The first challenge was deciding what kind of game to develop. We’re generally quite busy at Team Cooper HQ, so it seemed wise to focus on a fairly simple game design, and what could be simpler than Pong?

The game I have created is called p0ng and is a spiritual successor to the original Pong. It keeps the format of two paddles locked in an eternal struggle to bounce a ball backwards and forwards, but those of you familiar with Pong will notice some subtle (and not so subtle) differences.

Unlike Matt, I mainly used images to show graphics in my game, with the only dynamically drawn content being the score display. Using images in HTML5 was initially an interesting challenge as everything must be loaded in at runtime as opposed to Flash, where images can be compiled directly into the game’s SWF file. Other than that, the actual process of writing JavaScript code wasn’t too dissimilar to working with ActionScript 3 (this is no great surprise, considering both languages are forms of ECMAScript). This meant I could dive right into coding the game’s logic, although I had to do without many of the convenient libraries I often have at my disposal when working with Flash.

Usually when creating a Flash application I will write code using Powerflasher’s FDT, a powerful tool with many specific functions designed to make the process of writing ActionScript easier. I know Adobe Dreamweaver isn’t very popular with web developers these days, but I decided to give it a shot anyway to see what it could offer an aspiring HTML5 game developer. Dreamweaver did offer some useful error detection similar to what FDT offers, but lacks some of the most handy functions that we use in FDT every day.

To be fair to Dreamweaver, much of this is actually down to how JavaScript works compared to ActionScript 3, with the former being weakly typed and the latter being strictly typed. The advantage of a strictly typed language is that your coding tool can always tell what types of variables you’re working with and provide you with a whole host of information and shortcuts that make focusing on writing code much easier. With JavaScript, there is nothing like this which makes the code much more ambiguous with regards to its exact functionality. This makes it much more difficult for software to try and guess exactly what it is that you’re trying to accomplish with your code.

That said, p0ng didn’t take a great deal of time to produce and was a very good introduction to the world of HTML5 development. Obviously there are plenty of other things I’d like to put into the game if I had the time, but I don’t think any game developer worth his salt will ever claim any of his games are ever truly ‘finished’

I’m sure you’re itching to have a go at the game, though, so here you go (Make sure you click the game to enable keyboard interactions):

There’s been a lot in the media recently about HTML5′s uprising and its challenge for the throne of web-based gaming, so Team Cooper decided it was time to have a good look into it to determine if it was a viable option for the heavily interactive games and apps that we make.

As a consumer, the concept of HTML5 games is brilliant. Browsers are rushing to support all the new features, and new techniques and demos are being developed all the time. With no extra plug-ins or add-ons needed, it’s perfect for casual gaming on the fly. They’ll even (for the most part) work on mobiles!

As stated in Tim’s blog post back in November, Flash had been the go-to tool for creating rich interactive experiences for some time. HTML5 has been looking like it may change that, and from all the coverage it’s been getting, it’s clear to see that many people in the web community consider it a strong contender. As such, after our session in the meeting room, we went our separate ways to start playing about with what was on offer and to try and make something before the end of the day. Obviously with only a few hours left in the day we weren’t expecting miracles, but we all managed to get things moving around on our screens. Since then, I’ve been working on-and-off on my game, Shpace (You can play the game at the bottom of this post).

Shpace is a very simple shoot ‘em up, developed in a few days using solely the drawing functions provided by the HTML5 canvas element. As it was a test project for learning a new technology, there are certain things that could definitely be improved, so I will now provide a short run down of what I did and what I could do, given more time:

Controls

In its simplest terms, the game is just a set of functions that draw shapes at a specific position. The game checks for any of these shapes that might be colliding and carries out the required action depending on what they are. The player must navigate around the screen, avoiding the enemies and their bullets whilst shooting them for points. The controls I chose to use are the arrow keys and the ‘Z’ key to shoot. These seemed like a pretty universal method for controlling such a game, but a problem did arise in the form of having to cancel out any operations that might otherwise be performed by the arrow keys. Normally they scroll the page, but in this game, we really don’t want the scroll bar to jump up and down while trying to fend off a horde of angry red triangles. As the canvas element doesn’t have any way of knowing if it’s in focus, I had to use a click listener to check for focus myself.

