Documentation – Ben Miller

Project 1 – Untitled

Shakti Mb & Ben Miller

Summary: This project was a conversational framework, wherein four people engage in a single conversation, each limited in some aspect of communication, and forced to compensate. The four people were split into two groups, two physically together, and the other 2 off in separate locations, but paired digitally in a chat interface with one of the physically present people. The goal was to apply constraints to how people communicate in order to explore how aspects of race, gender and personality are conveyed through non-verbal means such as body language, tone, pitch or word choice, and potentially more dynamic aspects such as the relationship of the speaker to what they’re saying (are they speaking as themselves, or as’ a third party). The ruleset for engaging with the interaction is as follows:

Project1Ruleset

Project 2 – Untitled

Karen Mercado Campos, Qianjing Liu, & Ben Miller

Summary: This project went through several distinct phases, all focusing on exploring different roles and how these shape how a community relates to one another.

The design started initially as a board game taking the bronx neighborhood of Hunts Point as inspiration. Players would take on different roles in the community, including average citizens, police, or a criminal. Along with these roles, players would receive guidelines for how they can act and move along the game board, with players having to infer and make choices based off these rules. This version did not advance far, and after feedback in class we scrapped the highly representational aspect (both in board game theming and directly showing Hunts Point) and shifted towards a more ‘pick up & play’ card game approach.

This card game version went through two iterations, with the second being a much closer revision than the first board game. The first go at the card game took some inspiration from Mafia, focusing on the way information was selectively hidden or shared between players, and how these relationships could change dynamically over play. The ruleset for this version is as follows:

See Card Variant 1

We playtested this version and had a few promising moments, but the pacing and start were still rough. The key issues we found early on were the initial catalyst of distrust or a hint to get players questioning and accusing one another. Effectively the connection between questioning and who was the killer was not strong enough to get the game going, which drove us to once again revise the initial design. The most significant revision was giving players ‘trait cards’ that pair with a series of ‘suspected traits’ that match the killer, to give some information for players to work off of in the start of the game. This information was also partially held back, so players also had a short-term goal to work toward of revealing more information. The ruleset remains largely the same as the above, but with the following addition:

See Card Variant 2

Players would receive a hand of these binary trait cards, which would be publicly visible. At the start of the game, the one running it selects a player as the killer, and builds a set of hidden trait cards based on those held by the killer. As the game progresses, these killer traits are revealed, stoking the fire of suspicion between players as the option narrows down. This version worked far better, and seemed like it was enjoyed during each of our play tests. The traits added a welcome push to the start of the game, and provided more for players to latch onto and build off during the game for humor, asides and other remarks that added a dynamic quality to how relationships in each play session developed.

Project 2 Ruleset

Project 2 Cards

Project 3 – Coffeehouse Cahoots

Alex Dinsmore & Ben Miller

Summary: This project in a way combines aspects of both of our previous projects, exploring the potential mechanics we both explored previously. This project also went through several iterations, shifting in focus between mechanics that alternatively emphasized contained systems that players can infer and act off of, or open-ended verbal prompts that more flexibly played off of the players’ own projections or stories. The final iteration, which was also the one that we were both most satisfied with, uses a set of highly structured rules (similar to Poker hands) that were themed in such a way for players to be able to project onto them. The shifting tactics and playstyles players might enact would then interact with one another, and would often require revising accordingly, rewarding players who can think from the other player’s perspective to better equip them to make their own combos or block their opponent.

Here the core mechanic shifted to some degree across iterations, but often in some form touched on people’s personalities and traits, and how they are both often essential for engaging with others, but also potentially misleading if you rely only on them. The final iteration explored this in how these traits tie into the play tactics that must be leveraged to anticipate how your opponent will use the gameplay system strategically.

Project 3 Ruleset

Project 3 Cards

Documentation — Qianjing

First Project:

This is the first paper prototype for this class. The concept for this project comes from another project designed by an artist named Rashid Rana. In his installation, “I do not always feel immaterial”, he showed the audiences how themselves look liken when they were looking at a painting. Inspired by that idea, I also want my audiences to change perspectives in similar way. To achieve that goal, I would set a room as my project. In side the room, there will be a box on the desk in the middle of it. The box would be set as same as the real room and have a small doll inside it. As long as audiences get into this room, the kinect will track the movement of them and reflect on the doll. Therefore, players can see clearly how themselves move in this magic room.

 

 

GOAL of “who killed David”

About our project title is “who killed David”

our project’s keywords are “explore-game”, “experience”, “reality”, “clues”, “truth”

the goal of the project is to find the person who killed David. There are 4 suspects that police discovered that possibly relates to the murder of David and players/users have to figure out which suspect killed him.

