Nobody would like these kinds of games just like nobody has ever liked "educational" games.
Why?
Because they try too hard, since their main objective is not to be a good game.
It's like reading a novel and immediately noticing the story is just some thinly veiled bullshit so that the author can vomit their own personal view of the world. It makes you lose interest real fast.
You take that back, I loved educational games as a kid! There were indeed plenty of crappy ones out there, but some were really well-made. For example, Pink Panther's Passport to Peril was a charming point-and-click adventure that taught you about cultures in other countries.
There's a small cult following in the Netherlands for these types of edutainment games and a small group of people have set out to archive all of them: https://nationaalarchiefeducatievegames.nl/
This article did such a disservice in describing how gamers were helping cure disease. I had to dig further. In the article linked, it does a much better job of explaining in my opinion.
"Paradigm Shift in Designing Therapeutics
This kind of work isn’t possible with computers alone. The number of possible combinations are beyond any reasonable method for enumeration, and thus algorithms alone can’t solve this problem efficiently. However, humans are unparalleled at recognizing patterns. As Kim points out, computers don’t go into discussion forums to exchange ideas on how to push forward, but Eterna’s players do. They also constantly pick up on each other’s designs and then work to improve them.
“The players are designing things at incredibly granular levels while staying in touch with all the complex biological rules that we impose on them,” he says. “It’s allowing us to solve this incredibly complex problem through a video game interface. I honestly don’t think a lot of players fully understand the complexity of the problems that they’re addressing.”"
https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/a-game-playing-app-m...
I keep returning to Zachtronics games endlessly in my free time, despite doing engineering work for 8-10 hours a day for the last months. Sure they're a bit of a facsimile of a programming challenge, but they're pretty tough problems, especially in the ones that are basically using assembly. I even had someone reference that my latest Opus Magnum creation looks like cellular automata.
If you can simplify the problem/solution space into a puzzle, give me a leaderboard to compete against, more specifically let me compete against the people I care about, and give it the barest amount of polish, it's the kind of thing someone like me would obsess over.
I think there's still a challenge in balancing engagement and scientific rigor. Making a game that's genuinely fun and scientifically valuable isn't easy. But if done right, this could be a massive unlock and not just for cancer research, but for any complex system where intuition and creativity matter as much as formal training.
16 comments
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 42.6 ms ] threadWhy?
Because they try too hard, since their main objective is not to be a good game.
It's like reading a novel and immediately noticing the story is just some thinly veiled bullshit so that the author can vomit their own personal view of the world. It makes you lose interest real fast.
You take that back, I loved educational games as a kid! There were indeed plenty of crappy ones out there, but some were really well-made. For example, Pink Panther's Passport to Peril was a charming point-and-click adventure that taught you about cultures in other countries.
There's a small cult following in the Netherlands for these types of edutainment games and a small group of people have set out to archive all of them: https://nationaalarchiefeducatievegames.nl/
All educational games and all PHENOMENAL.
"Paradigm Shift in Designing Therapeutics
This kind of work isn’t possible with computers alone. The number of possible combinations are beyond any reasonable method for enumeration, and thus algorithms alone can’t solve this problem efficiently. However, humans are unparalleled at recognizing patterns. As Kim points out, computers don’t go into discussion forums to exchange ideas on how to push forward, but Eterna’s players do. They also constantly pick up on each other’s designs and then work to improve them.
“The players are designing things at incredibly granular levels while staying in touch with all the complex biological rules that we impose on them,” he says. “It’s allowing us to solve this incredibly complex problem through a video game interface. I honestly don’t think a lot of players fully understand the complexity of the problems that they’re addressing.”" https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/a-game-playing-app-m...
If you can simplify the problem/solution space into a puzzle, give me a leaderboard to compete against, more specifically let me compete against the people I care about, and give it the barest amount of polish, it's the kind of thing someone like me would obsess over.
https://www.eveonline.com/discovery
Did we jump 5 months into the future where $60 is the norm?
I’m guess this is probably aimed at the standard academic market, but even so more books like this could maybe help tackle cancer.
That and not having toxic drinking water from PFAS