Structuring the content

Laying out the page to work with the game was simple using CSS. There is an overall container to hold the game’s contents and within that there’s a separate container for the menu. JavaScript then takes care of what to show and what to hide at any given time. Finally, there is the canvas element which is what gets manipulated by the JavaScript to display everything. Learning and using JavaScript hasn’t been very difficult. It’s very similar to ActionScript as they both come from the same roots. The only issue I did have with using JavaScript was that, unless I wanted to have a huge list of script tags referencing all the different JavaScript files for each object in the game, it all had to be in one file. At first I found this very messy and quite annoying for scrolling up and down between areas that I was working on, but I soon got used to it and the web developer tools in Eclipse helped. In fact, it reminded me a lot of when I made a game in Python with PyGame – it forces you to lay out your file properly and comment vigilantly.

Future work

If I decided to work on Shpace in the future (which is quite possible) it would be good to add in a few more things. The game is quite bland at the moment, there are only two types of enemies and a distinct lack of any sort of ‘boss battle’. Creating some more varieties of enemy and giving them different behaviours would help to combat this, and wouldn’t take too much time. Adding in bosses may take a little longer, but really they’d just be a special type of enemy. There is also no sound as I haven’t really has time to experiment with the sound API. Another interesting addition, and one that again wouldn’t take very much time (I don’t think) would be high scores. I would also be intrigued to look into the possibility of WebSockets and a multiplayer co-operative mode. This is something that would definitely take some time however.

Mobile

Whilst developing the game I spent a bit of time messing about with getting it working on my phone and/or my iPod. I found a very good article and example on touch controls in JavaScript whilst searching for knowledge on the subject. After looking at that I managed to get touch controls working for the game on my iPod, albeit in a very unrefined manner. It worked okay, although as it was just a fleeting test, there were problems with scrolling and zooming not cancelling whilst trying to shoot the bad guys. This is something I’d love to look into more and get working in a friendly and accurate fashion so that the game could be played in a browser on a phone or iOS device. There are even tools like PhoneGap that enable you to package up HTML5 games and apps for deployment on the iOS app store and Android Marketplace, much like you can with Flash using Adobe AIR.

From my adventures in Shpace, I realised a few things. For a game like Shpace, HTML5 is definitely a strong and viable option. It’s simple, it’s easy to play and it doesn’t need a huge amount of code to make. As such, having the code laid out in one file isn’t a problem, and with the speed JavaScript executes at it runs pretty smoothly. That said, for a bigger game and a game with complex class hierarchies, I don’t think it’s the way to go yet. Something like Nurse Quest would just be a nightmare to get to grips with. I believe the battle between HTML5 and Flash will rage on for some time yet – Flash Player 11 has some great performance boosts and the introduction of Stage3D brings even more to the table. Whilst WebGL (Although not actually part of HTML5) can be used with it to create some stunning games and visual effects. I’m not sure there will ever be a clear winner between the two, but at the moment it really is just down to the project, your audience and what you want to do with it.

You can play the game below (Click the game to begin playing):

I’ve never experienced a Webinar before but I’m really impressed with the technology, there were only a few hitches that were effortlessly and quickly dealt with utilising freely available simple technologies like sharing a Google presentation. It enabled me to listen in to the sessions while still at work and, as Keri Lambden suggested, I could have been sat in my dressing gown if I liked – sadly the windows at TC towers are large and I’m not sure the innocent people of Sheffield (let alone my poor colleagues) are quite ready for that horror.

I really enjoyed Rebekah Lock’s talk about unblocking her creativity by setting herself a 365 challenge , to create a heart in whatever style or media everyday for a year. The great thing about her session was she set us the challenge to come up with our own heart, I gave myself a 20 minute time limit and came up with this. Which reminded me that at Flash On The Beach I’d promised myself to do more doing and making for myself, I’m now considering setting myself a daily creative challenge, but, I’ll get back to you about that.

