Advertisement

Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 45–58 | Cite as

Design for emergence: experiments with a mixed reality urban playground game

  • Yanna Vogiazou
  • Bas RaijmakersEmail author
  • Erik Geelhoed
  • Josephine Reid
  • Marc Eisenstadt
Original Article

Abstract

In this paper we present our work in the design of ubiquitous social experiences, aiming to foster group participation and spontaneous playful behaviours in a city environment. We outline our approach of design for emergence: to provide just enough of a game context and challenge for people to be creative, to extend and enrich the experience of play through their interaction in the real world. CitiTag is our mixed reality testbed, a wireless location-based multiplayer game based on the concept of playground ‘tag’. We describe the design and implementation of CitiTag and discuss results from two user studies.

Keywords

Social computing Wireless location based games Mixed reality Emergence Group behaviour 

Notes

Acknowledgments

CitiTag has been developed jointly by The Open University’s Knowledge Media Institute (KMI) and the Mobile Bristol team at HP Labs Bristol. The authors would like to thank the following people for their significant input to the implementation of CitiTag and their assistance with the user trials: Kevin Quick and Jon Linney (KMi), who programmed the multiplayer networking capabilities, Richard Hull (HP Labs), Ben Clayton, Tom Melamed (University of Bristol), Paul Marsh who provided the Mobile Bristol GPS location-based support for the game, Peter Scott (KMi) for overall supervision and support for the project, Lewis McCann (KMi), Stuart Martin and John Honniball (University of Bristol) who provided technical support during the trial and all our participants.

References

  1. 1.
    Ericsson KA, Simon HA (1996) Protocol analysis: using verbal reports as data. Oxford University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Farkas I, Helbing D et al (2002) Mexican waves in an excitable medium. Nature 419(6903):131–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garneau P-A (2002) Emergence: making games deeper. At http://www.pagtech.com/Articles/Emergence.html
  4. 4.
    Gero JS (1994) Towards a model of exploration in computer-aided design. In Gero, Tyugu (eds) Formal design methods for computer-aided design. North-Holland: Amsterdam, pp 271–291Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hull R (2002) Mobile bristol application framework (white paper), Technology & Lifestyle Integration Programme, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol. Available at http://www.mobilebristol.com/PDF/MobileBristol(W)-2002–01.pdf
  6. 6.
    Hull R, Clayton BT, Melamed T (2004) Rapid authoring of mediascapes. In: Proceedings of UbiComp 2004. The 6th international conference on ubiquitous computing. Nottingham, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson S (2001) Emergence: the connected lives of ants, brains, cities and software. Penguin Books, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kahn R, Kellner D (2004) New media and internet activism: from the ‘Battle of Seattle’ to blogging. New Media Soci 6(1):87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Macromedia website, http://www.macromedia.com/ 1995–2004
  10. 10.
    Milgram S (1977) The individual in a social world: essays and experiments. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mitchell WJ (1993) A computational view of design creativity. In: Gero M (ed) Modelling creativity and knowledge-based creative design. Lawrence Erlbaum, pp 25–42Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Nardi B, Whittaker S et al (2000) Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. CSCW’2000, ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Norman D (2002) The design of everyday things. Basic Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Opie I, Opie P (1969) Children’s games in street and playground. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paulos E, Goodman E (2004) The familiar stranger: anxiety, comfort, and play in public places, ACM SIGCHIGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Quick K, Vogiazou Y (2004) CitiTag multiplayer infrastructure, Tech Report KMi-TR-138, Knowledge Media Institute, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK, http://www.kmi.open.ac.uk/publications/techreports-text.cfm
  18. 18.
    Raby F (2000) Project No.26765: flirt. RCA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reid J, Geelhoed E, Hull R, Cater K, Clayton B (2005) Parallel world’s: immersion in location-based experiences. CHI, PortlandGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rheingold H (2002) Smart Mobs: the next social revolution. Perseus, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rettie R (2003) Connectedness, awareness and social presence. In: 6th international presence workshop, AalborgGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Saunders R, Gero JS (2001) Designing for interest and novelty, motivating design agents. CAAD FuturesGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schön DA, Wiggins G (1992) Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Des Stud 13:135–156Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stolterman E (2002) Uninteded use, shaping the network society, patterns for participation, action, and change. SeattleGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stone H, Sidel J, Oliver S, Woolsey A, Singleton RC (1974) Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Technol 28(11):24–34Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Suwa M, Gero JS, Purcell T (1999) Unexpected discoveries and S-invention of design requirements: a key to creative designs. In Gero, Maher (ed) Computational models of creative design IV. Key centre of design computing and cognition. The University of Sydney, Sydney, pp 297–320Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vogiazou Y, Eisenstadt M, Dzbor M, Komzak J (2005) From Buddyspace to CitiTag: large-scale symbolic presence for community building and spontaneous play. ACM symposium on applied computing, Santa Fe, New Mexico, pp 13–17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanna Vogiazou
    • 1
    • 4
  • Bas Raijmakers
    • 2
    Email author
  • Erik Geelhoed
    • 3
  • Josephine Reid
    • 3
  • Marc Eisenstadt
    • 1
  1. 1.Knowledge Media InstituteThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  2. 2.Interaction Design DepartmentRoyal College of ArtLondonUK
  3. 3.Hewlett-Packard LaboratoriesBristolUK
  4. 4.Design Department, Goldsmiths CollegeUniversity of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations