Generating gameworlds with computers: the case for procedural creativity

Abstract

Purpose \n \n \n \n \nDespite the popularity of the Computational Thinking (CT) paradigm and the call for broad social diffusion of CS fundamentals, the authors argue that the concept is inherently limited and limiting and does not sufficiently convey an understanding of how to enable people to create with computational technologies. The authors suggest an alternate paradigm, procedural creativity, that calls for the development of conceptual creative spaces governed by procedurally generative principles. The authors also call for game development to be the focus of procedural creativity pedagogy. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nThe authors first discuss the limitations of the CT paradigm, focusing, in particular, on the issue of abstraction and representation as opposed to execution and action. The authors then define procedural creativity in more detail. Following that, they discuss the use of game development as pedagogy, with a focus on Margaret Boden’s notion of conceptual creative spaces. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nCT is limited because it focuses overly on solutions to computational “problems”, because it is tied too closely with economic concerns and because it focuses on abstraction at the cost of action. Procedural creativity, on the other hand, focuses on the individual’s capacity for personal expression with the computer and on the generative capacity of code in action. Game development is in ideal platform for procedural creativity because it emphasizes the development of creative domains and conceptual spaces. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nThis paper offers a challenge to the CT status quo and presents a novel way forward for understanding computation as a creative practice.