The authors present the methodological background to and underlying research design of an ongoing research project on the scientific evaluation of serious games and/or computer‐based simulation games (SGs) for advanced learning. The main research questions are: (1) what are the requirements and design principles for a comprehensive social scientific methodology for the evaluation of SGs?; (2) to what extent do SGs contribute to advanced learning?; (3) what factors contribute to or determine this learning?; and (4) to what extent and under what conditions can SG‐based learning be transferred to the real world? In the Netherlands between 2005 and 2012, several hundred SG sessions with 12 SGs were evaluated systematically, uniformly and quantitatively to create a dataset, which comprises data on 2488 respondents in higher education or work organizations. The authors present the research model, the quasi‐experimental design and the evaluation instruments. This focus in this paper is on the methodology and dataset, which form a sound foundation for forthcoming publications on the empirical results.

Most serious games have been developed without a proper and comprehensive design theory. To contribute to the development of such a theory, this article presents the underlying design philosophy of LEVEE PATROLLER, a game to train levee patrollers in the Netherlands. This philosophy stipulates that the design of a digital serious game is a multiobjective problem in which trade-offs need to be made. Making these tradeoffs takes place in a design space defined by three equally important components: (a) Play, (b) Meaning, and (c) Reality. The various tensions between these three components result in design dilemmas and trilemmas that make it difficult to balance a serious game. Each type of tension is illustrated with one or more examples from the design of LEVEE PATROLLER.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract