| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision |
| future_fabulators:futures_card_games [2014-11-04 17:02] – [People involved] maja | future_fabulators:futures_card_games [2015-05-19 15:36] (current) – nik |
|---|
| ==== Challenge ==== | ==== Challenge ==== |
| |
| An introductory creative exercise at the beginning of the "Cross-over workshop week Public Space", organised by the MAD-faculty and UHasselt. The participants are students who don’t know each other and are assigned to work together for a week on a future scenario for different sites in public spaces around Hasselt. The session should bring the students together and get them thinking creatively about futures. The workshop is a part of the [[future_fictions|Future Fictions]] exhibition at [[http://z33.be|Z33]] | An introductory creative exercise at the beginning of the "Cross-over workshop week Public Space", organised by the MAD-faculty and UHasselt. The participants are students who don’t know each other and are assigned to work together for a week on a future scenario for different sites in public spaces around Hasselt. The session should bring the students together and help them to think creatively about futures. The workshop was a part of the [[future_fictions|Future Fictions]] exhibition at [[http://z33.be|Z33]] |
| |
| * Workshop for 2 groups of 18 students. | * Workshop for 2 groups of 18 students. |
| Co-organisers: Sarah Martens, Karen Verschoren | Co-organisers: Sarah Martens, Karen Verschoren |
| |
| Photos on Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/sets/72157648703225680/ | Photos on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/sets/72157648703225680/ |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15677140226/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15677140226/}}\\ |
| |
| ==== Content ==== | ==== Content ==== |
| |
| **The Thing From the Future** by the Situation Lab is most 'gamelike' of the three decks as it has a competitive aspect: at the end of the game there is a 'winner'. It is also the only deck that invites a mixture of group and individual creation. The game works with four generic futures (grow, collapse, discipline and transform) with different time horizons (up to 1000 year). The futures are further specified with 'terrain', 'object' and 'mood' cards, giving a specific context for creating 'the thing' from that future. It is played in several rounds until the deck is exhausted (or until the time runs out). | **The Thing From the Future** by the Situation Lab is most 'gamelike' of the three decks as it has a competitive aspect: at the end of the game there is a 'winner'. It is also the only deck that invites a mixture of group and individual creation. The game works with four generic futures (grow, collapse, discipline and transform) with different time horizons (up to 1000 year). The futures are further specified with 'terrain', 'object' and 'mood' cards, giving a specific context for creating 'the thing' from that future. It is played in several rounds until the deck is exhausted (or until the time runs out). |
| | |
| | {{>http://vimeo.com/111582424}} |
| | //Stuart Candy's introduction to The Thing from The Future// |
| |
| The **Design Fiction Kit** by the Near Future Lab has the quickest gameplay of the three decks with simplest instructions. The goal is to design specific products for the near future based on three cards describing an object, an attribute and design action. The products are described, visualised and given a name, as they would appear in a product catalogue. | The **Design Fiction Kit** by the Near Future Lab has the quickest gameplay of the three decks with simplest instructions. The goal is to design specific products for the near future based on three cards describing an object, an attribute and design action. The products are described, visualised and given a name, as they would appear in a product catalogue. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15677249896/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15677249896/}}\\ |
| |
| (NOTE: FoAM proposed four games, but the tutors rejected the [[http://www.superflux.in/work/tarotcards|Tarot Deck by Superflux]] as they felt it's focus on biotech was too specific for the context of their course) | (NOTE: FoAM proposed four games, but the tutors rejected the [[http://www.superflux.in/work/tarotcards|Tarot Deck by Superflux]] as they felt it's focus on biotech was too specific for the context of their course) |
| The second group developed a world suffering from cognitive pollution, flex working and distributed education, in a relatively stable climate. They were an organisation creating infrastructure and built environment, with a mission to connect children through free education and leisure. They created a protected off-line park where learning and play happened through connections with other children, where they could build on each others’ skills and knowledge to create complex projects as well as learn basics of maths, sciences and humanities. The park also included leisure spaces, which were accessible by exchanging credits gained in gamified educational courses and projects. | The second group developed a world suffering from cognitive pollution, flex working and distributed education, in a relatively stable climate. They were an organisation creating infrastructure and built environment, with a mission to connect children through free education and leisure. They created a protected off-line park where learning and play happened through connections with other children, where they could build on each others’ skills and knowledge to create complex projects as well as learn basics of maths, sciences and humanities. The park also included leisure spaces, which were accessible by exchanging credits gained in gamified educational courses and projects. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15698907511/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15698907511/}}\\ |
| |
| |
| * etc. | * etc. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15081612473/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15081612473/}}\\ |
| |
| === The Thing from the Future === | === The Thing from the Future === |
| * etc. | * etc. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15515684457/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15515684457/}}\\ |
| |
| |
