At the extremes this can include fantasy experiences – experiencing lives from history, or those that only exist as fictions. More prosaic game experiences have been created that specifically aim to invoke the lived experience of people who one could meet, living on the planet today – potentially with the aim of creating empathy in the player.

The magic circle, being magic, of course, these ideas can be mixed, in whatever proportions are desired, to create game experiences which are both situations one is never going to encounter, and a realistic depiction of real everyday life for some people.

A good example of this is Hellblade:Senua’s Sacrifice, which is both a combat/puzzle game with a fantasy setting, and an experience of psychosis, created with neuroscientists, mental health specialists and people living with the condition.

Hellblade is available on Amazon

As someone who has ADHD, I am particularly interested in depictions of neurodivergent experience and cognitive differences in games, and in the media in general. There is so much opportunity to create understanding, and alongside that, so much need to evaluate the potential both for good and for harm, as well as issues such as representation, ensuring that neurodivergent people have a say in how their experiences are portrayed.

We all live inside our heads, and it is often difficult to understand that other people do not necessarily ‘operate’ in the same way. We have all experienced that shock when someone we know well and like, suddenly reveals through a chance comment, that their values in relation to some issue lie very far from our own. Throughout my life, despite feeling ‘different’ from childhood onwards, I have nevertheless worked on the assumption that the internal experiences of other people were similar to my own. It was only with the realisation that I had ADHD, as an adult, that I began to understand the true extent of the differences in my experiences of both the outside, and inside, world compared to the neurotypical people around me.

Is Point of View important?

Games potentially give us the opportunity to overcome this kind of misconception, by creating ‘other’ experiences and allowing us to step into them. Arguably first-person games are the best vehicle for this. It is notable, therefore, that Hellblade takes a third person visual perspective, despite some of the other sensory aspects of the game e.g. the constant voices which Senua hears, being ‘first person’. Many players have noted this and there are even first person mods which have been created.

For most players, the POV does not spoil the immersion. The game has been widely praised, particularly because it ‘shows’ rather than ‘tells’. It could have given us ‘facts’ about psychosis through text prompts, or even by having Senua tell another character that she ‘hears voices’, but instead it subjects us to a constant uncomfortable soundtrack of whispers.

A less immersive approach is taken in the game ‘Max: An Autistic Journey’, but then the goal here is not stepping into Max’s shoes, but to ‘help explain to everyone a typical day for a ten year old who has autism’. It was developed by Max’s father, Stéphane Cantin.

The game uses a mixture of storytelling, instructive pop-ups which explain aspects of autism and the behaviour of the character of Max, in a number of everyday situations, to give a window into the real Max’s experience.

While both ‘Senua’ and ‘Max’ have the effect of educating, the latter does it more explicitly, and there are many games out there which aim, through immersion or instruction, or a mixture of both, to explain neurodivergent experience, to an audience who does not share those experiences.

For example, Auti-sim, which lets players experience sensory overload, which some people with autism and also some with ADHD can experience. Or the promise of VR and other technologies to allow others to dive into neurodivergent experience.

There are also of course, games which aim to help neurodivergent people navigate the world, as this article from AxonPlay shows, but a broader consideration of neurodivergence even in pure entertainment games, would be good not just for neurodivergent people, but the game industry itself. What that might mean is discussed in this article for Ludogogy about designing with neurodivergence in mind.

But arguably mainstream games are the route to take for wider empathy, understanding and destigmatisation, simply because they don’t require the audience to have a prior interest in being ‘educated’.

So, how is that going?

Well, a bit of a curate’s egg, to be honest. For every Senua’s Sacrifice, Sea of Solitude or In Sound Mind, all of which were developed by or with the help of people with lived experience, there are dozens of games which portray neurodivergence in more problematic ways or are simply ill-informed.

Sea of Solitude is available on Amazon

There are relatively few protagonists or characters in games who are explicitly presented as neurodivergent, so quite often fans have to discover these ‘coded’ characters for themselves. In the case of one of the most celebrated autistic characters in gaming, Symettra in Overwatch, the developers only acknowledged that she was autistic after considerable public fan speculation.

In Sound Mind is available on Amazon

Phoenix Wright in the Ace Attorney games is likewise believed by many to demonstrate many traits of ADHD. And certainly, when I played the game, I really appreciated the game play and many small touches that felt like playing in my own skin, using small details to build a larger problem solving strategy (often prioritising what seem unimportant to others), lateral thinking, his ability to ‘read’ people very accurately, and of course the strong drive for justice and ‘the truth’ which many people with ADHD feel very keenly.

Ace Attorney is available on Amazon

But often neurodivergent coded characters are used in games, and other media in less useful ways. And many neurodivergent people complain that traits which are seen as ‘quirky’, funny or endearing in fictional characters are exactly those which people find hardest to deal with when encountering real neurodivergent people.

In films and TV, this criticism has been levelled at characters such as Sheldon Cooper, or more recently at Jenna Ortega’s portrayal of Wednesday Addams. There are a number of potential problems.

Traits which are recognisable as neurodivergent, are being exploited to produce entertainment, to make a character ‘weird’ or the butt of jokes, which embeds the idea that this is an acceptable way to think about real neurodivergent people, or to regard them as a collection of stereotypical ‘symptoms’ rather than as people just like oneself.

The traits and behaviours displayed are often stereotypical and do not reflect a rounded human being, so characters are just tropes of neurodivergence.