I found Annette Priest’s session on mobile user experience invaluable. Taking recent apps made by Starbucks as an example of good and bad usability design. I found it interesting that the one they made for “fun” she considered to be an empty experience. I think this is a problem, finding a place for fun interactions that are not a whole game but have value as an added bonus for your audience. It’s not really wise to make something flippant intended as a few minutes of interaction as a downloadable app. The user has expectations linked in to downloading an app. It’s why frippery and fun is best handled in browser, and I would say this, by Flash.

The final panel discussion featured four highly accomplished, experienced and inspirational women who had to tackle some really big questions about being women working in technology. Well respected UI design expert Sarah Parmenter spoke about teaching herself how to code. Entrepreneurial power house Sarah McVittie spoke about her deep love for data. Julie Howell discussed her years in the industry and how she and her peers invented social networking by creating large forums where groups with similar interest and needs would discuss their issues. Jess Ratcliffe, founder of the awesome site GaBOOM, talked about having an idea at 15 and setting up a business at 19.

I think the main thing that I got from the conference was that, despite being a minority, women are a thriving vital part of the web community. We really enjoy the work and we bring a specific point of view to the market. We feel a little sad that there aren’t more of us but an event like Emerge gave us an opportunity to be more than the 12% in the room, even if it did mean there was a queue for the loos.

Admittedly, this conversation started because I got LA Noire for Christmas. Ensuing conversations revealed that Team Captain Tim had not really enjoyed scrutinising every inch of LA for clues, far preferring to battle the bad guys face to face – whereas I loved the more procedural, deliberately-paced investigation parts of the game only to instantly be obliterated whenever facing an actual gangster with a gun. (Every. Single. Time) As well as realising that we had strong potential for a mismatched buddy-cop movie, it was obvious that perhaps we were playing the game with different wants. A diverse, detailed and dramatic game – was its only mistake in thinking that it could please everyone? Or was our mistake in thinking all of LA was meant for us?

Whatever methodology you use, it seems undeniable that different games appeal to different sorts of gamers. The Bartle Test breaks us down into Achievers, Explorers, Killers and Socialisers (mostly in terms of World of Warcraft-style game play but can be expanded to general gaming) while Jon Radoff has charted the different things that motivate players across most games.

Is it ‘easier’ (or less risky at any rate) to target specific niche audiences with casual games? Maybe. But I also suspect a clear or ‘simpler’ idea also be used to appeal to all our different gamer motivations.

While anticipating the launch of our own Nurse Quest game on the [adult swim] site last December, one by one, we were all drawn into the strange world of Robot Unicorn Attack featured on the same site. A very simple game in some respects but maybe deceptively so as it seems to lend itself to all the quadrants of Radoff’s game motivation ideas.

It’s Immersive, hypnotically drawing you in with its colours and *that* soundtrack. While not so much a game of Co-operation it is certainly a social experience; a talking point – something you want to tell people about (good thing) but then ultimately can’t fully explain so you tell people to just play it themselves (even better thing).

As an endless runner  it’s also a game of Achievement and Competition, attacking all of the stars is a goal and simply keeping going as long as possible can be competitive in terms of personal bests and addictiveness – as is the notion of giving you three lives, allowing you to compare scores with yourself for each go and perhaps drawing you in for more plays than you would on the average flash game.

To an extent, it’s just a game with some (clever) gimmicks…but one that has racked up two sequels, 686,000 likes on Facebook and over 41 million plays to date. We can be loyal to game genres, game brands and our own gaming habits, but how far should developers strive to create games that please everyone? Is it better to have separate puzzle and racing games than one game which has levels of each? Or is the ‘variety pack’ approach just what we have come to accept from modern games – mostly enjoyable, but always one flavour left at the end that someone isn’t that keen on.

Christmas has come early for the team as our tribute to point and click style adventure games (and silly humour) comes alive and goes live through our collaboration with [adult swim]. After all our cryptic hinting and code names like “Project: Geoff”, it feels great to finally be able to talk about ‘Nurse Quest: Love Hurts‘.

As a new recruit, the game was 99.9% finished by the time I joined the company in October so I was given the arduous task of ‘here, play this’ and playing at my desk, slightly paranoid at the knowledge that how many times I laughed out loud was being monitored. Knowing the others were heavily inspired by LucasArts’ Escape From Monkey Island games, I had to confess (to my shame) I’d never played any of the series, but I have extremely fond memories of Day of The Tentacle (also by LucasArts) and several Discworld adventure games. So my chuckles were both natural and plentiful as my old love of adventure games came flooding back – not just how to play them, but also the endless potential for comedy the gameplay style creates.

Before I joined the team, I’d attended a talk by our lead developer Russell about agency in games using ‘Nurse Quest’ as one of his examples. I’d greatly appreciated the comparison to sitcom in terms of story design: how each level was like an episode with the hero in pursuit of the same goal but sewing the seeds of their own downfall en route. And, as with most comedies, it’s ‘downfall’ that leads to the humour (…especially if baggy trousers are worn without a belt) and where an ambulance speeding you to a hospital becomes a recurring comedy catchphrase.

But this is all getting a bit philosophical. The point is, Nurse Quest: Love Hurts is now live on the [adult swim] site. I know the team are really proud of this game. and I can see why. So join Geoff in trying to achieve that impressive injury that will win the Nurse of his dreams.

In my few weeks with Team Cooper, I’ve been looking closely at (i.e. playing) the Team’s back-catalogue and thought it would be interesting to define them via the different sorts of nemesis that help draw the audience in to the game. Maybe seeing games from an opponent point of view might get you thinking “Does my game need a bad guy?”, and if so, what kind?

1. THEY’RE JUST LIKE YOU

Two completely different games but with one thing in common, whether armed with fencing épée or light cycle  - the ‘bad guy’ can do everything you can. No more. No less (Even if it might seem like your opponent has been sneakily practising whenever you’ve logged of). As well as letting you try and beat their score, The Beazley Winter Rally also lets you compete against ‘ghost’ versions of players who’ve already raced. And to think they say you can’t outrun the past!

2. INCREASING ODDS.

They lure you in with nice easy early levels… But then, before you know it, your entire screen is filled with outer space invaders or queues of fussy customers all wanting a piece of you. Yes, it puts the player under increasing pressure – but maybe that’s where your player will thrive.

3. TIME WAITS  FOR NO PLAYER

Sure, Wolverine would take on the whole world if he could – but Cyclops and the other X-Men only have 30 seconds in these games so it’s about doing what you can. Even if a player does well in their allotted time, there’s always that niggling thought that maybe you could have done better. Taking on time can be a great way to show improvement after multiple plays.

4. GRAVITY (and other laws of physics)

There’s probably a fighting game where you can duff up Isaac Newton and other famous physicists. But until then, you can challenge their most famous discoveries through sports games and challenges that really test your ability and let you prove your skills against things like cross-winds and targeting. Plus there’s always gravity itself. Nothing brings a game to an end like falling off a rooftop!

If you’re thinking about what kind of game you might like, this can be a really fun part of the process. As well as giving your player a goal and reason to succeed and win… you get to be the person who decides what’s stopping them from getting it!

Go on. Be mean. It makes for a better game too! Bwahahahaha!!!

The offices at Media City are shinier than a really shiny thing.  Nearly every static vertical surface is covered in whiteboard material, there are bare concrete pillars and grey felt-covered chairs with brightly coloured furry buttons and zips. I was really struggling not to touch everything. Oddly, the lifts have the floor selection buttons on the outside of the lift, I assume possibly serving as a constant daily reminder to staff that user journeys and choice are very neatly intertwined.

The day started off with a rapid and tantalising tour of the R&D department. We were whisked through listening rooms, labs, user testing suits and shown a flashed ankle of what the R&D team is up to. Frankly, I want to go back and spend a whole day (maybe 2) badgering the staff about what they’re doing and why and how and … I digress. The highlight for me was discovering the Universal Remote Control API which has been developed to solve problems of accessibility but potentially has a wider scope, giving viewers the opportunity to control and interact with their TV screens from their phone or tablet,  and the possibility for programme makers to add an extra character to your living room.

The rest of the day revolved around the BBC’s vision for our four screens – TV, Computer, Tablet and Mobile.

Based on the fact 97% of homes have a TV and there are 1.3 mobile phone contracts per person in the UK, the assumption is that quite a lot of us are at least two screen people. Our consumption of media is not limited to those two screens though so adding in desktops, laptops and tablets means that the BBC’s digital output will now cover four screens.

My favourite presentation of the day was from Holly Goodier, Head of Audiences, who presented results of her teams extensive research. They’ve been listening to how we say we interact with our screens, but also looking at how we actually interact with those screens given the data trails we all leave behind us. Basically it comes down to context and interaction level. We love our phones; they are our limbs and our hearts. We see Tablets as frivolous entertainment and in many cases they’re now being used as personal TV’s. Most people associate their desktops and laptops as a work space. TV is divided between different generations, older people see it as the hearth of the home, younger people see them as background noise.

She explained that about three or four years ago they were wondering when screens would become ubiquitous – At what point would there be a screen everywhere? In a very short time that has become a reality. Holly also hinted towards a concept that has been buzzing around my brain after reading this blog post. She asked, “When will the glass disappear?”. Sadly she didn’t take a punt at answering the question.

So the BBC have set their stall out. They’re going to be creating digital content across all four screens for all ten brands. Even if that means some forms of interactive media are going to look ten years behind others. At the time I raised this point in an ill thought out tweet.  Actually, after talking it over with some of the BBC staff and considering the issue of “Is HTML5 ready?”, I think it’s a very brave move that’s been forced by events they have no control over. Considering the lack of knowledge and experience in these new areas but recognising a shift in the way we use our screens, they are starting and supporting a move over to looking differently at the ways in which we can produce digital content.

Not so long ago, if you wanted to create any sort of rich interactive experience for your web based marketing efforts, your choice was pretty much solely limited to using Flash. It is currently the de facto standard for creating animations and interactive content that needs to reach as large an audience as possible. But the times they are a changin’, and these days there is more of a choice from the increasingly popular HTML 5 ^[1] to alternative browser plug-ins like Unity. The web community’s reaction to Adobe’s announcement last Tuesday regarding dropping mobile browser support has only helped to fuel rumours of a trend away from Flash. Unfortunately this has created some confusion about which technology you should actually be using right now for your campaigns, and with that in mind I thought I’d share my experience on the matter.

A confession

Cards on the table, I’ll admit that I am likely to be slightly biased towards Flash in that I run a company that (currently) works mainly with Flash ^[2] and I love working with the platform. However I haven’t always been a Flash developer, I started my career in web development where my role was writing HTML and JavaScript for interactive e-learning applications (Back then they called it DHTML).

So, which should you choose?

Of these two technologies each has their advantages and flaws and so your decision should be based on a few things which you need to ask yourself of every project:

• Who are your audience? (Or more specifically, what type of browser are they using?)
• What type of content is it?
• What’s your budget?

Who are your audience?

This is the most important thing to consider. When writing your marketing message you’ll make sure that it is appropriate to your audience. Similarly from a technical standpoint you’ll also want to make sure that it is delivered in a format they are able to view.

Flash currently has the advantage here. Flash player is ubiquitous on desktop machines, and even with factoring in your mobile audience, you can be reasonably confident that at least 90% of your total viewers will have Flash Player installed.

The biggest hurdle for HTML 5 is Internet Explorer because prior to the introduction of IE9, it did not support any of its major features. The majority of other web browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari) have supported these features for quite some time now. They also generally update themselves frequently meaning that they can support the latest HTML 5 features.

If you have Google analytics running on your web server it is quite simple to find out how many visitors have Flash player installed, however HTML 5 figures are a bit more awkward to determine exactly. A good best guess is to add up all your Chrome, Safari, Firefox and IE 9 visitors and balance those against anything that remains (If you want to get some more accurate figures, have a look at Seth Meranda’s post on how to track HTML 5 elements in Google Analytics).

For example, on our own website 92% of all our visitors have Flash Player installed and 77% are using the HTML 5 enabled browsers mentioned above.

It is very important to check your own (or your brands) website stats for this against your expectations of your audience. In our case, we know we have quite a tech-savvy audience who will have the most up to date browsers, but some brands may not. In these cases you should expect the percentage of HTML 5 enabled users to be lower (In some cases as low as 40%).

Armed with this information, you can decide what approach best suits your audience.

What type of content is it?

This is almost as important a consideration as audience in that some technologies are better suited to certain projects.

