Not all games communicate values but of the ones that do some do it in a more subtle manner than others. 

2 hours ago, fleabay said:

As sexist and racist as Postal 2 was, it never communicated values.

The suffix "ist" denotes perpetuating demeaning or discriminatory ideas.  It is impossible for any work to convey those two things in the content of your work and not communicate any values.  You may see them as neutral values if they are ones you share, kind of like how no one thinks they have an accent, but that still doesn't change the fact that it is attempting to communicate a world view.  The content doesn't have to overshadow the game either, FFVII has a very environmentalist message and even puts you in charge of what are essentially a rag-tag group of eco terrorists fighting a corporation that runs the world and powers war machines by sucking the lifeblood from the planet, hamfisted writing at its finest with almost no major breakthroughs in game play other than being fully 3-d at a time when that was a novelty, everyone just remembers it for cool hair, big swords and chocobo races, no one cites it as shoving an environmentalist message down their throat.  Pac-Man and Minecraft communicate almost no values via game play or mechanics, I agree with you there and they are both what I would consider some of the greats, but they have little to no story.  The more you write the more the world view of the author will be reflected and everyone has opinions and values and those will come through via your writing. 

That being said I don't think that "what values were the creators communicating in this game" is a good question for a game design class, maybe something like a video games as art class where you did literary critiques of video game stories or something.  Basic games you want to start out teaching have little to no story and thus little to no representation beyond whatever visual assets are used.  The medium is still finding recognition as a legitimate form of art so good on you for teaching this class and legitimizing it in an educational setting, but I feel class time would be better used to teach techniques used in game development, possibly ones that arose out of system limitations and have an interesting history behind them, nuts and bolts type stuff.

11 hours ago, gameteacher said:

How games communicate values in the way they represent subjects, genres, and sure; things like gender and ethnicity.

Ultimately all games by their nature have a high degree of escapism even when they include meaningful subjects or themes. I would suggest discussing with English teachers how such topics are approached when examining other works of a similar nature. Hopefully people won't complain as much if you examine a game with the same lens as you would a book, movie or other long established forms of entertainment. An important difference to keep in mind though is that English class is a study of culture works while Game Design is a study of how to create a product within pop-culture.

8 minutes ago, kseh said:

Ultimately all games by their nature have a high degree of escapism even when they include meaningful subjects or themes. I would suggest discussing with English teachers how such topics are approached when examining other works of a similar nature. Hopefully people won't complain as much if you examine a game with the same lens as you would a book, movie or other long established forms of entertainment. An important difference to keep in mind though is that English class is a study of culture works while Game Design is a study of how to create a product within pop-culture.

What do you mean "complain as much"?

1 hour ago, gameteacher said:

What do you mean "complain as much"?

You barely brought up the topic of values and every reply since has centered on that.

It is fair to critically examine any work or product that we produce and to encourage students to consider such things. Doing so would hopefully produce more quality works. My advice is to have students critically analyze a game the way they might be asked to analyze something in English class. But again, I presume that your class is intended to be about producing a works of some kind rather than a study of culture.

Consider also that a lot of games being produced these days are not epic fictional experiences as would be expected from a "big game" like you mentioned in your original post but more like short automated board games or toys. Smaller games like these, usually designed for touch pads or mobile devices, are generally much easier to produce and in range of a student project.

3 minutes ago, kseh said:

You barely brought up the topic of values and every reply since has centered on that.

It is fair to critically examine any work or product that we produce and to encourage students to consider such things. Doing so would hopefully produce more quality works. My advice is to have students critically analyze a game the way they might be asked to analyze something in English class. But again, I presume that your class is intended to be about producing a works of some kind rather than a study of culture.

Consider also that a lot of games being produced these days are not epic fictional experiences as would be expected from a "big game" like you mentioned in your original post but more like short automated board games or toys. Smaller games like these, usually designed for touch pads or mobile devices, are generally much easier to produce and in range of a student project.