The fact that the characters are ‘coded’ rather than explicit, can be very damaging too, as it allows for ambiguity. Some people see Wednesday Addams as simply rude and socially cold, not autistic. And yet the ‘coding’ allows for these two things to sit side-by-side in public discourse without explicit explanation. Autistic people are not rude and insensitive, but some of them display behaviours which can be interpreted by others in that way. There is an important distinction which is essential to understanding that the outward appearance of neurodivergent behaviour is not the same as inward ‘character faults’.

Both Wednesday and Sheldon exemplify another fundamental problem of representation. These are (very obviously, though coded) neurodivergent characters being portrayed by people without that lived experience. One easy route to better representation would be simply to include a greater number of explicitly neurodivergent characters in games and other media, and to have those characters portrayed by actually neurodivergent people.

And even the games which have received plaudits for their representation tend to share one final overriding characteristic. They tend to fall in the horror genre.

Why are neurodivergent character always in horror games?

Is this a problem – well, like most things, yes and no.

Obviously, it is distinctly unhelpful to perpetuate tropes that present neurodivergent people as ‘monsters’ – a particularly pernicious form of ‘othering’, but how about if they are the protagonists battling for survival – like Senua?

As much as I like to celebrate the positive sides of my ADHD – the creativity, the hyperfocus, there is much about it that is debilitating, and, yes, on occasions, even horrific – sensory overload, rejection sensitivity, lack of sleep. Many neurodivergent people report that playing horror survival games are therapeutic or cathartic – helping them to reflect usefully on their lived experience.

So it is not necessarily the fact that neurodivergent characters tend to populate horror games which is the issue, but the fact that they are relatively rare elsewhere. It is an issue of representation – as if neurodivergence only has one story to tell, and it is a story of surviving horror.

If you imagine a TV show about a team of talented and dedicated investigators, and the only time that a Muslim character ever appears is if the creators of the show want to tell a story about terrorism. This happens quite a lot, but it does (and should) make many people uncomfortable when they see it.

We should feel the same kind of discomfort when we see yet another horror survival game peopled with ‘quirky’ characters, and ask ourselves “What about all the other stories this beautiful diversity of mind could tell us?”

The post The Other – Neurodivergence in Games first appeared on Ludogogy.

The game is available on Leslie’s site, where you can access a one week free trial of the online version (the one we are playing in this video) and order the board game.

The Loss and Remembrance game, also mentioned in the video is free to play, and you can find out more about Leslie’s other games at the Trance4Mation website.

The post Keep It Real Game – Live Play Session first appeared on Ludogogy.

I spent 35 years working in marginalized communities, to include working with the schizophrenic population in homeless shelters, an emergency shelter for runaway and homeless youth, was a Clinical Supervisor for residences for homeless young adults, created, implemented and supervised Creative Arts programs for at-risk youth in failing inner city schools for six years, facilitated Poetry workshops at the Riker’s Island Women’s Jail, was a Department of Defense Reintegration Specialist, and much more.

I am also a therapist in private practice who has a history of my own significant mental health challenges, many of which I have overcome, and some that I struggle with daily. I did not plan to develop games, or to create a Company to deliver these games. However, it always amazed me that with all of our incredible innate human capacity for understanding, connection and love – we have very few resources or tools to encourage and help us to grow, enhance and put into practice these capacities amongst and with our fellow human beings. So many of us feel entirely isolated, rejected, alone, unloved or cared for, with no one to talk to and no way to give meaning to our experiences.

I never consciously decided to create games. My first creation, the Keep It Real game came to me, almost as if in a visitation, with all of the categories and mechanics in place. And as in pregnancy, pushed me from the inside to develop it fully and get it out into the world. The Keep It Real game is all about the human condition, with 720 questions about life for us all to engage in together. It is a mixture of very deep questions, more neutral questions, and hilarious physical group interactions and fun challenges. Seeing it played, I realized that this blend lowers defenses and engages even the most resistant people, most of the time.

Because of my experiences working with diverse populations prior to my developing my games, it was clear to me that unique groups have unique problems, which due to stigma and lack of access or resources are rarely, if ever addressed, and need specialized, personalized solutions. So, I developed a number of specialized games to address these populations.

Sitting with groups of people, many who for the first time are openly sharing their stories, emotions and experiences through these games, deeply enriches my life, my spirit and my soul. It is an incredible gift that I have this opportunity. As the games bring us all into our humanity, they cross all barriers and allow us to build bridges and understand those from walks of life we may never otherwise engage with. As I sit with the incarcerated, those in the gang life, violence interrupters, College Professors, Corporate leaders, etc. , as we all enter into our humanity together, I am often reminded that I do not know where I would be right now if I had not created these opportunities for me to stretch and to grow, enhance and share my own humanity. In this world where it is so easy to go numb and to check out, where many of us are overwhelmed and lose touch with ourselves to some extent, I remain entirely grateful for my Keep It Real “visitation” which propelled me into this ongoing encounter with the kaleidoscope of the human experience.

Check out the play session of the Keep It Real game which Leslie co-hosted with Ludogogy.

The post My Journey to Becoming a Game Designer first appeared on Ludogogy.

In addition, the process mainly involves clarifying the vague points, adding fun elements or reducing boredom, balancing the victory situations, and so on. This according to Techopedia. While Playtesting is a term that is applied commonly among PC and or role-playing games, we applied the basic playtesting principles first to our physical board game version.

