Others say...

"Excellent book"
It's an excellent book. The fact that she included my incredibly detailed game design document in no way influenced my rating.

"Classroom Warning"
Just wanted to let people know there is a later version if you missed it, and you should check with instructors before buying this book and be sure it is the dated version needed!

"Gwenn McElwee's Review"
I find this book to be well rounded in the history and in the aspect to the gaming and simulation world. It was not what I originally expected to read, but I thoroughly enjoyed it and now can look at the gaming world a lot differently with more respect.

I purchased this book because it was required for the class I am taking at DeVry University Online, but now that I have read it, I am interested in purchasing a few of the other books in this series by Jeannie Novak.

"Interesting side notes, but not worth the effort"
One interesting thing this book contains is little sidebar interviews with people from the game industry. It might serve people who are looking for jobs and want to get names of people in industry.

This book might also be a good read for parents of kids who want to learn more about the gaming industry. It is a very simple introduction (hence the title).

For anyone who has played computer games however, it will be overly simple and offer little value add.

It really is an intro and nothing more.

"I enjoyed it"
I would probably have given it 5 stars if it weren't for the few mistakes made. For example on page 218 there is a screenshot of C&C Generals and the caption says "Praetorians uses terrain as a boundary" with the image credit given to Eidos Interactive! Wow... It's probably just a mistake someone else made and not Novak, but still. I haven't been able to locate an errata list on either the publisher's website nor Novak's, but aside from a few minor typos I haven't found any other mistakes.

For a book published in late 2004, an updated edition seems a long time coming for a book that needed it. I see the second edition is due out August 2007 so that's good. Too bad my class didn't wait until then. I was required to purchase this first edition.

I don't know if I'd recommend this to anyone just browsing the shelves for a book on game design, unless you have more money than the typical student. At $64, I would hold this book to higher standards. Thomson Delmar Learning doesn't really target the mass market, so you'd expect to pay a little extra and receive a little extra in return. But price aside, I agree with all the other positive comments. If you are interested in the subject matter then I really would recommend this book. Maybe just wait a few months for the 2nd edition.

The demo CD is lackluster in my opinion. All it had were URLs to demo games and game engine trial versions. They could have saved some money and just had a page at the end of the book list the URLs.

The interviews with and comments by the industry pros are very nice for the beginning student to read. The book is very colorful and has lots of pictures. That makes it sound childish but it really does help with the reading. I'm used to reading technical books on programming and even I found this format to be useful and it fit well with the subject.

In places, the author talks about generic game ideas and then references a specific game, as if this game is a shining example of the topic and it beat out all others. The topics are so generic that any game in the genre discussed could be used as a reference. To me this reeks of product placement.

One other thing that bothers me is the inclusion of "credible" studies and surveys by renowned research organizations like Nielsen. It isn't so much the fault of the author as it is the proliferation of surveys. One study sampled 33 medical professionals, came up with surprising results, and made the following statement: "The next step? Surgery simulations!". I'm sorry, but sampling 33 doctors means absolutely nothing. Get back to me when you sample 33,000. A different survey of 1,000 males in 2003 found 10% watched less television, 33% said in-game ads helped them decide which products to buy, and 50% actually liked the inclusion of real products in games. The next statement makes a conclusion: "Major corporations are now considering product placement in games as a significant form of advertising." How many millions of males in the United States alone play video games regularly? Wow, 1,000 sure is representative. Now the rest of us have to be subjected to in-game ads, which are repulsively annoying, thanks to the wrong set of 1,000 people surveyed. Sigh. Yes, I know it's impossible to survey a representative sample. So don't bother with surveys. I'm going off on a tangent, but the point is this book is pretty good. Just ignore the surveys.