Alternate Reality Gaming – Ingredients

Posted on January 14, 2013 by Priscilla

Any ARG has several key ingredients such as

  • a puppet master
  • a rabbit hole
  • a curtain
  • TING rhetoric

A puppet master is the person controlling the game, giving out clues and keeping an eye on plot development. The starting point of an ARG is known as a trail head or a rabbit hole, the latter being a reference to Alice in Wonderland “In another moment down went Alice [into the rabbit hole] never once considering how in the world she was going to get out of it”. Usually the rabbit hole is a website. The curtain marks the separation between the players and the puppet masters, it refers to the curtain of a magician; if you look behind it you will learn how the trick works and ruin the magic of the experience.
An ARG treats itself as if it were real; all physical elements used by the puppet master exist and are functional. There is no overtly present rule set or designated arena for play. All evidence of the game being a game is buried and whatever is incorporated in the game has to be non-fictional but actual. This pattern of the game denying it is a game is known as the This Is Not a Game or TING rhetoric (McGonical, 2003; Montola, 2005).

Elan Lee, lead game designer of the ‘first’ ARG The Beast comments; “Players were never meant to believe the This Is Not a Game rhetoric… it was obviously a game. There was nothing we could do about that. What we could do was make it a game with an identity crisis. If I know it’s a game and you know it’s a game, but IT doesn’t know it’s a game, then we’ve got a conflict.”

Players hold on to this rhetoric and actually protect it by ignoring possible cracks when reality seeps through at places where the curtain is slightly lifted (Stenros, Montola, Waern, & Jonsson, 2007). Players want to go along with the game believing itself, but the awareness of the game-as-game remains.

ARGs are part of the pervasive gaming genre which is “a genre of gaming systematically blurring and breaking the traditional boundaries of a game”. Expansion of a game beyond its boundaries in spatial, temporal and social dimensions in itself is not new but “pervasive gaming is differentiated with the use of these expansions in new efficient ways to produce new kinds of game play experiences” (Montola, 2005).

McGonical (2003) defines different types of play further by making a distinction between pervasive play and immersive play. Pervasive play consist of mixed reality games that use mobile, omnipresent and embedded digital technologies to create virtual playing fields in everyday spaces. Immersive play is a form of pervasive play that adds the TING rhetoric to the mix. Immersive gaming was designed to “integrate itself fully into the off-line lives of its’ players”. The game achieves this by using everyday digital devices. So no special toys, consoles or joysticks but the phones, PDA’s and internet connections that the players already had were now part of the game.

The ARG The Beast intrigued their one million player base by contacting them at home or at work, sending emails from their own accounts, sending them packages in the mail and spreading over 4000 digital files over various websites (Dena, 2008). For the players The Beast was everywhere and anything could be a potential clue.

This blog is a shaken but not stirred piece of my thesis “How ARG changes reality” which you can find here

Introducing Alternate Reality Games – blog 1 of 3 –
Alternate Reality Gaming – Ingredients – blog 2 of 3
Alternate Reality Gaming – Examples – blog 3 of 3 –

Posted in Games | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Introducing Alternate Reality Gaming

Posted on December 12, 2012 by Priscilla

In 2008 I first came across Alternate Reality Gaming (ARG) in an episode of the popular TV-show Numb3rs and I was intrigued. It was a form of gaming that apparently did not stop when it encountered physical reality but made reality part of the game.

This latest form of game play is not just multimedia. Websites, cell phones, public phones, motion pictures, radio, magazines, newspapers and museums have all been used in an ARG (e.g. Hunter, 2008). An ARG is also multi reality; the virtual and the physical reality are combined in a game that has lost some of the boundaries we use to distinguish game play from reality (Baertlein, 2008). Other games are limited in time, space and numbers of players, but an ARG is more ambiguous regarding these aspects “…a game that has one or more salient features that expand the contractual magical circle of play socially, spatially or temporally (Montola, 2005, p. 3)”.

The six key qualities that describe an ARG are

  • cross-media,
  • pervasive,
  • persistent,
  • collaborative,
  • constructive and
  • expressive

(McGonigal, 2004).

Cross-media refers to the several media platforms that are used simultaneously in the game play. All possible media have been used in an ARG but internet is usually the central binding medium.
The pervasive quality is found in the fact that an ARG uses the real world as part of the narrative it wants to tell. Part of the game play takes place in the physical reality and several game clues are embedded in everyday environments.
Persistence means that the game play is continuous, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. For the individual player this means that game play continues without the player being present.
Collaboration is required because ARG’s  “would be absolutely impossible to solve alone” (McGonigal, 2005). An ARG incorporates massive scale challenges and location-specific information, from multiple locations.
The constructive quality refers to the absence of a player platform, which needs to be created by and for the players. The organisation of communities and social engineering are needed, but not pre- made, to maintain game play.
A final determining quality is its expressiveness; an ARG “requires and inspires user self-expression” (McGonigal, 2004). User created content, fan art and fan fiction are an integrated part of the game play.

Another striking feature of Alternate Reality Gaming is that players do not use a representation to interact with the game. A player does not create an avatar, does not build a virtual space for a virtual presence but utilises actual presence directly in the game play. The players’ lives are the platform.

Multiple media and gaming elements are involved and the players have impact on the storyline, making the narrative an interactive one. The story develops real-time and player’s often work together, coordinating real-life and online activities. Real life knowledge, that not everyone might have, is required to solve clues and puzzles.

This blog is a shaken but not stirred piece of my thesis “How ARG changes reality” which you can find here

Introducing Alternate Reality Games – blog 1 of 3 –
Alternate Reality Gaming – Ingredients – blog 2 of 3
Alternate Reality Gaming – Examples – blog 3 of 3 –

Posted in Games | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Roting for change

Posted on November 12, 2012 by Priscilla

The foundation of our educational system is the repetition of factual knowledge. Classrooms are filled with the chanting of multiplication. Useful and necessary one might think, but is it? What we need to know is not that “three times four equals 12” but that one grouping ‘times’ another grouping results in a new grouping via the mechanism of multiplication. What we need to understand is what ‘times’ means. I was never very good at rote learning, the chants of multiplication or topography were songs to me. The lyrics no more relevant than Mary having a little lamb. Teaching the principle instead of the several outcomes must be a better way to do it.

“This is rote learning, the bane of modern existence[… ] simple remembering without reliance on an understanding of why or on an internal structure.”
The design of everyday things (Norman, 1988/2002).

Like the Ford-factory the basis of our schooling system is that of the conveyer belt. A one size fits all approach in which rote learning represents the nuts and bolts that allow us to mount, with simple instructions, the bodywork of factual knowledge onto the framework of any child. Out comes a generally tested product that can be “any colour as long as it’s black”. Society doesn’t need more of the same; it hasn’t for some time. Society doesn’t need dependable cars than can drive on paved roads, it needs a vehicle that can traipse any geology it encounters. Could be a car, could be a plane, might be a dolphin and chances are high that the best fit is going to be something that I cannot think of because basically I am a Ford-mobile too.

We do a lot more rote learning than just the chanting of numbers. We learn facts; we teach one-dimensional knowledge and test by stating the outcome. We learn the names of countries, places and people; declarative statements. If you were keen on biology you can probably tell me the six types of feather on a magpie but have you ever been asked to describe the birds’ experience of flight?

I am terrible at naming places and countries because as soon as I learned how to interpret a map and found out that every atlas has an index I no longer saw the point in stuffing my head with these nonsensical lists of names when there was a perfectly good list out there. Nowadays, Google is the index of everything. Filling impressionable heads with whatever listings of fact is a terrible waste of space. What would be useful is teaching them to actively seek knowledge. How and where to find the facts, how to judge information, possible interpretations of ‘the facts’ and how to apply them.

Which lands us in the middle of How? How do we teach these things (and how do we test them)? If we want to instil the process instead of providing declarative statements; what do we do? Perhaps we should question the thinking process and then trust the outcome. The educational paradigm must be redefined as a continuous interaction between teacher and pupil instead of the sender-receiver model it is now based on. At the moment, this is not what we teach our teachers.

Have peek at what changes possibly -hopefully- lie ahead with 21st century skills
or join the discussion here (Dutch)

Posted in Research | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Winner: Mirror Me

Posted on November 4, 2012 by Priscilla


Motivatiemechanisme voor lichaamsverandering winnaar Ideas Waiting To Happen
Mirror Me is de grote winnaar geworden van de tweede serie van Ideas Waiting To Happen. In de finale, die plaatsvond tijdens Innovation Day op 31 oktober, werden in MediaPlaza Utrecht de meest innovatieve ideeën gepitcht. Mirror Me sleepte hiermee een geldprijs van €5.000,- in de wacht.

Mirror Me biedt ondersteuning in het vaak lastige traject van lichaamsverandering, zoals afvallen. Dit motivatiemechanisme gaat slimmer, effectiever en efficiënter om met de middelen die er al zijn. Hoe werkt het? Via een 3d-camera wordt je interactieve spiegelbeeld op een scherm getoond. Dit laat je alvast het beoogde resultaat zien en vertelt je wat je moet doen om dit beeld te bereiken.

