For my project, I originally intended to make a blog with a series of posts discussing the role of Egyptian history in video games, but after doing a survey and external research on the mythological representation, I ended up with an accidental research paper. I ended up reaching out to 27 participants who completed the survey which was a series of questions situated by demographics, short answer recognition of gods, multiple-choice recognition of popular symbolism, and self-report questions regarding personal views of historical accuracy in video games.
I think a study like this could succeed in a much larger setting with more participants that allow it to be generalized to the public, but for right now it was a fun learning experience while also getting to utilize some of the research and study design techniques I learned in my undergraduate degree. Despite the small sample size, I can safely say a strong takeaway I got from this project was that, while people don’t actively seek out historical games because of their accuracy, there is a market for people who would prefer their games to be accurate as well as fun. I think it just falls to game developers and writers to present a system that is fun mechanically and narratively while still being accurate. And since Assassin’s Creed: Origins did so well, it’s safe to say there’s a strong market for that type of thing to succeed in.
My limitations were well documented in the discussion section of my paper, but one main one I wished to touch on was the fact that people really like to make jokes out of studies like these. I had to wade through several “silly” answers despite explicitly stating I was looking for “N/A” responses. Perhaps it had something to do with the fact I knew 85% of the people taking the survey and they felt comfortable not following the rules, but in a follow-up study, it should definitely be done in a more professional atmosphere so that the results are publishable, reliable, and potentially valid.