Websites

These days, if you’re building a website there aren’t many good reasons you should use Flash and generally you should be using HTML 5 wherever possible. The two main exceptions to this would be if you’re creating a complex web based tool (e.g. a drawing tool or editing images and/or audio) or if you need to feature a lot of video (especially if you want to stream secure content).

Games

For games the best technology to use is Flash. Technically it is better because HTML 5 canvas suffers from inconsistent rendering speeds across browsers and has terrible audio support. For viral marketing it also has the advantage in that the whole game can be contained within a single SWF file, making it very easy to copy and distribute around the web ^[3]. With HTML 5, you are limited to keeping your game on your own site(s). This means you have to rely on being able to bring the audience to the game, rather than being able to bring the game to the audience.

If you’re considering a 3D game, Flash has recently added 3D support with Stage3D. HTML 5 has WebGL, though this is not natively supported by any version of IE. From a purely technical standpoint the Unity 3D plug-in is the best tool for the job, though its penetration rate is not nearly as high as Flash Player.

Richard Davey (Photon Storm) has put together a very good post on developing games in Flash, HTML 5 & Unity right now. It’s aimed mainly at developers but if you are considering commissioning a game, its well worth a read.

Quizzes

I’ve separated quizzes from games as these are generally a collection of questions with a score at the end and don’t require consistent high performance rendering. Audio is also not that important so either technology can be a good choice unless you want to distribute it around the web ^[2] (which is rare).

Facebook

As a Facebook app can be either be a website or a game, the same above advice applies but without the issue of distributing around the web.

Banners

Banners are still made in Flash but this will change over time.  Most are simple time based animations and therefore there is no real issue in choosing either technology.

What’s your budget?

If you happen to have a large budget then you probably don’t need to worry about making a decision about which technology to use, you may as well build separate versions for each technology and cater for everyone. A lot of large marketing campaigns right now do just this and use a combination of Flash, HTML 5 and/or mobile apps. Some are mainly HTML 5 and fall back to Flash, some are mainly Flash and fall back to simple HTML, some may also have a supporting iOS/Android app.

If you have a more modest budget, you’ll probably want to get the most value you can out of your spend. Assuming that the content you are producing has lots of rich interaction (animation, “whizzy” bits, video, etc.) then currently it is likely to take your developer 1.5 to 2 times longer to develop that content in HTML 5 than Flash (i.e. Twice as expensive).

This is mainly due to the amount of effort required to get your content working consistently across multiple browsers, as there is still enough variety in the way that each browser currently implements different features of HTML 5 that it usually requires writing specific code for each browser. There are tools (Like Adobe Edge and Game Maker) being built which should help to reduce development times in future, but we are not there yet.

Something else to consider is maintenance, HTML 5 is not yet a ratified standard and is subject to change, as are the browsers that support it. If you have HTML 5 content developed, you should prepare for it to break (so make sure you have an ongoing maintenance agreement with your developer).

Anything else?

One final thing to consider is the security of your content. While not entirely hack-proof, Flash does do a much better job of protecting your content from being “hacked” or re-purposed once it’s out in the wild.

When built, Flash code and art assets are compiled, compressed and can also be encrypted if required. And while decompiling is possible, it requires specialist software and technical knowhow to do so effectively.

With HTML 5, while your code can be minified and obfuscated (made smaller and harder to understand) it is still open for all to view and is easily hack-able. This means that people with a simple understanding of JavaScript can gain access to the code and do anything from changing their hi-scores in a game, to copying your product – replacing your logos with theirs.

While these practices are rare, it does happen in Flash games, and will almost certainly happen with HTML 5 as developers strive to appear “on the cutting edge”.

Summary

Deciding which technology is best for delivering your digital marketing is not a simple case of “Flash is better than HTML 5” or vice versa. Each technology has its advantages and disadvantages depending on the type of content you are producing and the audience you are hoping to reach.

As HTML 5 & Flash continue to mature, the advantages of using either technology will likely be reduced, but it will be a long time before it truly makes no difference (technically or financially) between them. If you are currently producing a new piece of content and are unsure of what technology to use, or you have further questions about this post, please do get in touch.

