[arg_discuss] Topic of the Week July 20: Designer Responsibilities to the Public

[Annika Waern]

This is an interesting topic with no easy answers (and one that  
Montola, Stenros and I discuss quite a lot in our book "pervasive  
games: Theory and design"). ARGs tend to stage some kind of  
fictionalised reality, and since it is available in the 'real  
world' (even if this is the web) not everyone that stumbles upon game  
content will know it's a game. We call such games 'socially expanded'  
and they tend to raise ethical questions both concerning players and  
bystanders.

Personally, I think that in socially expanded games you should make an  
effort to design the bystander experience, and not only the experience  
for the player who is already in the know.  In that process, you'll  
want to both offer the bystander an interpretation of what they see  
("this is a fake website", for example) and a way to relate to it  
(such as "I can enter into the game or just ignore it"). Andrea seems  
to have done precisely this - she considered the accidental website  
visitor's experience and then went through some effort to make sure  
that sucha a visitor would understand the fictional nature of the  
site. She might have designed every site to be a rabbit hole  
invitation to the game as well, turning the occasional visitor into a  
prospective player.

By this, I don't mean that you MUST avoid misleading the occasional  
non-player that stumbles upon your game. It can sometimes be fun to be  
fooled, there might be a political / artistic reason to fool somebody,  
or you might even consider it an 'acceptable risk' given that there is  
always somebody who is prone to believe in just about anything. One of  
the reasons why this was an issue for routs 'Routes' was probably that  
the game dealt with a serious subject which is high on the current  
agenda. This makes it more likely both that people will be mislead,  
and that people will care about being 'fooled'. But it is also often  
the reason why you want to create reality fiction in the first place -  
you want to discuss something important rather than just entertain.

(Incidentally, a pop-up warning is probably not the ideal way to  
advertise the fictional nature of a website. 'Sanningen om Marika'  
used this, and it didn't really work out. For the dedicated players,  
the popups were irritating as they kept reminding them of the  
fictional nature of the production. At the same time, many people  
don't read pop-ups. It seems like some people even participated in the  
game activities without realising that they were participating in a  
game...)

Annika Waern
Mobile Life at Stockholm University
pervasive-games.wordpress.com


20 jul 2009 kl. 17.10 skrev Andrea Phillips:


> This isn't on the list of upcoming topics on the wiki, but this was

> something that I found myself blathering about a lot at ARGfest this

> weekend. I thought I'd bring it to the list.

>

> We've talked about our responsibilities and ethical guidelines on the

> list before, mainly in terms of what we owe the players. But we're

> putting material out there in the real world, and it's possible --

> even likely -- that somebody who isn't a player, doesn't know anything

> about ARGs, and has no reason to doubt your credibility will stumble

> into a piece of your game and think it's real.

>

> One example: In Routes, we made up a couple of fictional websites for

> pharmaceutical companies, and we did a little nail-biting over what

> 'advanced treatments' we had this company working on. Could we talk

> about our fictional success with gene therapy to treat Parkinson's?

> What if a person with Parkinson's came upon our site via Google and

> thought it was real? We decided there was an ethical problem there.

>

> There are other examples that spring to mind, too -- most notably

> innocent bystanders who might witness something terrifying and call

> the police that turns out to be a live event for a game.

>

> So how do you manage these risks? What do you consider your

> responsibilities to the public at large?

>

> -- 

> Andrea Phillips

> http://www.aaphillips.com

> AIM: Andrh1a * Skype: Andrhia

> Words * Culture * Interaction

> _______________________________________________

> ARG_Discuss mailing list

> ARG_Discuss at igda.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss