The Malthusian Paradox: performance in an alternate reality game

Abstract

The Malthusian Paradox is a transmedia alternate reality game (ARG) created by artists Dominic Shaw and Adam Sporne played by 300 participants over 3 months. We explore the design of the game, which cast players as agents of a radical organisation attempting to uncover the truth behind a kidnapping and a sinister biotech corporation and highlight how it redefined performative frames by blurring conventional performer and spectator roles in sometimes discomforting ways. Players participated in the game via a broad spectrum of interaction channels, including performative group spectacles and 1-to-1 engagements with game characters in public settings, making use of low- and high-tech physical and online artefacts including bespoke and third-party websites. Players and game characters communicated via telephony and social media in both a designed and an ad hoc manner. We reflect on the production and orchestration of the game, including the dynamic nature of the strong episodic narrative driven by professionally produced short films that attempted to respond to the actions of players and the difficulty of designing for engagement across hybrid and temporally expansive performance space. We suggest that an ARG whose boundaries are necessarily unclear affords rich and emergent, but potentially unsanctioned and uncontrolled, opportunities for interactive performance, which raises significant challenges for design.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. 1.

    Benford S, Crabtree A, Reeves S, Sheridan J, Dix A, Flintham M, Drozd A (2006) The frame of the game: blurring the boundary between fiction and reality in mobile experiences. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘06). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 427–436

  2. 2.

    Bishop C (2006) Introduction. In: Bishop C (ed) Participation. MIT Press, London, pp 10–17

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Boal A (1979) Theatre of the oppressed Charles A. and Maria-Odilia Leal McBride (Trans.). Pluto Press, London

  4. 4.

    Cawelti JG, Rosenberg BA (1987) The spy story. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Evans E (2011) Transmedia television: audiences, new media and daily life. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Fischer-Lichte E (2013) Politics of spatial appropriation, Michael Breslin and Saskya Iris Jain (Trans.). In: Fischer-Lichte E, Wihstutz B (eds) Performance and the politics of space. Routledge, New York, pp 219–238

  7. 7.

    Gennette G (1997) Paratexts: thresholds of interpretation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Goffman E (1974) Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Gray J (2010) Show sold separately: promos, spoilers and other media paratexts. NYU Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Hansen DL, Bonsignore EM, Ruppel M, Visconti A, Kraus K (2013) Designing reusable alternate reality games. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 1529–1538

  11. 11.

    Jenkins H (2006) Convergence culture: when new and old media collide. NYU Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Juul J (2008) Half-real: video games between real rules and fictional worlds. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Lévy P (1997) Collective intelligence: mankind’s emerging world in cyberspace. Perseus Books, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Livingstone S (1998 (1990)) Making sense of television: the psychology of audience interpretation. Routledge, London

  15. 15.

    Martin A, Thompson B, Chatfield T (2006) Alternate reality games white paper. International game developers association alternate reality games SIG. http://archives.igda.org/arg/resources/IGDA-AlternateRealityGames-Whitepaper-2006.pdf. Retrieved May 2013

  16. 16.

    McGonical J (2003) A real little game: the performance of belief in pervasive play. 030303: Collective Play, Research Colloquium, University of California at Berkeley, March 3. http://www.avantgame.com/MCGONIGAL%20A%20Real%20Little%20Game%20DiGRA%202003.pdf. Retrieved May 2013

  17. 17.

    McGonigal J (2011) Reality is broken. Penguin Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    McGonigal J (2008) Why I love bees: a case study in collective intelligence gaming. In: Salen K (ed) The ecology of games: connecting youth, games, and learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 199–227

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Moore C (2011) The magic circle and the mobility of play. Converg Int J Res New media Technol 17(4):373–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Montola M (2005) Exploring the edge of the magic circle: defining pervasive games. In: Proceedings of digital arts and culture, Copenhagen, December 2005

  21. 21.

    O’Hara K, Grian H, Williams J (2008) Participation, collaboration and spectatorship in an alternate reality game. In: Proceedings of the 20th Australasian conference on computer-human interaction: designing for habitus and habitat (OZCHI ‘08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 130–139

  22. 22.

    Porter MJ, Larson DL, Harthcock A, Berg Nellis K (2002) (Re)defining narrative events: examining television narrative structure. J Pop Film Telev 30(1):23–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Project A.P.E. http://geocaching.wikia.com/wiki/Project_A.P.E. Retrieved May 2013

  24. 24.

    Richardson I (2011) The hybrid ontology of mobile gaming. Converg Int J Res New media Technol 17(4):419–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Salen K, Zimmerman E (2004) Rules of play: game design fundamentals. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Our thanks to Dominic Shaw and Adam Sporne of Urban Angel for providing research access and materials. The Malthusian Paradox was supported using public funding by the National Lottery through Arts Council England. This research was supported by the Mixed Reality Laboratory (EP/F03038X/1) and Horizon Digital Economy Research (EP/G065802/1).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Flintham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Evans, E., Flintham, M. & Martindale, S. The Malthusian Paradox: performance in an alternate reality game. Pers Ubiquit Comput 18, 1567–1582 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-014-0762-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Alternate reality game
  • ARG
  • Pervasive game
  • Hybrid performance spaces
  • Player agency