Waarde in real life
Leonie Baauw en Priscilla Haring, de bedenkers van Mirror Me, zijn trots op hun eerste prijs: “Hiermee kunnen we echt iets doen voor de samenleving!” Chill hug sleepte de tweede prijs (€3000) in de wacht. Met deze inventie kunnen o.a. autisten een ‘gesimuleerde omhelzing’ krijgen door druk op de schouders te geven. Uit onderzoek blijkt dat druk op het lijf kalmerend kan werken, maar niet noodzakelijkerwijs van menselijke hand afkomstig hoeft te zijn. De derde prijs (€750,-) ging naar MoodReports.com. Dit quantified self concept helpt schildklierpatiënten bij het meten en verwerken van gegevens over hun symptomen en gemoedstoestand en geeft de mogelijkheid dit online te delen met lotgenoten en medische experts.

De jury, voorgezeten door Huub Vroomen, director Innovation & Development bij Philips Consumer Lifestyle, beoordeelde de ideeën op criteria als marktpotentieel, haalbaarheid en het daadwerkelijk kunnen toevoegen van waarde aan real life. Op advies van de jury gaat Mirror Me in de komende periode dan ook op zoek naar partners om het idee op de markt te brengen.

Underground gevoel
Ideas Waiting To Happen (IWTH) ontstond begin 2012 in Utrecht en verbindt de werelden van technische wetenschap en design met elkaar. Op een laagdrempelige manier worden teams gevormd en nieuwe, creatieve toepassingen gevonden voor technische ontwikkelingen als nano, augmented reality en quantified self. Zo ontmoetten de bedenkers van Mirror Me elkaar tijdens een bijeenkomst van IWTH. Inmiddels hebben diverse bedrijven en steden interesse betoond in het concept.

Zelf meedoen?
Ook meedoen aan IWTH? Professionals en bedrijven zijn welkom. Meer informatie via www.ideaswaitingtohappen.com

Persbericht van www.taskforceinnovatie.nl

Posted in Art | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Recipe for Serious Gaming (in health care)

Posted on September 14, 2012 by Priscilla

Dr. Alma Schaafsel at the Games in Healthcare: hype or hope? the conference said that successful development requires good connections with people with expertise in their fields. This is precisely what most projects lack: open collaboration between the right experts. Many healthcare experts from urgent care Auburndale are inspired to start a caring, serious healthcare project with the best of intentions. However, nothing good will ever come of it until these two (the need and the application) work together. However, having a grasp of the technology that will meet the need does not make a success.

Ingredients for serious gaming:
 One health care expert
 A researcher from an applied psychological field
 One or more ICT geniuses with at least one know-it-all
 A media psychologist
 A game expert
 All users
 An interpreter

The health care expert from http://www.norm-uk.org/ site starts the whole process and/or offers insight into the need that is to be fulfilled as well as the issues and daily practice of health care. This expert is the shining beacon of this project and yet he is merely a starting point. When we research the need, we attempt to move beyond what might seem into the realm of what is. Is the friction we experience the same that is causing the heat? Who feels this need and when do they feel it most? What will be the result of fulfilling the need? Only after you have minutely charted the actual need can there be effective development and measurement. Do not skimp on this part of the process but hire a trained professional; an academic with experience in this kind of research (and no, market research or having done some interviews is not the same!).

ICT development has its own problems such as different platforms that can’t or won’t communicate. Hardware and software limitations, several programming languages, calculations that take too long for interfacing to run smoothly and general ‘bugs’ that seem to pop up from out of nowhere. To be able to deal with all this successfully you need ICT experts that are fluent in the language and developing environment they are working in as well as all the other environments your game will encounter and handle this creatively. You need someone who can see above and beyond the current project, someone omnipotent. Every project needs a know-it-all like that.

Next we encounter the space surrounding the playful interaction we are developing. The physical, psychological and emotional processes that all users must go through in order to be at play. My most beloved frustration is that these processes are often overlooked or ignored whilst developing any mediated application. You then run the risk of developing a perfectly fitting key to a well-researched lock that somehow nobody uses to open the door. This might be because the key turns in the opposite direction than what people are used to. Or because the turning motion of the key is too heavy. It could also be because the lock is in the wrong place. Or because users have no idea what is behind door number three and it really isn’t interesting to go around randomly turning keys. All these situations can be prevented by inviting a media psychologist at the stage of research and first development and heed his/her council.

Since the objective is to develop a game you will need someone well familiar with game-mechanics. If you want to use the power of gaming, make sure you are actually developing a game. This seems stupidly obvious but you might be surprised (I no longer am) how often the point is missed. Adding a high-score does not a game make. To be called a game, a number of criteria must be met and preferably this meeting should be done with some creativity while never losing contact with the need at the centre. This is hard.

Properly done research is always important but even more so when developing anything in the field of health care. Your game will be interacting with people in a vulnerable position and must be backed by the people in the white coats that run this field. When you wish to recruit the average white coat to use his/her authority to back your game you had better bring some persuasive arguments backed by numbers. These numbers should show two things
1) No adverse effects
2) Clear and present positive effects.
You can also present these numbers at the several accounting departments who will transfer your positively humane numbers into the bottom-line of economic result. Whilst we still view health care as something that should not be individually paid but a socially shared burden (come on America), the funding for your project will be coming from large institutions such as insurance companies, ministries, European organisations or health care centres. These organisations cannot work with good intentions and great ideas. They can work with the results of scientific research. Here we find the same researcher that we needed at the start of the recipe.