There’s more about the Ubuntu Game in this article about debriefing and feedback

Validating the Game through Playtesting

Both Prototyping and Playtesting play an important hand in hand role in validating your game or application.  We created our version of our game or application, often called a beta test or prototype, based on some early assumptions about our MTP which included who the target audience is, what problem we’ve identified and are solving and how we can create an intuitive, enjoyable gaming experience for our target audience. In the chicken and the egg schematic, your prototype of course precedes your playtesting, which puts your prototype through some hopefully tough validation paces.

Most of us develop our prototypes based on an initial, limited number of features and characteristics that we generally feel will have broad based acceptance among our audience and user community. This is also commonly called an MVP or minimal viable product. At Games 2 Unite, with Ubuntu Game, we were ready to first try it out internally before we expose it to beta test customers or initial adopters. Our initial prototype was actually a physical board game.

Games 2 Unite launched its Ubuntu Game prototype in June. We built an MVP based on what our MTP was. Our target audience is teenagers of different ethnicities and cultures who together play our game to, through questions and collaborative activities, learn about their differences through conversations around diversity, inclusion and equality along with some of the critical issues facing the world today like climate change or overfishing. Once our MVP was created, we turned to Playtesting where play testers playing our game.

Piloting with the Target Audience

First, we play-tested our physical board game prototype internally to validate the mechanics of the game and to fine tune our user instructions as needed, we were then ready to take on exposing the prototype to our beta test users. Our early beta customers not only played the game, but recorded feedback on a micro level detail, validating our actual questions in terms of what landed well for a teenage audience. Playtesting with our ideal audience was invaluable in validating our game and processing improvements that went into the next iteration of the game.

Our next Playtesting will involve the digital version of our game through a platform called Tabletopia. We will again engage our target audience now with the digital version of the prototype and not only process the feedback but compare the feedback to the initial physical board game version. The true test will be what is called Blind Testing, where the testers have no prior experience or exposure to the game.

Prototyping is an important milestone and accomplishment as it serves as the first version of your gaming application, but one word of caution is to not get too attached! Some of the feedback you can get through Playtesting can be critical, even harsh and with any MVP or prototype, be prepared for the worst and the best. Even if you have to significantly course-correct given the feedback on your prototype, imagine staying the course without that feedback. This would be a sure failure!

The Ubuntu Game features in our Make and Break live play sessions

The post Prototyping and Playtesting – Games 2 Unite’s Ubuntu Game first appeared on Ludogogy.

The Ubuntu Game is a physical and virtual board game designed to teach teenagers the wonders of diversity, inclusion and equality as well as empowering them to discuss critical issues facing us as a society like climate control, overfishing of the oceans and sustainable farming.

It does this through game play that challenges its players through questions, conversation, collaborative activities, experiential media (videos and virtual reality) and discovery about themselves, their beliefs and their likenesses and differences through culture, race, creed and other differentiators.

Today’s Teens are Problem Solvers

At Ubuntu Game we believe today’s youth are smarter, more opinionated and have greater access to information and therefore greater capability in thought processing and problem solving than any prior generation. Because of this, it is essential that their viewpoint on board game design and even their direct input be cultivated and encouraged. The majority of board games are designed by white males who dominate the space but also restrict its diversity, a known industry issue.

To combat this limited view in design, we released a beta or Minimal Viable Product (MVP) version of our game, designed to be played by beta customers to garner feedback and constructive improvements towards the game. It is a generally accepted practice that an MVP is a preliminary beta product with some clear cut shortcomings that can be iteratively improved or even pivoted on, depending on the nature of the feedback. Ubuntu Game solicited direct feedback from teenagers playing the beta game themselves.

With the success of the Ubuntu Game directly tied to the power or quality of our questions, our questions were derived from a diverse collection of young and older team members, some of whom were well versed in the diversity/inclusion space. We plan to crowdsource our game content and all-important game questions through our players ultimately.

This initial vetting of the game is all typically part of a lean startup or EXO initiative, which we adopted during the formative stages of Ubuntu Game to validate what we were doing.  In the EXO framework, much up front thought is given by the game developers towards identifying the Massive Transformative Purpose or MTP. What is the critical impact the game will have in a positive way?

Our Massive Transformative Purpose

With Ubuntu Game, our MTP was to create a movement where diversity and inclusion and equality became the norm in the world to counter the recent outbreak of derision, bullying, racism and marginalization that bubbled to the surface due to Black Lives Matter and other incidents.  This is considered alongside the specific problem which is being solved and how our game can solve the problem. Finally, of course, it makes the mechanics of the game much easier to design.

We felt that the route we wanted to take was getting teens into conversations to explore and discover their differences and to better understand and accept them. Initially, our focus groups validated this hypothesis as a core approach to diversity and inclusion understanding! This allowed us to formulate a Value Proposition Canvas to sketch out the benefits and problems solved by our game.

Within the game, we built online questionnaires and surveys to obtain feedback from game players to improve the game. We also had a Breakthrough Wheel which each player spins at the game’s conclusion,  to determine what was their top takeaway from the game, their biggest personal breakthrough, or who they would like to share something with that they learned from the game.

In addition, they may be asked “What would you do differently after today’s game, or what action will they immediately take after today’s game?” or “What discussion will you have with your parent(s) after today’s game?”

Sharing as Learning

This is all intended to memorialize or anchor the key impacts or impressions from the game for each player, and to get them to verbalize it so that it becomes more present to them. Given the game play is a shared experience with other game players, this sharing can lead to significant breakthroughs and discovery by players.

This learning process sets the players up to look forward to future play sessions and clearly places their shared peer experience as a paramount feature of the game. The crystallization of the game’s outcome for the players makes them more mindful of their own growth, which is perhaps the game’s most important objective.

