Ryan Bitzegaio, Megan Caylor, Elizabeth Clay, Alex Corn, Charles Estell, Francesca Hernandez, Student ASLA, Ashley Keith, Christopher Patten, Student ASLA, Nicole Randolph, Nadia Roumie, Adam Voirin, Student ASLA, Kelly Woodward, Student ASLA
State University, Muncie, IN
Faculty Advisor: Martha Hunt
The educational video game Navigating
Nature was produced by a twelve student interdisciplinary
team (landscape architecture, biology/natural resources,
telecommunications, computer science, English). Navigating
Nature challenges children to restore ecosystems; to
do so they build an understanding of these systems,
and connect to the natural world through a technology
they are comfortable with: a video game.
Navigating Nature is made up
of 3 mini games: a forest game, a wetland game, and
a prairie game. The creation of this game grew out of
three beliefs. First, getting kids interested in, and
knowledgeable about, the natural environment is important
to make the Earth a healthier place. Second, when kids
play games, they are learning; they are thinking critically,
performing exercises in logic, and developing superior
hand-eye coordination. Third, video games have been
blamed for everything from increased violence to sloth
and indolence, and they have been given short shrift
in their potential as a positive tool for learning.
The game’s target audience, elementary-aged
schoolchildren, required that it be engaging, but also
satisfy the wide-range of learning and developmental
levels found in second through fifth grade. Also, the
game outcome had to be more complex than a simple win/not
win state -- the children needed to be able to do well,
to have an average performance, or fail. A compelling
storyline, animated characters, and different game play
techniques were all used to address these needs.
Each mini-game was constructed from the
ground up: original code was written, game play was
built upon the natural laws, graphic entities were drawn,
and the children were consulted throughout the process
(feedback was gathered at each step: storylines were
presented and the game was tested for game play, challenge
level, and code problems). Academic and field research
on ecosystems, hands-on prototyping, problem solving,
and testing resulted in the following themed mini-games:
The Forest Game --
The player is taken back in time 200 years to see
the clear-cutting of old-growth forest. To win, the
player re-populates the forest with native tree species
and removes the invasive species.
The Wetland Game -- The player is
faced with wetlands that have been disconnected from
their water source, the river. To win the player reroutes
the river to reconnect these wetlands.
The Prairie Game -- The player is
in a prairie invaded by exotic species. To win the
player finds the invasive species and replaces them
with their native look-alikes.
The Role of the Landscape
The design of a video game is much like
landscape design, so we were comfortable in this setting.
We worked closely with students from computer science,
wildlife biology, ecology, English Education, and TCOM,
and our roles were ever-changing. To meet our goals,
teams were formed to efficiently tackle different tasks.
We (the LA students) found ourselves on many of these
teams. Some of us worked on the graphics team to illustrate
characters, plants, and animals, while others worked
on the storyline team to develop a narrative for the
game. We also documented (in video and still photos)
the entire process, developed a children’s storybook
for the game, and prepared a final presentation (including
kiosk-like stations designed to inform about the process
and allow the play of the game). Given the “generalist”
nature of our field we were the most comfortable with
moving from one task to the next, and visualizing the
final outcome. This allowed us to step in and contribute
to discussions in meaningful ways, from seeing both
sides of an argument to assisting the group in coming
How the Landscape Architecture
Students Contributed to the Process
We were able to contribute in many different
- Illustrations of plants and
animals. In this process the natural science students
found plant and animal data and we guided everyone
through the decision-making process to choose the
most representational species, and determined which
could be illustrated given technological constraints.
A similar process was followed to create the overworld
map (where the player begins the game), the topographic
tile overlay for the wetland game, and aerial and
cross-section scenes in forest and prairie games.
- Mediating discussion
and guiding consensus building. Though we served
as mediators and consensus builders, the following
example exemplifies this role.
An argument had ensued regarding the rerouting of
a river as a basis for the wetland game. Some students
argued that if the river was re-routed back to a more
natural flow, established habitats would be re-disturbed,
causing too much harm. Others argued that a concrete
channel was not a diverse system, and there are many
successful examples of re-channeling. We (the LA students)
realized everyone was arguing from discipline-specific
beliefs. This realization broke the stalemate, and,
with good communication, a solution was found.
- Establishing a successful
communication system. Any miscommunication
in this project had an effect on many different fronts,
from the evolution of educational intent or game play
to frustration with each other. And, working with
technology introduced another set of difficulties.
To help with tug-of-war situations, we utilized our
diagramming and graphic communication abilities. We
were able to focus discussion on the project, making
decisions both tangible and less personal.
What the Landscape Architecture
Student Learned from Other Disciplines, and Visa Versa
Here are some examples that illustrate
what we learned from each other in this game-building
- Communicating effectively
with different disciplines. Primarily we learned
how important it is for us to not expect others to
understand our design vocabulary, jargon, or process.
For example, we cannot expect natural science students
to immediately come up with a series of storyboards
when storyboarding is not in their skill set. To address
today’s environmental challenges will require
intense collaboration between many disciplines; this
experience has given us some good practice at communication
with other professionals.
- A deeper understanding of
specific native flora and fauna. Intense collaboration
with students from the natural sciences opened our
eyes to the fact we do not know nearly as much as
we thought in terms of plant life, cycles, and how
ecosystems operate. This resulted in, for example,
the inclusion of each tree’s life cycle and
propagation patterns in the forest game.
- Virtual world challenges.
Computer science students taught us about the opportunities,
and limitations of today’s technology. For example
our game’s main character had to be animated
within frame constraints, and sized to correspond
to a computer screen. A tile system of this screen
required each tile had to be drawn to fit. Scale,
perspective, and how one moves through the landscape
all needed to be rethought as we constructed this
virtual world of many different parts. Augmented Reality,
a concept now being explored in landscape architecture,
is one area that will need to be approached in such
a collaborative manner.
- Technology and design opportunities/constraints.
Working with TCOM and computer science majors brought
to the forefront the challenge of animation. The pixel,
for example, brought on an entire new set of graphic
design rules. This restriction demanded clear layout,
color choice, and comprehensible graphic representation.
- Understanding client needs.
The English/Secondary Education major helped us interpret
and understand our audience: elementary school students.
Applying state science learning objectives and standards,
how to gather information from this age group, and,
working with children to test our designs was all
new to us. In our profession, our purpose as a designer
is to listen and create a solution that they can relate
to, will enjoy, and, in this case, learn from.
While we certainly learned a lot
from others in this seminar, the other students learned
the following from us:
- Our discipline bridges many
disciplines. Though we found ourselves grappling
with our own jargon, we were able to demonstrate how
to value and apply the knowledge from other disciplines
in this process. Our leadership in this regard demonstrated
the role we play in our field.
- Understanding the process
of design can bring answers to many questions.
Though the design of a video game is not typically
what landscape architects do, our understanding of
design process provided a solid foundation throughout
the semester. We found ourselves taking on leadership
roles, and being productive team players in this project.
Consequently we taught others how to move through
the (sometimes scary) creative process.
- What landscape architects
do – how we see things, how we engage the community.
We spent many, many hours with these classmates (this
was our primary project for all of our credit that
semester). It was inevitable that we shared what we
traditionally do in our disciplines. This happened
when we made site visits – by the questions
we would ask, how we would graphically document what
we saw, and by pointing out how land was being used.
And this happened in the classroom – by showing
the others how to read an aerial photograph, or how
to draw in plan view vs. section. This exposure broke
the others in the seminar from thinking we were like
the rest from our college -- that we are not simply
architects that design landscapes. We are landscape
architects that put healthy landscapes and communities
first on our list of goals.