As most of you know, I am an archaeologist.  For several years, I haven’t really been in touch with that.  Yes, I’ve taught ancient history classes (all of which have been infused with an enormous amount of anthropology and archaeology), but I haven’t been living and breathing archaeology on a daily basis, it hasn’t been at the core of my professional being. In hindsight, this has taken a bit of tole on me.  The reality of things is that I was never really a “citizen” in History (nor Telecom).  I could teach the classes (and I’ve taught some classes that I absolutely love), but I was always somewhat of an immigrant (an immigrant who spoke another language and saw things from a different disciplinary perspective).  The result is that this move  honestly feels like returning home after a long stay in another county.

There are definitely some downsides to this.  History was given the opportunity to pick up a piece of me (1 class/year).  They unfortunately declined (a mystery to me as to why).  The result is that I’m going to have to abandon several classes that I worked hard to develop and enjoyed teaching quite a bit.  Among these are my History of the Modern Comic Book class, my Ancient Egypt & Popular Culture class, my History of the Future class, and my History of the Digital Age class. As I developed these classes, and was the sole instructor, they will most likely never be taught again. Walking away from these classes is very hard. The upside is that all of the course sites (with all of the related course media) will stay live, open, and accessible as log as humanly possible.  Also, I’ve recorded lectures for a great number of my classes (some classes have one or two lectures recorded, while other classes have all of the lectures recorded).  I’ll be going through these slowly (editing, compressing, etc.) and putting them online for anyone to download.  I’m currently editing the raw recordings from my History of the Modern Comic Book class (the class for which I have the most complete lecture recordings).  When I’ve finished with that class, I’ll be putting the entire class up on iTunes.

The same bitter sweetness goes for the Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies, and Media (who have owned 25% of me for the past few years). I will no longer be teaching my Digital Games & Society class (which I developed, and feel very close to), nor will I be taking on serious game MA students as advisees any more.

The good thing is that I’ve got an exciting slate of classes on the horizon in Anthropology.  In the fall I’m teaching a class on pseudoscience and pseudoarchaeology. In the spring, I’m teaching in intro to ancient Egyptian archaeology & social history. The year after that, I’m going to be teaching a grad class on cultural heritage informatics (embracing a DIY “more hack, less yack/more grok, less talk” ethos), as well as a grad seminar called Scholarly Practice in the Digital Age (which will most likely be marketed to grad students across the College of Social Sciences – and also have a a strong hacker/DIY vibe). The bottom line is that I’ll have no shortage of great classes to teach.

The other thing that I must mention is that even though I’m moving into an anthropology department (and back to being an archaeologist), I’m probably not going back into the field.  I haven’t been a practicing field archaeologist for years, and my research interests have diverged from “trowel-in-the-ground” kind of work.

The other extremely important thing that I must mention is that this move would not have been possible without the efforts of Lynne Goldstein.  It is absolutely no exaggeration that Lynne made this happen, and for that I am eternally grateful.  I would also be remiss if I didn’t give a thankful shout out to Jodie O’Gorman (chair of Anthropology), who fiercely supported my move from the get go.

The bottom line is that I feel exuberant about these changes. For the first time in a long time (relatively speaking), I feel like my professional life is starting to defrag.

For years, researchers have discussed the educational potential of digital games.  Most recently, this discussion has been framed using the term “serious games” – games whose primary purpose is not entertainment.  It is only recently that these discussions have begun to bear fruit in the form of robust game development and published research. While serious games have been used in a wide variety of contexts such as healthcare, the military, and language training, there are far fewer instances of games being used to teach archaeology & cultural heritage. This is unfortunate, as there are many commercial digital games that are only too happy to use archaeology, in one way or another, as the basis for their gameplay – most often resulting in simplistic, inaccurate, or unethical portrayals of the human past, archaeology (as a discipline), and archaeologists (as practitioners in that discipline).  There is no reason whatsoever that archaeologists and other cultural heritage professionals could not use digital games as a powerful tool for public outreach, education, and engagement.

It is in this context that this talk will explore how public archaeology (and archaeology in general) might best take advantage of digital games in order to more positively impact the public’s perception of the human past. We’ll look at the current state of the commercial games (with an emphasis on archaeologically inspired games), serious games, and explore the ways in which serious games can be used to engage and educate the public around archaeological issues.