In conclusion, getting young adults to talk about their experience, contribute to the game’s content and seeking their ongoing feedback is what sets Ubuntu Game apart.

HOW THE UBUNTU GAME IS PLAYED

Players traverse the board using mini cultural icons by rolling a die. They land on spaces that trigger questions and conversations in six categories that matter, including diversity, connection, understanding our differences, our similarities, controversial topics and fun facts.   A mobile app is used to add context, enlightenment or information to kindle the conversation. Players can play as individuals, as pairs or teams. Some players will spin to see what kind of barrier to play they will experience.

Virtual and Augmented Reality

Additionally, players will get to role play as “Avatars” and see themselves, literally, through a Virtual Reality experience, as someone from another culture, creed or place in life. Augmented Reality with accentuate some of the images they’re familiar with in their surroundings.

Players will also participate in activities, one on one or with the group, solving riddles about society and diversity, work collaboratively towards a common goal or even just have fun pitching in together to make a recipe!

The game is over when every player reaches the end of the board. The player, pair or team with the highest score wins. Winners get to spin the “Breakthrough” wheel landing on various options to explain what’s changed in their perceptions and what actions they will take.

Read Richard’s other article about Ubutntu game and watch the play session.

The post Debriefing and Feedback for Ubuntu Game first appeared on Ludogogy.

Desire for Play is Inherent

What does this development tell us about games? On the one hand, it shows that the desire for the joy of playing is inherent in human behaviour (Yee 2007). On the other hand, it reflects the fact that with the principle of games – interaction, achievement and reward – it is not only possible to make money, but also to profit from deeply rooted human behaviours; discovery, social interaction and amusement (Wu et al. 2008).

The principle of gamification is utilised by various companies to increase their visibility and to profit from the mechanisms of fun (Wily Global 2018). This could be interpreted as a milestone in the modern recognition of games and as the victory of games over triviality and into cultural mainstream. However, it is crucial to retain a critical stance on the economization of gamification, especially if companies use the mechanisms of gamification to increase revenue rather than being dedicated to the idea of valuing fun as a component of transformation (Peterson 2013). We should rather go back to the roots of games and interpret their rise as part of a social transition embedded in the technological revolution of the last century. If games have the power to instil enthusiasm and excitement, why not use these strengths of games to make a difference in the social sphere? In this context, it is time to see games and gamification as a tool for social change.

Games and Gamification for Social Change

With this background on games and the infinite potential for gamification, we would like to introduce our understanding of gamification as a tool for social change. Following the idea of applying games and gamification methods to create a space for intercultural dialogue, we recognize their potential for the humanitarian field. The workshop “Gamification and Game Design for Social Change” is designed and facilitated in order to introduce the power of games in creating social cohesion by including all the diverse identities on the same board.

In the context of supporting vulnerable people, games are an excellent tool to empower and build resilience. Unlike in life, in games everyone has the same starting point and moves according to their choices. For these groups, life is often characterized by inequality, but games provide a space to be the decision makers for themselves. In games the rules are equal for everyone, in the beginning the materials are distributed equally, the rest is the responsibility of the player. All the players agree on the conditions of winning, and, more importantly, everyone has equal chances to win. For these reasons, games establish a feeling of equal opportunity and a convivial space for agency. Either in front of a screen or at the table, players gain a new identity that they define with their own choices during the process of playing. The magic circle does not have borders.

Target Audiences for the Workshop

Following these ideas, the target group of the workshops are people who are working with marginalized communities, migrants, or vulnerable groups under risk. So far, they have been delivered in different countries with teachers, youth workers, different NGO members and humanitarian workers. The workshop is for all the active citizens who have access and motivation to build dialogue with diverse groups.

The workshop is using non-formal education methods, and Kolb’s (2014) experiential learning cycle[1] is taken as the base of the design. More concretely, the workshop has four chapters: Game & Play, Simulation, Gamification and Game Design. In each section we experience a game, then reflect on our experience, discussing from different angles and critical perspectives and finally considering the process of implementation into the field. Not only inside the flow of the section but also between the sections,

Kolb’s Cyle and Games

1. Game and Play: Through playing a simple game (an energizer or a well known childhood game) it is possible to reflect on the concepts of game and play. This is the section more based on dynamics of the game design. With this approach the focus is on the fun element, and how to make games fun for everyone. This opens a space to discuss the inclusivity of the games in terms of gender, cultural sensitivities, disabilities etc.. The critical questions here are; who can play this game and who cannot, what can we do to include everyone and what can we do to play together? As the first step of the cycle, it is the concrete experience gathering part.
2. Simulation/Role plays/Serious Games: In the second round, using example games provides a good insight on the player experience. Designing the roles that the group is familiar with is especially effective in getting the participants out of their comfort zones and reveals the characteristics of the players. After the exercise, it is useful to discuss more about feelings. Reflection is the crucial outcome of this section. How does it feel to be another person, to make choices as another person? How does it feel to be in that particular role? These questions try to focus on player experience and how game design is shaping that experience powerfully.
3. Gamification: The participants are introduced to the term gamification through example videos. The focus is on the change effect; both behavioral and motivational change. An open discussion is facilitated about which aspects of gamification can encourage a positive change in socially sensitive (polarized) topics. The advantages and disadvantages are discussed. As a cumulative process, the previous parts are always referenced as a start of conceptualization and to give a more holistic view on the process.
4. Game Design: This is the part where participants have a chance to practice the previous steps. Now, they are getting to actively experiment with their learnings. In groups, they are encouraged to design a simple game prototype, based upon a goal with the given materials. The task is “design a game to X”. The goal can sometimes be an easy task like “teach to count to 10 in a different language”, or it can be more complex like “there is a tension in a school against migrant background students”. It can be good to challenge the participants during the design process to make sure they have their critical eyes open (especially when they start falling into the comfort zone and think it was easy; we found something nice). There are challenges that will create problems in their designs. They can be related to inclusion (there is no common language in the group), or social conflict (girls do not want to play with boys). But these serve to encourage flexibility and inclusion, starting from the design. This is an advanced version, but it is important to underline that the game is an active space that designer and potential players always needs to be engaged with. Also, it helps to complete/restart Kolb’s experiential learning cycle.

We are United by the Passion for Play

With this simple design, it is possible to capitalize from the potential of games and to use the human desire for joyful interaction for social interventions. The trends in the game industry and the increasing recognition of games as change-bringing activities are crucial to underline the positive effects that games can have. When using games and the principle of gamification as a tool for social change, we do not only want to stress the idea that games can make a difference, but also that this difference can be based on valuable transformation; valuable for vulnerable groups such as migrants, but also for the common understanding that we are united in the passion for playing.

The post Games and Gamification as a tool for Social Change first appeared on Ludogogy.

I didn’t see many characters like myself in the media when I was growing up. Even now, there is a distinct lack of female Chinese characters in games, movies, or books. With age came the realisation of sexuality —or in my case, the lack thereof. Factor that into an already meagre pool of representation and we’ve dropped that number down to zero. (Readers, if you know of a prolific asexual female Chinese character in any form of media, please reach out to me!)

Now, compare this to the amount of white, male protagonists in the video game world and you’re drowning in a veritable ocean of testosterone and grit.

Diverse representation is a hot topic among the gaming world and across all spheres of entertainment. The need to include voices from as many communities as possible is not so much a case of marking off an invisible checklist created by ‘social justice warriors’ or ‘political correctness police’ but rather, a case of being able to see yourself in the shoes of a character and feeling validated. Of course, this might be difficult for those who have never had the experience of erasure; after all, how do you empathise with such a topic when you’re used to seeing yourself in the media you consume?

Then there’s the topic of ethnic typecasting and the microaggression that comes with it. How often do you see Chinese characters starring in support roles where they’re a mathematical genius, computer scientist, or alike? Probably more often than not. Art informs perceptions of our reality, and as such, stereotypes are transferred onto the real people we meet in our lives and assists in creating bias before the other person even opens their mouth. There have been many times where I’ve been expected to be good at maths or know some form of martial arts. These days, I meet these expectations with a weary smile and brush it off as harmless ignorance.

There is more to diversity than the colour of a person’s skin, their culture, or their sexuality; it is a facet of a character, not the whole package deal. Just as white characters are multifaceted in goals, aspirations, and flaws, so should our depictions of characters outside this circle.

What makes mainstream media so resistant and reluctant to embrace diversity? In my experience, it can be a number of factors.

It Takes Work Writing and creating something outside of your immediate knowledge takes research, empathy, and a sense of cultural sensitivity; all things that people aren’t always ready to embrace. After all, why bother to put in so many hours of extensive research for someone to point out how you inaccurately portrayed a culture, or on the opposite side of the spectrum, have someone complain that you’re pandering to the minority?

In an attempt to diversify a cast, many well meaning creators fall into the trap of cultural shortcuts, regurgitating the westernised versions of culture they’ve consumed, or fail to consult actual members of the minority they’re attempting to represent. The result is a flat, 2D caricature that lacks the depth of their fellow straight, white cast members.

It is Outside The Audience’s Comfort Zone Humans are creatures of habit, taking comfort in the familiar. When faced with the unknown, they meet the new experience with scepticism or reluctance.

I remember watching a Hong Kong movie with some non-Chinese friends once as part of a movie night and spent the better part of it having to explain cultural references and nuances that loaned itself to the plot. My friends appreciated it, but I could see that they were a bit overwhelmed with the extra information needed to fully enjoy the movie.

Consider this type of experience in a game context. If you need all this extra information to get full enjoyment out of a game, there is a high chance that the player may not want to invest the time and effort to learn more. Games are about enjoyment, and if the player sees this task as a chore, then they won’t want to engage.

People Don’t Want to Disturb the Status Quo Existing media of predominantly white casts (with a male hero), has the backbone of Hollywood and video games for as long as anyone can remember. The formula works and sells, and in a world where money rules, there are few willing to take the risk of changing this. This point ties back in with the idea of comfort and fear of poor portrayal.

Of course, there are more, but these are the main ones I can think of.

So, how do we handle the challenge that is diversity? The obvious answer is to have more diverse content creators and key decision makers. We live in a colourful world of many different races, sexualities, and genders; it should not be up to one singular group to take the sole responsibility of representation. By working together, communicating, and respecting different experiences, can we begin to create characters that feel as real as the groups they portray.

In the end, diversity is not a case of being able to relate to every single character in the cast. It’s a case of being able to find at least one character you can empathise with and relate to, creating a bond and allowing for emotional investment. Only by seeing ourselves in the world, do we feel empowered and inspired to create and do more.

The post Navigating the World of Gaming as a POC first appeared on Ludogogy.

Terry: I grew up playing games, I think I played my first game of Dungeons & Dragons at nine, and was playing bridge by 14. They were a big part of how I learned about the world. How big a part of your upbringing did games play?

