they really think that it is about typical
sadness, laziness or (very temporary) low mood. Or that people suffering are
just too dumb to realize that some activities may help them.

And I found this game useful in explaining depression to such people.
Especially as:

\- very often one is well aware of beneficial steps, yet having no
energy/will/hope to do them (captured wonderfully in this game!),

\- that even positive things (committed relationship, social gathering etc)
are at best small steps, they aren't enough just to "cheer someone up".

For a better resource (but not a game), I send:
[http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-
par...](http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-part-
two.html).

EDIT: That said, I don't mean that Depression Game is a good game for
everyone.

EDIT2: IT is here are its mechanics is mechanics of depression (psychology).

~~~
simias
But is it "science-based"? One can relate to a piece of art (music, games,
movies, paintings...) but it doesn't have much to do with actual science. Is
the actual game based on scientific research in one way or an other?

~~~
stared
Read dscription, not only title.

~~~
simias
What description? I've tried "playing" the first few screens of the game here:
[http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html](http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html)

So far it looks like any other visual novel and I can't find any mention of
scientific research anywhere. I really don't understand what's scientific
about any of that. It would be like saying that the movie "Memento" is
scientific because it features anterograde amnesia.

~~~
stared
Description of the list.

"Memento" is not an interactive experience. (And the condition is not common.)

If there were a game with _mechanics_ on living with OCD, it would fit.