Yes, well the other people replying were confused because they don't understand the deeper representational signifiers built into games through aesthetics and game play, and they also don't understand game design education, which can include studies of this sort in addition to the vocational aspects of just making games. This warmup procedure will be part of the "game study" portion of my game design course. Students study games to develop serious games of their own. By the way, what is the better term for big games, mainstream games or AAA games?

1 hour ago, gameteacher said:

By the way, what is the better term for big games, mainstream games or AAA games?

I'd use AAA because it's an acceptable slang for big budget development. Mainstream is a nebulous term for whatever is in vogue at the time.

1 hour ago, gameteacher said:

Yes, well the other people replying were confused because they don't understand the deeper representational signifiers built into games through aesthetics and game play, and they also don't understand game design education, which can include studies of this sort in addition to the vocational aspects of just making games.

Fair enough. It sounded like you were preaching the hot topic of representation as a important part of your high school curriculum. Representation as a synonym for concepts and meaning is fine, I suppose. Though it is a very odd word to use in this day and age in that kind of context. However, I still don't see the importance of that as it pertains to game design.

I would love to hear an example of what you mean by representation as a component of game design. Perhaps your initial question would be better served if we understood more precisely what it is that you are trying to achieve.

1 hour ago, gameteacher said:

Yes, well the other people replying were confused because they don't understand the deeper representational signifiers built into games through aesthetics and game play, and they also don't understand game design education, which can include studies of this sort in addition to the vocational aspects of just making games. This warmup procedure will be part of the "game study" portion of my game design course. Students study games to develop serious games of their own. By the way, what is the better term for big games, mainstream games or AAA games? 

I think discussions like that have happened here more often in the past. People here do understand that a game's content and aesthetics can have an impact on society but unfortunately these days such public discussions are powder kegs with the potential to have long term repercussion given the permanence of what's written on the internet. I think this is something society could benefit from examining but is a different topic entirely.

A mainstream game is probably made by a AAA company. But it's probably fair to say that indie developers and hobbyists are in a better position to take risks. So developing a "serious" game depends on what your actual goals are. So what are the goals of your students, to get a job in an established company, start a business, make a statement of some kind, just try out something interesting?

On 8/9/2019 at 1:31 AM, krb said:

Not all games communicate values but of the ones that do some do it in a more subtle manner than others. 

The suffix "ist" denotes perpetuating demeaning or discriminatory ideas.  It is impossible for any work to convey those two things in the content of your work and not communicate any values.  You may see them as neutral values if they are ones you share, kind of like how no one thinks they have an accent, but that still doesn't change the fact that it is attempting to communicate a world view.  The content doesn't have to overshadow the game either, FFVII has a very environmentalist message and even puts you in charge of what are essentially a rag-tag group of eco terrorists fighting a corporation that runs the world and powers war machines by sucking the lifeblood from the planet, hamfisted writing at its finest with almost no major breakthroughs in game play other than being fully 3-d at a time when that was a novelty, everyone just remembers it for cool hair, big swords and chocobo races, no one cites it as shoving an environmentalist message down their throat.  Pac-Man and Minecraft communicate almost no values via game play or mechanics, I agree with you there and they are both what I would consider some of the greats, but they have little to no story.  The more you write the more the world view of the author will be reflected and everyone has opinions and values and those will come through via your writing. 

That being said I don't think that "what values were the creators communicating in this game" is a good question for a game design class, maybe something like a video games as art class where you did literary critiques of video game stories or something.  Basic games you want to start out teaching have little to no story and thus little to no representation beyond whatever visual assets are used.  The medium is still finding recognition as a legitimate form of art so good on you for teaching this class and legitimizing it in an educational setting, but I feel class time would be better used to teach techniques used in game development, possibly ones that arose out of system limitations and have an interesting history behind them, nuts and bolts type stuff.

Your last paragraph is false reasoning. EVERY game exhibits values. Whether you understand how these are visually or otherwise communicated is another story.