Notes

^[1] Because the term “HTML 5” actually covers a multitude of technologies, for the purposes of this post, when I refer to “HTML 5”, I am referring to the web technologies that enable it to be a potential alternative to Flash Player (Namely JavaScript coupled with the canvas, video, audio, & SVG elements).

^[2] When I talk about Flash Player, I mean version 9 and above.

^[3] By “around the web” I mean hosted on other people’s sites.

It’s 21 minutes into my first day as Office Assistant at Team Cooper. That I’m blogging on a working computer (and actually sitting on a chair while doing so) instantly puts this ahead of a few other offices I’ve worked in – but these aren’t the only reasons I’m already extremely excited to be here.

As much as I’m trying to earnestly and intently focus on my monitor (and appear as diligent as possible on my first day, new shoes and everything), I can’t help but eavesdrop on the Team as they update each other on the status of a myriad of different projects. And they all sound infinitely intriguing.

39 minutes in. I’m back from a quick tour of the building so now I can actually find my way to the office, let alone direct others here. In the more abstract sense, I’ve  found my way here from a TV background, moving from production office co-ordination into drama development and also working on my own freelance writing. In particular, I’ve become increasingly fascinated by games of all shapes and sizes and the different ways they find and engage their audience.

This is why I jumped at the opportunity for a role that allowed me to combine my previous work experience with something brand new. So, as much as I hope I’ll be useful to Team Cooper, I’m also here to keep my eyes, ears and brain peeled to learn everything I can.

59 minutes in. I’m off for my induction session shortly. Everyone is being fantastically welcoming for which I’m extremely grateful and I’ve already stuck a post-it note to my monitor to remind me of something for later. For now, I’ve been given the keys to office. I mean that in the literal sense but, now (checks watch) one whole hour in to my first day, I eagerly anticipate what hour 2, day 2, week 2 and beyond are going to unlock.

It’s great to meet you.

John.

So, for the first time in ages I’m sitting down to write a blog post, I’m sorry it’s been so long. If you want to know more about Ada Lovelace and what this day is trying to achive please go and read more here. However, to summarise, Ada was the first computer programmer and blogging about women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics is the order of the day.

This year I’ve decided to write about another woman who achieved a first, Helen Sharman.

Helen Sharman is from Sheffield and in 1991 she was 27. She was a chemist and at the time had been working for Mars, in what I can only imagine, was a Dexter’s Laboratory meets Willy Wonker type set up making chocolates and sweets EVEN more deliciously addictive (this isn’t actually true as far as I know but I really like the idea that it might be). She heard a radio advert, entered a competition and became the first British astronaut. How cool is that? There’s a little bit more to it than that, but rather than me go on about it in detail you should go and watch Helen talk about herself in this excellent video.

I’m from Sheffield and in 1991 I was 14. In addition to my basic core love of science, I have a deep fascination with space, space travel and the possibilities this affords us. I was (am) a massive sci-fi nerd (I even have my own Star Trek communicator pin badge so I can pretend I’m Captain Janeway when no-one else is in the house). A year or so later I was lucky enough to see her do a very similar talk to the above at my school. She is one of the best speakers I have ever seen, she enthuses about her experience in space and explains it with such clarity. In a pretty recent article from a local news paper I was pleased to find out she’s still working in the sciences as part of the analytical science team for the National Physical Laboratory.

All of that lovely inspiration and I STILL didn’t choose science as a subject beyond GCSE or as a career. I don’t know why. I kind of wish I could go back in time and shake my teenage self to tell her it was a missed opportunity. That said I wouldn’t change the opportunities that DID happen and led me here to work in technology. I mean, Seriously. I’m writing this and anyone in the world, should they find it, could read it. Anyone. I still love that.

Hello world

Anyway… I also wanted to quickly mention the blog post I wrote for the last Ada Lovelace day about Jane McGonigal and the concept of gaming for change that she has been promoting. In the 18 months or so since I wrote that blog post lots of projects have been carried out with that concept at their core. The one that interests me the most is the Fold.it  game. It has taken a scientific problem and turned it in to a puzzle game. After playing it for 3 weeks, a small group of people (who are not scientists but gamers) solved the problem and contributed to scientific progress. Amazing.

Janeway out.