Sam: I play games every day, and I grew up playing card and board games with my family. I always liked games that made me feel there was something to learn. Cards taught me strategy, planning and maths. I’m not such a fan of Monopoly, though – the dice made it too reliant on chance.

Terry: I totally agree. I’ve gotten in a few debates with people online about my pet hate for Monopoly. I remember feeling bored by having to play on after it was clear who was going to win. I think how games make you feel is really important.

Sam: Completely. I enjoy games with an element of showing what I’m good at, and of confidence boosting when I get things right or win something. And the feeling that I’m learning. As an autistic person growing up not knowing I was autistic, I look back and think I learned things over and above what the game intended, and that made me feel good. I learned how to take turns instead of grabbing centre stage. How to take not winning – my parents would never just let me win – and how to deal better with different human behaviours, like my brother cheating.

Terry: Yeah, I’m fairly sure my brother did, too. We’re already talking about how non-learning games helped you to learn. What about games where learning was at least part of the intention?

Sam: I really liked Dr Kawashima on the Nintendo DS – addictive, rewarding, competitive. It was really clearly explained, and the gradual increase in toughness of the levels kept me challenged and encouraged me every day to form new habits. I think it improved my IQ and mental arithmetic, and that’s stayed with me.

Terry: That’s great. I think that balance of new levels providing the right new level of challenge is one of the cornerstones of the power of games.

I’m really interested in how far you feel that your own experiences and preferences generalise to other Autistic people – I’ve heard it said that there can be more difference between one Autistic person and another than between a given Autistic person and a Neurotypical person.

Sam: Yeah, Autistic people are so different to each other – just like non-Autistic people. You get artistic leanings, or science geeks, or people who do both. One size will never fit all. I think – as far as you can generalise – there are some patterns. But the worst thing you can do is make assumptions and say, all Autistic people are like this, or will like this.

Terry: So how can learning game designers and similar folk account for this?

Sam: I think consultation with the audience is key. You potentially cut out one-third of your audience when you model things just for non-Autistic people.

Terry: Nothing for us, without us. And that’s good game and learning design practice, anyway. It’s going to help everything you do land well with your audience if you prototype and test with them.

Sam: Yes, I think that’s important to say – a lot of the things that are going to help Autistic people are going to help non-Autistic people too. Lots of non-Autistic people learn similarly to Autistic people. And of course there are a lot of undiagnosed Autistic people, too.

Another thing I’d like to see more of is people offering as many different options as possible for learning, whether it’s games or something else. Even though all Autistic people are different, what they often have in common is that they can find things that are designed just for Neurotypical people challenging. The specific things that are challenging may be different, but you can get round that to some extent by giving them choices. Different formats, more or less visual, more or less active, but also just different.

Like controls. Take Microsoft programs – there are several ways to do anything: menus, the ribbon, quick keys… the sense of choice is really helpful, the autonomy of being given choices.

Terry: Well, autonomy is a huge plank of intrinsic motivation for good game design. Like the choices in Choose Your Own Adventure books.

Sam: Or Black Mirror’s Bandersnatch! I loved that.

Terry: Me too! I followed through to most of the endings.

So okay, there are some good design principles that can also steer us well for considering the needs of Autistic people. But, if we preface everything in the next part of out conversation with ‘there are as many differences as similarities and we shouldn’t make assumptions’, are there any patterns that are, shall we say common, in how Autistic people interact with games, in your experience? Any that might be helpful to address?

Sam: There are some I see often, but yes, we need to make sure we don’t turn them into stereotypes. Abstract concepts can be tricky sometimes, or a lack of clarity about how to win. Also reliability. I want to know that a rule or technique I learned always works.

Interpreting what Neurotypical people say, and some of the non-verbalised messages in particular, is a common challenge for many Autistic people. So for instructions or for people facilitating learning games or experiences, to be clear, to mean what you say and say what you mean.

Also, I think Autistic minds are often looking for patterns, things they recognise – again that’s all minds, but maybe a tendency to do it more for many (but not all) Autistic minds. So, variations on an existing pattern of play as a game progresses in level is good.

Terry: Like with Dr Kawashima.

Sam: Exactly.

Terry: There’s a game that does that amazingly well; it’s not a learning game, but a puzzler called The Witness; I’ve seen a few articles written by Autistic people saying how well it worked for them[1], and the link with patterns building was very strong. I think that game could be a good inspiration point for people wanting to design well for many Autistic people.

Sam: I’ll have to check it out.

Terry: Anything else, in terms of patterns?

Sam: Maybe something around emotions; controlling and interpreting emotions in the self and others. Many Autistic people can find that a challenge. An over-reliance on emotional intelligence in a game where it’s not really necessary could be a problem. On the other hand, games can really help develop these skills in Autistic people. They helped me.

Terry: Yes; Jane McGonigal references a number of studies[2] in her book SuperBetter[3], where multiplayer videogames increase co-operation and social intelligence. She also talks about games helping develop a theory of mind, which is part of emotional intelligence. This was with children, though.

Sam: Right, but nothing about Autism stops at 16. Except maybe some of the support and recognition.  

Stress is also a common factor. High levels of stress. So games should really lower that stress, and should avoid too much pressure. Because stress levels may already be high, a challenge too far could make some Autistic people give up in frustration a little more easily than a Neurotypical person.

Terry: There’s some great stuff there. So long as we keep in mind that the golden rule is consult, not assume, right?

Sam: Right.