The Head First series is best know for using the latest research in cognitive science and learning theory to craft a multi-sensory learning experience. Head First Web Design continues that tradition by using a visually rich format specifically designed to take advantage of the way the reader’s brain really works. For more information on the book, including table of contents and sample chapters, visit http://www.headfirstlabs.com/books/hfwd/

This is easily the hardest book that I’ve ever written. First off, all Head First authors, regardless of whether they are totally green in the publishing world or if they’ve written 10 books, have to go through a rather rigorous audition which includes building a demo chapter in the Head First style. Once you are given the thumbs up and put under contract to the write the book, the entire production process (and it is a “production” process as opposed to a “writing” process is incredibly different than anything I’ve ever done. Instead of sitting down at a keyboard, banging out a draft, sending it in to an editor, getting revisions back, editing, and sending in a final draft (the usual book writing cycle), writing a Head First book is something akin to writing a graphic novel (vaguely). Here is how things go (on a single chapter):

Beats

You come up with beats for the chapter. This isn’t like slapping some vague chapter structure ideas on a page. Head First books have a very precise ebb and flow of content based on cognitive models of learning. Where to cover stuff, how to cover stuff, the pace at which stuff is covered, and the general subject matter have to go into beats. Also, you not only have to include learning content, but you also need to include the chapter’s narrative (Head First books often have a narrative that drives the learning – both in the individual chapters and across the entire book). Once you do the first pass on a chapter’s beats, you turn it in to your editor. From here, you’ll get feedback. The feedback might be light or it might be heavy – and it might even require you to scrap everything and start again (that happened to us once or twice). Its also very rare that you revise only once. It was quite common that we had at least two rounds of revisions.

Boards

Once your editor signs off on your beats, you can start working on storybaords. Yup, thats right….storyboards. Since the Head First series is so visual, authors actually build very detailed storyboards for each chapter. This is pretty much designed to get a solid idea of how each page is going to be laid out, what content is going to appear where on the page, etc. These storyboards are hand drawn, and often quite time consuming (Jeff and I actually erred on the side of very detailed storyboards, so it often took us a little longer than other Head First authors). As with the beats, we would submit boards to our editor, get feedback (sometimes feedback that would require major work), revise accordingly, and re-submit (and do it again if necessary). Jeff and I never submitted boards that didn’t have to go through at least one revision. There were several chapters where we had to go through three revisions. There were also a few chapters where we had to scrap the boards we started with, and start again from scratch (which sucked horribly).

InDesign

Once your editor signs off on the boards, you get to work “writing” the book in InDesign. You take what you envisioned in your boards, and actually create it in InDesign. For anyone who who has written a more “traditional” book, this may come as quite a bit of a surprise. The author actually becomes the book’s designer. Its important to note that these InDesign files aren’t another step on the pre-viz ladder which then get re-done by talented staffers at O’Reilly. These are the actual chapters files that will (eventually) go to the printer. At this stage, you are not only doing layout, but you are also writing body text. As with all of the other steps along the way, you send the InDesign chapters in to your editor for revisions. Generally speaking, revision at this stage of the game are a little less intense (though certainly not absent). Your content and layout is pretty much set, and all you really need to do is implement it. In this stage, I was incredibly lucky that Jeff took control of most of the layout while I dealt with writing the body text. Jeff has an incredible eye for design (and is a hell of a lot more skilled with InDesign than I am). As a result, we fell into a very comfortable pattern that resulted in a book that looks awesome and has really solid content.

Chaos

Near the end of the production process, the predictable back and forth revision cycle tends to break down. InDesign chapters are flying back and forth between authors and various members or the editorial team. All of the little things (both in terms of design and content) are addressed, fixed, ect, etc. Its also at this stage that production people step in and make sure the InDesign chapters are ready for the printer – color correction, hi-res images, etc. Also, the Head First design editor (Lou Barr http://www.headfirstlabs.com/lou.php) will put her hands on the chapter and polish it up significantly. At this stage, its a mad rush to the finish line. We were fairly lucky in that we managed to get all of the chapters finished off and to the printer slightly ahead of schedule.

All in all (from audition to publication) it took about 10 or 11 months. This about about 3 times the length it took me to write any of my other books. Was it worth it? Yes. I’m quite proud of the book (except the cover….I hate the individual they chose for the cover). Now, the next question…would I do it again? Honestly, I don’t think so. Why? Well, first off, the production schedule was almost too much to deal with. As an academic, my schedule is already very, very full. While I was writing the book, many of my projects, publications, and grants had to be put on the back-burner (and are only now getting the attention they deserve). Its not like the workload was a surprise. We were well aware of how much work this would be when we signed the contract (and, in fact, our schedule was a little more aggressive than other Head First books because O’Reilly wanted to get the book to market quickly…and we knew that). However, the reality of the schedule almost burnt me out. I simply can’t afford to dedicate such an enormous amount of my life to one project (at the detriment of all other things – including my family life). Granted, if O’Reilly wants us to do a 2nd edition, I would have no problem doing it. However, a new Head First book…that probably isn’t in my future. I am, however, currently (vaguely) talking with O’Reilly about my next book project – a social history of digital games (based partially on the class I teach) – but that is far more of a “traditional” book project.

