For the last several months, I’ve been thinking a lot about how games can be used to teach things above and beyond what games have traditionally been teaching. It turns out there’s a whole movement called the Serious Games Initiative already. That’s not surprising, because one thing the internet has taught me over the years is that most ideas I’ve had actually have a long history already.

While I whole-heartedly support what they’re doing, I can’t help but be confused by the word they picked to describe the games they want to bring about—serious games. It is because I do care about what they’re doing and want to help them be successful that I’m writing this, not to just sit back and throw stones like others we find on the internet.

Serious vs. Fun

What added to my dismay as I read more about what’s been written on this subject is that the games we typically find in the commercial video game industry are called fun games. In order for this movement to be successful, we need to convince people to make serious games and, just as importantly, PLAY these games. It seems to me that we’re starting off on the wrong foot by ignoring the potential effects of this terminology.

I heard recently that one of the rules of politics is that he who is explaining is losing. Imagine approaching a teenage boy and saying, “Hey, would you rather play fun games or serious games?” Yep, 1 point for fun. Maybe you can convince him to at least try a serious game after explaining it, but the words used up front will create a prejudice against serious games that resist accepting them.

Now, it’s probably not that bad, but I think it’s still worth the effort to change our words to increase our persuasive abilities.

Serious Games Must Be Fun

The other problem I see with calling them “serious” and “fun” games is that people tend to group things mentally into mutually exclusive groups. While the language doesn’t explicitly say “serious games aren’t fun” and “fun games aren’t serious,” making that distinction using those terms creates that connotation.

In order for a serious game to be effective, people have to play it. If that game isn’t fun, then the only people who will play it are those who “have” to for school or some other similar reason. Even then, the players aren’t engaged and won’t be learning as much. But if the game is fun, lots of people will want to play. People will even pay money to play it! The game could be sold in stores to consumers directly and not have to be imposed on students by the institutions that buy them.

A game that isn’t fun, isn’t played. A game that isn’t played doesn’t do anyone any good.

Better Games

There’s nothing wrong with being entertained. “Fun” games are still good games. They still teach some very useful skills and exercise our mental muscles. That’s good.

Wouldn’t it be better to not only entertain and exercise mental muscle but to teach something else that might be useful in real life?

As long as they’re getting the fun they want, do you think anyone would mind learning something more from playing a game?

Instead of fun and serious games, I propose we use the terms good and better games. We can capitalize the words to distinguish them from the regular adjectives. Let’s make Better Games. Everyone wants to play them. They’re fun and exciting and have the power to change people’s lives. You don’t have to explain it.