Screen Shot 2015-12-13 at 8.19.40 PM

Screen Shot 2015-12-13 at 8.22.52 PM

our mechanic is to give clues(but not enough information) to the players to figure out what happened.

pdf link : Documentation (1)

Final Documentation- Yunqi Zhou

First prototype

  • Introduce the first prototype

I want to make an immersive environment that people can experience the life of ghost and ghost exist in our world. Basically, I will make a virtual room that same as our classroom or my bedroom. There are two persons can engage in this experience. One sitting in front of the computer(the virtual room that I created) play as a ghost. He or she can trigger some environment objects, sententiously, in the physical room(my bedroom ) will also be influenced. The other persons will stand in the physical room, using a camera(made by Arduino) to capture the ghost.

  • Game mechanism

The ghost’s goal is triggering all the item in the virtual world and avoiding be captured by the player in the physical  world.

When the ghost trigger items in the  virtual world, same objects in physical will also have feedback. Therefore, according to these clues, the physical world player can use the camera to capture the ghost. Furthermore, there is sound feedback. The player can hear the sound which generates by the ghost. The player also can recognize the direction of the sound.

The goal of the player in the physical world is trying to capture the ghost, by using those clues and sound feedback. The player has 3 chances to capture the ghost. If the player captures the ghost within 3 changes, he/she win. If not, lose. Or if ghost trigger all the items, Ghost win.

未标题-1

the figure of the physical world and virtual world

  • Document Video

 

Second prototype

  • Introduce the second prototype

This prototype Geyao and I want to use sound as an instrumentality to change people’s perspectives. Basically, we use heart beat. So we want people to evaluate each other by hearing heartbeats.

  •   mechanism

There is a completely darkness room, and we need 10 or more people to participate in, and each of person has a stethoscope, and each of them wears a T-shirt with a light stick around their heart position. It can help people find where is the heart position in the darkness room. So base on that, people hear others’ heartbeats by using a stethoscope in the darkness room, and find the most beautiful heartbeats, and then stay with he/she. So when light up someone may stay with the person with whom they never want to make a friend.

  • Why in the darkness room? And why using heartbeats?

So we want to use darkness to remove everything. Such as, skin color, appearances, gender, privilege. The only thing left is heartbeats, and almost everyone’s heartbeats hear same. So we want to use that to achieve an identity.

 

Third Project

  • Introduce 

Geyao and I want to create a cooperation game. To win the game two players have to communicate with each other. So in this process, they will change the perspectives.

image

  • Game mechanism

This is a multiplayer Jenga game, and the computer will be divided into two section that is left and right. There is a fence perpendicular to the screen and at the middle of the screen to limit the information they can get on the screen. Their goal is trying to escape the little man on the top of the tower. P1(the right side player) has a panorama view, and he/she can remove the bricks. However, P1 doesn’t know which brick will blow up the tower. However, once the player-one’s mouse hover on dangerous brick. A sound warming warning will play for player-two. Therefore, the player-two can warn the player-one. The P2 can control the little guy on the top of the tower. P2 has a first person’s view, and he can turning his views to check and know which brick to decide move direction. So they should talk to each other and figure out how to rescue the man on the top of the tower. In this process, they will change the perception.

2015-12-13 194941

the figure of computer and fence.

The win condition is that let the little guy safely landing on the ground.

 

  • Document video

 

The PDF LINK

thoughts on VR

I thought Dan Archer’s talk was very inspiring as I am really interested in how stories in the news are told. Expanding journalism beyond the written word is something that is emerging as our technology evolves. Every medium lends its own representation to an event, or as Marshal Mcluhan says — the medium actually IS THE MESSAGE! This little phrase took me a long time to wrap my head around, until I realized that what he is saying is that the way we communicate defines what it is we communicate. Stories are hard to tell. How do you describe a moment in time? Can a news event really be summed up by one overlying story? Aren’t stories and news events more of a combination of perspectives? I think so. Therefore, telling a story is an art form. The medium used to tell the story lends to the way the art is perceived in the end. For example, a painting of a rose in watercolor communicates something very different than one painted in acrylic.

In terms of VR, I think it just offers us another face to a story. VR is not truer to a story because it immerses our vision in a 3D world, but it does lend a new interpretation. The language of communication it uses is completely different from writing a story, but each has the capability of storytelling.

VR will not take over writing, photography, or film making. It is an interesting medium in that it immerses a persons VISUAL SENSES to the confines of a world that an artist builds. Nevertheless it is just another medium, not one that renders writing, photography, and film making obsolete.