It also bears mentioning that inviting Jeff to co-author this book with me was a bloody stroke of genius on my part (if I do say so myself). Jeff worked insanely hard on this book (I will admit, harder than me). It is a testament to his skill (as both a web designer and a print designer) that this book is so damn good. He’s a big deal, and people should watch him – because he is going to do (and is doing) some incredible things.

Right now, Jeff and I into the PR/Marketing phase – trying to do what we can to promote the book. So, if anyone has access to a good venue (web, print, or audio/video) and wants to review the book, give me a yell because I can get you a free copy. Also, if anyone runs a podcast, and would like to interview Jeff or I (or both at the same time), give me a shout. I can also probably get some free copies of the book that people can use as contest giveaways on their site.  Drop me a line at ethan [dot] watrall [at] captainprimate [dot] com

We are the dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

In 1958, Charles Roberts founded Avalon Hill in order to capitalize on the success of his game Tactics. Self-published in 1952, Tactics was particularly noteworthy because it was based on actual war tactics and scenarios. As such, Tactics is considered to be the first modern tabletop war game. Shortly after the company was founded, it released Tactics II, the sequel to Roberts’ original game. The game, which was an improvement on the original design, featured a series of concepts that have long since become ubiquitous in modern tabletop war games. One might argue that many of these concepts have become pivotal mechanics in many other types of tabletop games beyond the wargamming genre. Chief among these newly introduced mechanics was the Combat Results Table (CRT), a tool to determine in-game combat success or failure. Shortly after the release of Tactics II, Avalon Hill published Gettysburg, which is widely considered to be the first tabletop wargame based upon an actual historical battle.

By the end of 1962, Avalon Hill had fallen on difficult economic times. Roberts was forced to sell the company to Monarch Printing, Avalon Hill’s printer, as a way of paying back his debt to them. Upon the sale of Avalon Hill, Roberts left the company and founded Barnard, Roberts, and Co, a small press publisher. Monarch Printing, who changed their name to Monarch Avalon after they acquired the company, continued to run Avalon Hill as a subsidiary for 36 years until its sale to Hasbro in 1998.

Throughout the 1970s, Avalon Hill continued to publish tabletop war games, including such noteworthy titles as Midway, Afrika Korps, The Battle of the Bulge, and Blitzkrieg. However, in addition to its tabletop wargame products, Avalon Hill continued to publish tabletop games in other genres, a strategy pioneered by Charles Roberts before he was forced to sell the company to Monarch Printing. Among these games were Acquire, an economic game of acquisitions and mergers, and Twixt, an abstract strategy game, the rights to both of which had been acquired by Avalon Hill when they purchased the products from 3M’s Bookshelf Game series.

During this period, Avalon not only published original titles, but they also purchased the rights to re-publish games that had been previously published by smaller companies. Included in these re-published games was Battleline Publications’ Wooden Ships and Iron Men, Jedko Games’ The Russian Campaign and War at Sea, and Hartland Trefoil’s Civilization. In response to the enormous popularity TSR was experiencing with Dungeons & Dragons, Avalon Hill also published several traditional pen & paper roleplaying games, including Lords of Creation and Powers and Perils. Through a complicated agreement with the publisher Chaosium, Avalon Hill was about to secure the rights to release the RuneCraft, an RPG which had established itself as the second most popular fantasy role-playing game after Dungeons & Dragons.

At the beginning of the 1980s, Avalon Hill began developing numerous computer games based on their various boardgames. Platforms for these new computer games included the VIC 20, Commodore 64, and Apple II. Unfortunately, Avalon Hill saw little success with their computer games.

Avalon Hill enjoyed moderate growth through the 1980s and early 1990s. However, during the mid 1990s, the boardgame industry as a whole began suffering a downturn in sales. Not only had overall sales of their board games decreased, but the company had also lost the rights to two of their most popular games, Civilization and 1830, in a legal battle with the computer game publisher Microprose. In 1997 and 1998 Avalon Hill lost significant money in both its computer division and its boardgame division. In the summer of 1998, Eric Dott, president of Monarch Avalon, Inc. (the parent company of Avalon Hill), sold the rights to all Avalon Hill titles, all back stock, and the name company itself to Hasbro, Inc. Hasbro continued to publish games under the Avalon Hill name. In addition, they sold the rights to several games, such as Advanced Squad Leader, to other publishers. In late 1999, Avalon Hill was made a division of Wizards of the Coast, who had been purchased by Hasbro earlier that year. Wizards of the Coast continues to release games under the Avalon Hill name, including Axis & Allies, Betrayal at House on the Hill, RoboRally, and Risk 2210 A.D.

Despite the fact that Coleco is certainly not the only company releasing home PONG clones, they enjoy moderate success and go on to produce nine more varieties of the Telstar unit. Unfortunately, in 1978, as the home videogame market moves to programmable, cartridge based game units, Coleco is forced to dump over a million obsolete Telstar machines at a nearly crippling cost of more than 20 million dollars.

Coleco president Arnold Greenberg ignores this near disaster and directs his R&D team to begin work on a new home videogame system, the ColecoVision, which he feels will set the standard in graphics quality and expandability.

Released in the summer of 1982 at a retail cost of $199, the ColecoVision has the ability to display 32 sprites on-screen at the same time, along with a 16 color on-screen palette out of a total of 32. In addition, the ColecoVision features three channel sound. The key to this new system’s success, however, as with many of the new home systems being released at this time, is the included cartridge. In the case of the ColecoVision, Coleco successfully negotiated the right to release the smash arcade hit Donkey Kong.

While amazingly popular, Coleco’s release of Donkey Kong with the ColecoVision was not without its problems. Universal City Studios Inc, believing that Donkey Kong infringed upon thier own King Kong, threatened both Nintendo and Coleco with legal action. With a large sum of money already invested in the license, Arnold Greenberg agreed to pay Universal 3% of the net sale price of the game. Unlike Coleco, Nintendo fights the lawsuit, offering numerous in-court demonstrations or gameplay vs. movie plot. In addition, Nintendo argued that in a previous case, Universal had themselves argued that King Kong’s characters and plot were in the public domain. The result was that Nintendo is successful in their claim, and was awarded $1.8 million in damages. Nintendo’s victory immediately prompted Coleco to file suit against Universal, the result of which was the receipt of a portion of the royalties they had previously paid to Universal.

Beyond Donkey King, twelve additional cartridges were released along with the ColecoVision. While Atari had pioneered the licensing of arcade games for home play with Space Invaders, Coleco makes this a key part of their strategy, aggressively seeking licenses for coin-operated games instead of concentrating on developing original games. The first wave of these games includes translations of such arcade games as Lady Bug, Space Panic, Mouse Trap, Venture, Space Fury, and Zaxxon. While the conversations were hardly flawless, the ColecoVision’s relatively advanced graphics are able to capture the look and feel of the coin operated originals upon which the cartridge versions are based.

Hitting the market in the midst of the public relations war between Atari and Mattel, the ColecoVision sells for around $100 more than the Atari 2600 but also $35 less than Mattel’s Intellivision. The price point combined with Donkey Kong makes the ColecoVision an instant success. The first run of 550,000 unites sells out almost immediately. By Christmas of 1982, one million of the systems, along with more than 8 million cartridges, have been sold.

After the initial release of the ColecoVision in 1982, Coleco immediately releases the Atari 2600 Converter. Selling for $60, the Atari 2600 Converter allows users to play Atari 2600 cartridges on their ColecoVision. The Atari Converter is amazingly popular, and goes on to sell 150,000 units within the first three months after its release. However, as one would expect, its release results in a flurry of litigation, starting with a $350 million lawsuit from Atari over patent infringement. Coleco counter-sues for $550 million, claiming that Atari is infringing on U.S. anti-trust laws. The two companies eventually reach a settlement, resulting in Coleco paying royalties to Atari on every Atari Converter unit sold.

By the end of 1983, the ColecoVision has sold more than 1.5 million units, surpassing the number of units sold by the Atari 2600, the Mattel Intellivision, and Atari’s new 5200 Supersystem. In addition to the Atari Converter, the 29 game publishers who are producing cartridges for the system give the ColeoVision the largest game library of any console currently on the market

After the success of the ColecoVision, Coleco decides to invest not in the production of a new home game system, but in a home computer system instead. This was a logical step for Coleco as they, along with the other major home videogame system developers, are beginning to suffer financially as consumers turn to home computer systems such as the Commodore VIC-20 or the The Commodore 64.