Throughout the entire process another expert is needed. The one who can clarify the need we are trying to fulfil, the one who will find the flaws in the system for you and the one being researched; The user. By which I mean ALL USERS. All the people (and other systems) that will be interacting with the wonder you are developing are very important at every stage of development. Get them and keep them involved. On-going user testing is the only way to effective development.
Interpretation is needed. The people you have gathered around your game may well be the pinnacle of knowledge in their field; usually they are blissfully unaware of the goings on in all the other fields involved. To prevent Babylonian delays in your project please add someone who knows something about everything and speaks all the languages. If suitable, this person should be your chef and run the kitchen.

Add all expertise’s into the mix and stir. Get yourself some decent cooking utensils. The experts involved are not necessarily separated into individuals. One person can be a pre-mix of several experts. For example, I am a three-in-one mixture: the researcher, the media psychologist and the interpreter. Feel free to use these pre-mixed people; they will only enhance the flavour. There are several cooking methods that can be used. I prefer Scrumming it. Share and enjoy!

Please read this inspiring blog on taking the advice of experts in making Serious Gaming by Pamela Kato

This is a translation ofan earlier blog of mine

Posted in Games | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Patatcultuur

Posted on August 23, 2012 by Priscilla

Van de week was ik met twee vrouwelijke kameraden in een snackbar om wat te nassen. De langste dame uit ons gezelschap moest zich even verexcuseren en gaf mij de verantwoording over het bestellen van een frikandel speciaal en een patatje oorlog.

Eenvoudige opdrachten monden dikwijls uit in diepe verwarring en filosofische discussie. Bij mij wel.

Na het aflopen van de rij en een korte interactie op gebiedende wijs was daar het moment wat ik niet had zien aankomen; “Speciaal met curry of ketchup?”. Uiterste verbazing aan mijn kant, tandwielen die frictieloos tot stilstand kwamen in mijn hoofd en een vlakke uitdrukking op mijn gezicht die weerspiegeld werd door het serverend personeel.

Waarom was dit een vraag? Speciaal was toch de uitdrukking voor gelijke delen mayonnaise/ketchup onder een berg uitjes. Lang vervlogen smaken van grote patatten gehuld in een roze, brokkige gelei prikkelde aan mijn binnenkant. Alle speciale frieten die ik ooit genuttigd had passeerden in sneltreinvaart de revu. Allemaal met ketchup. Maar ik ben dan ook geen voorstander van curry. Iets anders begon aan de zijkant te knagen. Had curry zich in de afgelopen jaren de snackbar ingewerkt? Wellicht had het iets te maken met de invloed van die volhoudende Duitsers en hun curryworst. Mijn zusje was ook al zo’n curry-fan. Wat zou mijn vriendin zijn; een curry-liefhebster of een speciaal-purist? Vijftig procent kans op het juiste antwoord en vijftig procent kans op een vieze frikandel.

Toegegven, meestal ben ik de afwijking. “Curry”.

“Oorlog met of zonder ui?”. Neeeee! Gekker moet het toch niet worden. Is geen enkele afspraak meer heilig? Hoezo zonder ui? Zonder ui geen oorlog. Ik zie een zachtmoedige Brabander voor me die “Een patatje pinda met mayo zonder brokstukken graag” besteld, waarschijnlijk op woensdag. Niets van dit alles; OORLOG WIL IK. Geen laffe halverwege poging tot smaakstimulatie maar zoveel mogelijke scherpe tegenstellingen en texturisatie in een wit, plastic wegwerpbakje. Mijn vriendin is nog steeds niet teruggekeerd dus knopen moeten gehakt worden. “Met ui”. De curry is haar gegund en vergeven maar ze heeft meer dan genoeg ballen voor de ui.

Zelfs de meest simpele taal- en handelingsafspraken zijn in flux. Tijdens mijn levensspanne, en zo oud ben ik nu ook weer niet, is wat wij ‘speciaal’ en ‘oorlog’ vinden van inhoud veranderd. Maar niet vast veranderd. De ene inhoud is niet vervangen door een andere inhoud maar door een optie. Want we weten niet meer wat we willen. We durven elkaar niet meer met zekerheid tegemoet te treden. Wij willen onze eigen keuzes kunnen maken, zelfs binnen een reeds gemaakte keuze. Niets is meer vaststaand.

Want wat is nog ‘speciaal’ en wanneer is het ‘oorlog’?

Posted in Writings | Tagged , | 1 Comment