Terry: What about any learning or games designers who might be thinking, ‘I’d really like to design something to raise awareness around Autism, or to help Autistic people’? What would you say to them? Is there anything you’d really like to see?

Sam: Maybe something to improve facial expression recognition – roleplay scenarios where you have to guess what’s going on and you get rewarded for guessing correctly. Or emotional intelligence development: how to manage strong emotions for what’s acceptable in society, so you can enjoy holding down a job. Converting direct language into non-Autistic language, too.

But conversely, apps for non-Autistic people to understand Autistic people and their potential difficulty with emotional intelligence, facial recognition, sensory sensitivity, overload, meltdowns, language, etc.  It works both ways – it’s not just for Autistic people to do all the work.

Terry: That’s a great point. And is there something we should also consider about how this shouldn’t all be about just addressing the difficulties that Autistic people face, but harnessing their strengths to improve games and workplaces?

Sam: Absolutely. That’s a huge part of what I do. So, Autistic minds can often be great with problem solving, because they often see things very differently, and more perspectives bring more solutions. They can often also be great at concentrating, if left alone. Again, designing for difference is going to reap rewards.

Terry: I think that might end up as part of our title. Sam, it’s been really thought-provoking for me, and this conversation is definitely going to be rattling around in my mind in future when I’m designing. Thank you.

Sam: And for me. And fun, too.

Terry: Definitely. That’s a gamification maxim: don’t forget the fun[4].

The post Designing for Difference – Autism and Games-based Learning first appeared on Ludogogy.

Following the death of George Floyd, the groundswell of feeling showed similar extremes. While many people showed their solidarity with Black Lives Matter, and sought to educate themselves about the history and effects of racism, others took to social media to defend the status quo, rehashing the old stereotypes and myths.

I’ve had an interest in creating prosocial games ever since I became a games-based learning professional and recent events have really galvanised my intent to make a learning game around racism. For details of how I actually want to go about creating this particular game, see the end of this article. But first I want to explore some of the questions which have come up for me whilst thinking about this game.

Imposter syndrome

Like a lot of people, I’ve been reading round the topic, a lot!  But the more I read the less I felt I knew. I realised that what had seemed to me to be relatively simple, for example, the causes of racism in individuals, was in fact incredibly nuanced and complex. And that was just one aspect of the learning I was embarking upon.

The depth of my ignorance weighed heavily on me and I wondered if I would be capable of, or even had the right to be, creating a game, which after all is about someone else’s lived experience and struggle.  But then someone said something (or wrote it, I’m ashamed to say I don’t remember where I heard or saw this). She said ‘Black people should not be doing all the work on this.’ And I realised it should be the work of white people, like myself, to find ways to become part of the solution.

So, my game should focus on helping white people to recognise aspects of their own actions and beliefs, which reinforce stereotypes, which support and perpetuate privilege, and which undervalue the contribution of ‘the other’.

White Fragility

All of which brings me very neatly to the next ‘thinking roadblock’ I encountered, which is dealt with very eloquently in Robin DiAngelo’s book ‘White Fragility’. Although games are often touted as ‘safe spaces’ in which to experiment and to explore even quite contentious issues, asking people to consider that their thoughts and actions might be ‘racist’ is probably going to make for a very bumpy ride.

For many of us who see ourselves as inclusive, unprejudiced liberal types, it is a core conviction that racist beliefs and actions are the preserve of ‘racists’, who are, by definition, bad people. So, when we are asked to consider that our own actions or beliefs may be racist, the reaction is often to cast ourselves as the ‘victims’ of unwarranted accusations of ‘being a racist’. An attempt to correct faulty thinking is seen as a personal attack on one’s character.

I experienced a good example of this recently, in an exchange of comments on LinkedIn. One commenter expressed his belief that Adidas’ commitment to change their employment practices to employ more black people, was in itself racist, because it is taking jobs away from the more qualified in favour of others ’just because of the colour of their skin’, to get ‘token’ employees to be seen to do the right thing. Several people tried to explain to him that the idea that employing more black people requires ’tokenism’ (rather than say, adjusting employment practices which currently overwhelmingly favour white people), is where the racist belief lies here. It rests on the assumption that black people are less able and qualified. He saw the point that one’s appearance is irrelevant to one’s capability, when ‘black’ was replaced with ‘red-head’, but then still insisted that his original point was correct.

Even though this person recognised that white people currently have an advantage in employment (as evidenced by studies using ‘whitened’ resumes), he was far more disturbed by the idea of potential future positive discrimination, than by the idea that the prevailing situation continues.

White Fragility means that we feel that the ‘damage‘ caused to us when our beliefs or actions are identified as racist is far worse than the effect of racism itself.

A similar effect, relating specifically to (prosocial) games, was identified in a 2015 paper by Kaufman & Flanagan. The direct and explicit inclusions of issues-based scenarios was found to cause psychological resistance on the part of the participants, and there is therefore a need to present persuasive material in a more ‘embedded’ way. Mixing ‘on-topic’ and ‘off-topic’ material and using game devices and tropes to obscure material are two ways in which the authors suggest this can be done.

From Play into Action

The final major issue with creating a game which looks at racism is bridging the gap between the learning created by the game experience and effective behaviour change and/or activism.

This suggests to me that the game will need have a longer duration than a typical game play session. Games such as ‘World Without Oil’ – which featured in Ken Eklund’s article last month, blur the distinction between the game and everyday life. They also give players the opportunity to ‘live the experience’. As well as have the advantage of increasing exposure to the topic at hand, these protracted experiences can be a good way of embedding new ideas and even behaviours into people’s lives, and of creating a feeling of empathy with the player/character/self.