Coleco’s answer was the ADAM computer. The ADAM computer is released as two separate versions. One version of the ADAM is a stand-alone unit, while the other version, called Expansion Pack #3, involves a series of add-ons the existing ColecoVision game system.

The hardware for both units includes 64K of RAM and 32K of ROM (expandable to 144K). Interestingly enough, the hardware also includes a built-in word processor. The stand-alone system featured two game controllers, and an external cartridge slot into which ColecoVision cartridges can be inserted and played. Both systems include a full-size keyboard, a digital tape drive, and a large printer that also serves as the unit’s power supply.

By late 1983, Coleco has received a delayed approval from the FCC on the ADAM design, and the company frantically begins mass production to meet the 400,000 pre-orders that retailers are demanding before the pivotal Christmas season. With a retail price of $600 for the stand-alone unit, and $400 for the ColecoVision add-on package.

Unfortunately, public reaction to the ADAM is mass indifference. Sales are vastly below what Coleco had originally predicted. Out of the pre-orders, only 100,000 eventually sell. The primary problem for the ADAM’s low sales was that it was remarkably buggy. One of the most dramatic problems was that the machine emitted a magnetic pulse when it powered up, erasing any tapes accidentally left in the drive. Matters were made worse by the fact that many of the ADAM manuals instructed user’s to put the tape in the drive before actually turning the computer on.

Eventually, 60% of all ADAMs are returned to stores as defective. In 1984, with the rest of the home videogame market in a downward spiral, the consumer electronics division of Coleco loses over $258 million dollars.

In an effort to bolster sagging sales the retail prince of the standalone ADAM unit is reduced to $300. However, not even this price reduction in addition to a billion dollars in Cabbage Patch Kid sales can save the company from the losses it incurred as a result of the abject failure of the ADAM. By 1985, the ADAM and ColecoVision line of electronic devices are abandoned by Coleco. Shortly thereafter, Coleco itself files for Chapter 11 bankrupcy in 1988.

In 1973, Gary Gygax, a game designer from Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, and Don Kaye founded Tactical Studies Rules in order to publish the rules for Cavaliers and Roundheads, a miniature war game based in the English Civil War. While Cavaliers and Roundheads was the initial focus of Tactical Studies Rules, Gygax and Kaye also wished to publish the rules for Dungeons & Dragons, a fantasy miniature role playing game developed by Gygax whose rules were based on Chainmail, a medieval miniature game developped by Gygax and Jeff Perren in 1971. As Cavaliers and Roundheads began generating revenue for Tactical Studies Rules, the partnership was expanded to include Dave Arneson and Brian Blume. While Dave Arneson was brought into the partenership as a game designer, and left shortly thereafter, Brian Blume entered as a funder. Blume believed that Cavaliers and Roundheads was not generating enough revenue, and encouraged Gygax and Kaye to focus their efforts on releasing Dungeons & Dragons.

There is considerable debate as to the contributions that Dave Arneson made to the initial development of Dungeons & Dragons. While Arneson has labeled himself “The Father of Role-playing,” and has said that he was responsible for writing the game in its entirety, Gygax contends that he himself was primary responsible for the development of Dungeons & Dragons, and Arneson’s involvement, while important, was contributory. After Tactical Studies Rules was dissolved, and TSR Hobbies, Inc. was formed, Arneson continued to receive credit for his involvement in the development of Dungeons & Dragons, as well as royalties per his contract.

In 1975, after the highly successful release of Dungeons & Dragons, Don Kaye died of a stroke. The immediate result was that Blume and Gygax dissolved Tactical Studies Rules and founded a new company named TSR Hobbies, Inc. The board of directors for TSR Hobbies, Inc. consisted of Brian Blue, Gygax, and Kevin Blume, Brian Blume’s younger brother who has received shares from Melvin Blume, Brian and Kevin’s father, who had purchased shares in the company. Brian Blume acted as President of Creative Affairs, while Kevin Blume acted as President of Operations, and Gygax acted as the company’s CEO and President. Unlike the equal partnership of Tactical Studies Rules, Brian Blume & Kevin Blume owned a majority of the new company’s shares.

