Review
of
a
language‐learning
activity
in
Second
Life:
the
Paintball
game


Helen Newstead, Introduction to Game-based Learning, March 2010



Introduction

I participated in a team-based paintball game created by LanguageLab (slurl), a virtual language
school for adult learners of English (av. age 32), based in Second Life (SL). The game comprised
two parts: an initial training game followed by several short paintball games. As regards
wraparound activities, there was an initial briefing stage and a feedback/debriefing stage after the
game(s) had been completed. Since the game I played was a demo (with other language teachers),
some of the information below was derived from a discussion with Jessie Driscoll at LanguageLab
HQ in SL.
I will present a description of the game, and provide an analysis of its characteristics and relevance
to language learning, followed by concluding remarks.

Description


Stage
1
–
Briefing: Consists of a run-through of vocabulary required for the game (nouns,

prepositions of place). The demo took place within a computer's hard drive, but other locations
within LanguageLab's 'English City' are used depending on the learner group, eg forest, city streets,
hotel, building site.


Stage
2
–
Training
activity: This training activity presents a 'subdomain' (Gee, 2003) of the
Paintball game, and offers an opportunity for facilitators to ensure students have sufficient SL skills
to play the game, and for players to practise the language required for giving directions in a less
pressured environment, eg "go towards the fan", "jump up onto the hard drive", "opposite the
cables" etc. Students sit in a room and are split into pairs. One of each pair is dropped into the
workings of a hard drive, while the other remains in the room looking down on the computer.
Having muted all other players, the person in the room must give verbal directions to their partner
to help them locate a red square (see fig. 1). The first person to reach the square wins the game, at
which point players swap positions. A video of the training activity is available here:
http://vimeo.com/9528651

Figure 1: Screenshot of training activity (computer sim)

Stage
3
–
Paintball
game: The group is split into two teams, each with its own home base. A flag is
positioned at each base. The object of the game is to try to capture the opposing team's flag and
return it to the home base without the team's own flag being captured. Team members are all given
roles (rotated between games to avoid 'bystanders' (Whitton, 2010)), such as defending the flag,
covering opponents, running to capture, and must devise a strategy between them to win the game.
Since it's a fast-moving game, communication has to be oral, so players must mute players from the
opposing team. Additionally, players are armed with paintballs to incapacitate opposing players
temporarily (10 sec). A two-hour session allows several games to be played, and home bases are
moved to new locations within the sim to vary the vocabulary required.



Figure 2: Screenshot of Paintball strategy discussion (hotel sim), courtesy of LanguageLab

Stage
4
–
Debrief: The nature of the debrief depends on the language level of the learner group. A
beginner-level class might discuss directions. A higher-level class might discuss tactics and
strategy, and an advanced class might extend the discussion to war and ethics.


Analysis

I will assess the activity by examining its game-like characteristics and the level of engagement.
Having experienced this activity very much as a game, it comes as no surprise that it meets all ten
'defining characteristics of games' listed by Whitton (2010): competition (multiple teams), challenge
(giving directions in target language (TL)), exploration (moving around); fantasy (first-person
shooter scenario); goals (strategy to obtain flag); interaction (collaboration between players
essential to win); outcome (clear winner); people (team-based game); rules (game rules); safety (no
real consequence). In terms of engagement, my sense of 'flow' (defined as 'the state in which people
are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter' (Csikszentmihalyi, 2002, cited in
Whitton, 2010) was hindered by my lack of SL skills. This game requires a very high level of
familiarity with the SL interface since you're required to be able to run, jump, shoot and talk in a
very complex environment. Although I felt immersed for parts of the game, my 'flow' was
frequently interrupted by bumping into things, and not being able to jump with enough precision.
LanguageLab has a self-selecting group of SL aficionados, but I would be wary of using this game
'as is' in a non-SL-based course, since the learning curve would be fairly steep. In the Paintball
game, less SL-literate players have the assistance of a facilitator, but this could potentially lead to a
high teacher-student ratio, making it difficult to implement in a more traditional setting.


Relevance
to
Language
Learning

Recent theories of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) have focussed on the importance of
input and interaction in the TL – with the computer as mediator – based on the idea that interaction
and immersion simulate the environment in which native languages are learnt. Peterson (2010)
draws on both psycholinguistic and sociocultural theories of second-language acquisition (SLA) as
a basis for considering the use of games and simulations in language learning, and many of the
optimal conditions for learning hypothesized by these theories are supported in this game. An
analysis is offered below:

Theories
of
Language
 Optimal
conditions
for
learning
 Conditions
supported
by
the


Learning
 Paintball
game
Psycholinguistic
SLA
 Long's interaction hypothesis
(1996): importance of both
'comprehensible input' and
'negotiated meaning' in facilitating
SLA.
Authentic contexts for
communication; importance of
having an 'audience' and contexts in
which learner is expected to use TL
forms that stretch competence
(Chapelle, 1998).
Maximise opportunities for high
levels of two-way interaction, and
preferably a non-linguistic goal to be
achieved through linguistic means
(Chapelle, 1998).
Sociocultural
SLA
 Rooted in the work of Vygotsky
(1978), this approach stresses the
importance of social interaction in
SLA.
Collaborative TL dialogue with
more able peers (linked to zone of
proximal development)
Opportunities for experimental, low-
risk learning based on collaborative
relationships (Peterson, 2010).


High level of interaction in TL
between players, teacher-learner,
learner-learner, and opportunity to
react to feedback, correct mistakes
and thus negotiate meaning.
Scenario has to be negotiated with
real people in real time. Providing
learners are of a similar level, all
participants in the game will be
stretched to produce appropriate
language at speed.
Clear non-linguistic goal which
can only be achieved through
successful linguistic interaction.
Game is entirely social since it
cannot be won without interaction
(strategy, directions, cooperation)
with fellow gamers.
Game based on collaborative TL
dialogue. Scaffolding available by
intervention from more able peers
or teachers.
Since game is learner-centred and
fast-paced, there is ample
opportunity for experimentation,
and subsequent correction, with
no risk outside game.

Conclusion

The main benefits afforded by the Paintball game are the opportunities for input, social interaction
and collaboration in the TL. Language is all about communication, and the game provides a highly
motivating environment for students to demonstrate their language skills by collectively achieving a
goal in the TL. The game requires a high degree of familiarity with SL, so there may be ways to
simplify the environment to lessen the learning curve for less able players (eg fewer obstacles).
Also, if I were to incorporate this into my own teaching, I would develop a written exercise based
on the game to encourage deeper reflection and reinforce learning.


Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Jessie Driscoll at LanguageLab for taking the time to meet with me in SL, and
also Damon Plummer, a fellow student on IDGBL, for his valuable comments on a draft of this
review.


References

Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA.
Language Learning & Technology 2(1): pp. 22-34.
Gee, J. P. (2003) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York,
Palgrave Macmillan.
Long, M. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in SLA. In Handbook of second language
acquisition. W.C. Ritchie and T.K. Bhatia (Eds.). San Diego, Academic Press.
Peterson, M. (2010). Computerized Games and Simulations in Computer-Assisted Language
Learning: A Meta-Analysis of Research. Simulation & Gaming 2010 41: pp. 72-93.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with Digital Games: A Practical Guide to Engage Students in Higher
Education. New York, Routledge.

[Word count: 1195, excl. title, captions, acknowledgments and references.]