Here is the midterm OSS post for our project, “Thieves Between Time.”
We previously commented on our bodystorming experience here:
Kee Yong: https://oss.adm.ntu.edu.sg/kchin005/interactive-1-bodystorming-reflection/
Here are some sketches and notes we made between the bodystorming and our midterm presentation.
What are the changes you have made to your project since the initial sketches?
Kee Yong: We explored different options for the form of our final product and realized that some of our ideas were not feasible to implement, as neither of us are familiar with electrical engineering. Hence we decided to keep the product simple.
Christine: Initially, we had a countdown before the light switched between on and off. However we have decided to make the change abrupt so that it is more exciting.
What are some users feedback you have incorporated into the reiteration of your project from the body-storming and mid-term user testing session?
Kee Yong: Our playtesters said that the game became boring after it stretched on for too long. We have modified the game rules to add more elements midway through the game, so that it remains tense and exciting throughout.
Christine: Lei said that our participants should have more interaction with the game. We are considering having the participants involved in the initial placement of the treasure, to increase their stakes in the game.
Where do you think your interactive project will fall on the continuum of interactivity? Why do you think this is the most appropriate mode of interaction for your participants or audience?
Kee Yong: The participants do not really affect the plot of the game, but they are fully immersed in the world of the game’s fiction. I think this is the most appropriate mode of interaction because our goal is to draw the participant’s attention to the idea of “interstice”, and our game could not accomplish this without the defining structure of its rules.
Christine: On a scale where 0% is noninteractive and 100% is fully interactive, about 30%. This is because participants do not really affect the plot or ultimate resolution of the game: they are just following the rules. In our game, the “interstice” between day and night is the most important part, so we feel that it is appropriate as long as the players can experience the changes through the rules of the game.
Apart from responding to the user, does your interactive piece include elements where the content change over the amount of time your user has been engaged?
Kee Yong: Yes, we plan to change the game rules over the course of the game to keep it from becoming too stale. This means that the tension will naturally increase regardless of what the players do.
Christine: Our game is random from the beginning, so the game is different every time you set it up. At least this is what we hope our programming can accomplish. 🙂
Based the diagram above, which characteristics does your interactive project fall under? Explain why these characteristics can be used to describe your project.
- The user has a limited role, because they are only capable of taking a limited set of actions within the context of the game. However these actions can and will affect the outcome and winner.
- The game is a parallel experience with the real world. When the players act the part of thieves in the game, their actions and mindset become those of a thief. Hence they can be said to become thieves in the real world.
- The game has a fairly rigid structure, however the players’ selections (stolen treasures) are remembered, which increases their involvement in the outcome.
- Our user is an observer, because they cannot affect the game, only take part in it according to predefined rules.
- The user’s experience is monitored and used virtually. This is because the game takes place entirely in a fictional world, and the player is just acting out a role in that fictional world.
- Our game has an open structure, because it has no space limitation. You can decide where you want to play, so there are infinite possibilities.