Initially, TSR Hobbies, Inc. experienced phenomenal success in both the United States and abroad. Unfortunately, despite the fact that the Dungeons & Dragons brand was becoming more popular and widely recognized, the Blume’s began to greatly overextend the company’s reach. They not only moved into domains such as boardgames and toys, but they began to diversify in remarkably unrelated areas. Perhaps the best evidence of this was the unapproved acquisition of Greenfield Needlewomen, a needlepoint business owned by one of the Blume’s relatives. In addition, TSR Hobbies, Inc was remarkably overstaffed (the result of the Blume’s nepotism). Further, Kevin Blume had grossly overprinted millions of copies of the previously successful multi-path Dungeons & Dragons adventure books, all of which could not be sold. In an effort to mitigate the mounting financial problems, TSR Hobbies, Inc was restructured into four companies: TSR, Inc., TSR Ventures, TSR International, and TSR Entertainment. TST Inc. continued to manufacture the company’s core Dungeons & Dragons role playing products. TSR Ventures focused on the production of plastics and toys in Asia. TSR International was established to manage overseas business, distribution and sales there, licensing and production. TSR Entertainment, which was headed up by Gygax and later changed its name to Dungeons & Dragons Entertainment Corporation, was responsible for leveraging TSR’s IP in other entertainment markets, such as movie and television. Unfortunately, TSR Entertainment’s only success was the short lived Dungeons & Dragons cartoon. Upon multiple occasions, Gygax had said that the separate corporations were Blume’s attempt as keeping foreign income away from US taxation

Despite the restructuring, TSR, Inc. continued to lose money as a result of mismanagement. Eventually, both Kevin and Brian Blume were removed from the board of directors after being accused of misusing corporate funds and accumulating large debt in the pursuit of unapproved and inappropriate acquisitions. In the wake of the Blume’s departure from the board of directors, Gygax assumed the role of CEO and regained partial control of the company. However, unbeknownst to Gygax, Kevin and Brian Blume were in secret negotiations with Lorraine Williams, a potential investor who Gygax had brought into the company previously as an officer, to acquire their majority stock. When Williams finally acquired a controlling stake in the company, Gygax attempted to have the sale declared illegal. Unfortunately, the attempt failed, and Gygax sold his remaining stock to Williams and used the capital to form a new company entitled New Infinity Productions.

The departure of Gygax from TSR irreparably changed the face of the company. TSR successfully expanded into areas such as magazines, paperback fiction, and comic books. In addition, the company released popular new role-playing settings including Dragonlance, Ravenloft, Forgotten Realms, and Greyhawk, all of which have had an enduring impact on the tabletop roleplaying landscape. However, the company was unable to adapt to the continued fragmentation of the tabletop RPG community as new products were released by other companies. In addition, in an effort to compete in the emergent collectible card game market, TSR released a series of products, such as Dragon Dice and Spellfire, which simply did not sell. The downward financial spiral was aggravated by the fact that, as their products continued to perform poorly in the marketplace, TSR began to legally attack those who it believed infringed on its intellectual property. The targets of these legal actions included not only other corporations and businesses, but individuals fans involved in authoring fan fiction and D&D fan modules. The result of these actions was that TSR was widely perceived as directly attacking its customers.

In 1997, as TSR approached receivership, the company and all of its intellectual property were acquired by Wizards of the Coast. Ironically, Wizards of the Coast, which was now widely considered to be the preeminent tabletop role playing game company had been responsible for publishing Magic: The Gathering, the game whose remarkable success had been responsible for TSR’s failure in the collectible card game market. After the sale to Wizards of the Coast, which continues to publish Dungeons & Dragons to this day, TSR was slowly dismantled. In 2003 the final TSR trademarks were allowed to expire by Wizards of the Coast.

Despite its almost constant legal and financial troubles, TSR had a lasting impact on both digital and non-digital games. One might easily argue that TSR has had more impact on the entertainment game industry (digital or non-digital) than any other company in the history of games. Not only are many computer role playing games based on the archetypes and mechanics first introduced in Dungeons & Dragons, but many of the luminaries in the history of digital games were greatly influenced by TSR and its various products. TSR’s products have long since passed into the realm of popular culture.

Whether designed to entertain or for more “serious” purposes, games have the potential to impact players’ beliefs, knowledge, attitudes, emotions, cognitive abilities, and behavior.

Meaningful Play 2008 is an interdisciplinary academic conference that explores the potential of games to entertain, inform, educate, and persuade in meaningful ways. The conference includes thought-provoking keynotes from leaders in academia and industry, peer-reviewed paper presentations, panel sessions (including academic and industry discussions), innovative workshops, roundtable discussions, and exhibitions of games.

For more information on the conference, check out http://meaningfulplay.msu.edu