How I want to get this done

Ludogogy is going to undergo some changes over the next few months. While it will still have a magazine at its heart, the intention is to create a ‘Community of Value’ – an online space where people with an interest, as creators and/or consumer of games-based learning, gamification and gameful design, can come together and derive and create value for each other.

One of the core features of this new iteration of the site will be, (I think – nothing is set in stone), a project marketplace. In this, people will be able to propose projects and invite others to work with them. These projects could be commercial, with contributors being paid by project owners for their work. They could also be speculative, with project owners and contributors working together towards what they hope will be a commercial proposition, or they could be projects simply for fun or learning.

The project I have in mind is speculative. The ideas are sketchy, at the moment. Many of them are the result of the thought processes above. Although the project marketplace is some way off, I would like to strat the ball rolling with this project and invite anyone who wishes to join me (as much or as little commitment as you like), in the process of bringing these ides to life. As it stands, the below are what I think I want to work with, but that may change, with your input.

• A game focusing on a desired future where racism has ceased to damage people’s lives
• Designed to work mainly by helping white people to learn about the realities of racism and their own privilege
• Costs (to players/facilitators) should be kept low to ensure accessibility
• Gives players access to the experiences of others to create empathy
• Some level of abstraction may be necessary to combat psychological resistance
• Provides routes to activism
• A mixture of analogue ‘in real life’ elements and online interaction (to broaden exposure to different cultures and experiences)

Drop me a line at sarah@ludogogy.co.uk if you interested in joining in

The post The Future of Racism – a skeleton of a game first appeared on Ludogogy.

Although autistic children receive a lot of attention, support drops off sharply as they become adults. Most resources for individuals with ASD level 1 and 2 are tailored for younger people and are too childish and basic for adolescents and older. Other materials are aimed at parents of neurodiverse children. However, there are currently very few accessible resources for young adults with ASD aimed at developing mental resilience and other social skills.

We conducted extensive in-depth interviews with over 70 individuals who identify as having ASD,  families with children on the spectrum, caretakers, occupational therapists, speech pathologists, and social workers. 85% said there are no sustainable and affordable solutions addressing social resilience issues such as:

• Rejection
• Initiating conversation
• Puberty and sexual development
• Transitioning into high school
• Independence
• Beginning or maintaining a friendship or a relationship

Our solution is a narrative social simulation game which uses interactive dialogue to help people on the spectrum manage their anxieties about social situations and develop better resilience. Set in a high fantasy world of magic and technology, the player develops relationships with a closed community of characters stuck in a temporal dislocation. Together they try and return to their correct existence before they become stuck forever. Each character challenges the player in different ways, such as establishing boundaries, dealing with intimidating behaviour such as anger or uncooperativeness, and rejection.

Nola the artificer (left) offers the player character (right) a hug as a symbol of interaction which is rejected by the play, challenging the player’s boundaries.

Repeatable dialogues allow the player to ‘dry-run’ various social situations before they might encounter them in the world. Doing so helps the player understand what kinds of feelings, thoughts and motivations other people in these situations realistically could have. By aiding the player’s ‘theory of mind’, they learn to handle anxiety about how a social situation could go wrong or how someone will react to them. This also builds insight into dealing with undesirable outcomes if they occur.

Player flow is regulated primarily by altering how much information about the interaction and the speaker is revealed to the player during a dialogue. Through character animations, effects, colour coding, and iconography, the player gets access to NPC’s perspective. As the player gets better at reading this information, it is reduced so the player has to use body language, tonal, environmental, and narrative cues instead.

While a playthrough has some narrative linearity, the characters are simulations adding a dynamic element to dialogues and an uncertain path through the story. This dynamic gameplay allows replayability to facilitate learning and keeps the challenge level tailored to the player.

By making the characters simulations, the protagonist becomes part of a simulation and an economy. As a result, the game becomes an autism simulator of sorts. While the project presents a number of design challenges, such as player motivation within a gamified teaching tool and user experience for neurodivergent players, there are two of particular importance: what are we teaching and the representation of autism.

Pedagogically, we cannot not simply teach rote ‘socially acceptable’ scripts or routines. We are not trying to normalize behaviour or teach masking skills. Our aim is to aid ‘theory of mind’ to help build insight through dynamic challenges.  We are working with psychologists at the University of Technology Sydney to ensure we are delivering an effective teaching aid.

There are representational issues particularly with creating mechanics to emulate the autistic experience. We need to avoid using stale and limiting stereotypes of autism, especially those created by neurotypical people. While not the primary goal of the project, it would be a bonus if a neurotypical person playing the game experienced an insight into autistic reality. To this end, we have neurodiverse members of our team, including our game designer who is autistic, and are working closely with the community to ensure we get it right.

It’s time to provide the right resources for neurodiverse people!

We are extremely passionate about creating a better platform for people with learning disabilities. Everybody on our team has been deeply affected by this issue, some having experienced similar situations themselves. We have team members who have had extreme difficulties with social communication. As such, we have made it our mission to create better tools for people on the spectrum. We want others to be valued, integrated members of society and hope they face fewer difficulties navigating communal norms. Our team are professional game developers with a range of expertise.

If you know anyone facing these complexities please reach out to us, we are looking for early adopters and building our community.

The post HOW FANTASY WORLDBUILDING COULD BE THE PATH FINDER TO SOCIAL RESILIENCE? first appeared on Ludogogy.