| Changeist’s Design Fiction worldbuilding exercise appeared to be quite complex, and most students found it difficult to begin with. It took them a while to understand the nature and detail of the concepts described and the process of elaboration. They often struggled to keep the content of all cards in mind and tended to work with a subset of the issues. Early dicussions tended to close down the exploration of possibilities, however questions about explicitly linking or cross checking cards with emerging ideas tended to open up the conversation. However, once it 'clicked' discussions became much deeper and more reflective than those within the other two games. The cards provided a lot of material to work with and the first group felt that they should have had more time to develop it. For this game it might be necessary to either play with people who have a bit more experience with the foresight process, have a longer introduction, or have a facilitator present at all times to moderate and guide the discussions. | Changeist’s Design Fiction worldbuilding exercise appeared to be quite complex, and most students found it difficult to begin with. It took them a while to understand the nature and detail of the concepts described and the process of elaboration. They often struggled to keep the content of all cards in mind and tended to work with a subset of the issues. Early dicussions tended to close down the exploration of possibilities, however questions about explicitly linking or cross checking cards with emerging ideas tended to open up the conversation. However, once it 'clicked' discussions became much deeper and more reflective than those within the other two games. The cards provided a lot of material to work with and the first group felt that they should have had more time to develop it. For this game it might be necessary to either play with people who have a bit more experience with the foresight process, have a longer introduction, or have a facilitator present at all times to moderate and guide the discussions. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15699099701/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15699099701/}}\\ |
| |
| Near Future Lab’s **Design Fiction Kit** is simple, but perhaps deceptively simple since it requires (assumes?) a reasonable understanding of the (product) design process to avoid falling into cliches. Several students with a background in design found the rapid development and rejection of ideas more manageable than those who were more careful or those considering unexpected implications. One group took a while to understand what they were doing and needed continuous prompting from the facilitator to develop the objects further. The other was quick to understand the process and could create and discarding ideas at a faster pace but occasionally overlooked some cards. The ideas generally came to life if there was someone in the group who could illustrate them. One group had a few more people able to draw and created 'pages of a product catalogue' inspired by the TBD catalogue. This created a more lively process than when ideas were just named and described. The reference book wasn’t used much in either group. We have a sense that some of the gentle absurdity of the reference might be a lost with non-native speakers. | Near Future Lab’s **Design Fiction Kit** is simple, but perhaps deceptively simple since it requires (assumes?) a reasonable understanding of the (product) design process to avoid falling into cliches. Several students with a background in design found the rapid development and rejection of ideas more manageable than those who were more careful or those considering unexpected implications. One group took a while to understand what they were doing and needed continuous prompting from the facilitator to develop the objects further. The other was quick to understand the process and could create and discarding ideas at a faster pace but occasionally overlooked some cards. The ideas generally came to life if there was someone in the group who could illustrate them. One group had a few more people able to draw and created 'pages of a product catalogue' inspired by the TBD catalogue. This created a more lively process than when ideas were just named and described. The reference book wasn’t used much in either group. We have a sense that some of the gentle absurdity of the reference might be a lost with non-native speakers. |
| Situation Lab’s **Thing from the Future** took a while to explain, since it needed an introduction to 'generic futures', the rules of gameplay and the procedure for voting on the best idea in each round. However, once the instructions were understood and a quick dry-run round was played, the groups needed virtually no supervision, except for time keeping and coming up with an 'anonymous' voting system (they were too timid to outright vote one idea better than another, so we gave them pieces of paper on which they wrote a number of the idea they liked (1-6 starting with the person who presented their idea first). They folded the papers and gave them to the dealer or facilitator who unfolded them and pronounced the winner. We had a draw twice, in which case we divided the cards evenly between two people. Participants also most appreciated that they could take time to come up with individual ideas, rather than having to discuss them in the group. As we still wanted to encourage a creative group discussion, after three rounds we added some 'visualisation time', where the whole group could develop the winning idea further, visualise it and add a heading or slogan to describe it. | Situation Lab’s **Thing from the Future** took a while to explain, since it needed an introduction to 'generic futures', the rules of gameplay and the procedure for voting on the best idea in each round. However, once the instructions were understood and a quick dry-run round was played, the groups needed virtually no supervision, except for time keeping and coming up with an 'anonymous' voting system (they were too timid to outright vote one idea better than another, so we gave them pieces of paper on which they wrote a number of the idea they liked (1-6 starting with the person who presented their idea first). They folded the papers and gave them to the dealer or facilitator who unfolded them and pronounced the winner. We had a draw twice, in which case we divided the cards evenly between two people. Participants also most appreciated that they could take time to come up with individual ideas, rather than having to discuss them in the group. As we still wanted to encourage a creative group discussion, after three rounds we added some 'visualisation time', where the whole group could develop the winning idea further, visualise it and add a heading or slogan to describe it. |
| |
| {{>https://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15081495083/}}\\ | {{>http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/15081495083/}}\\ |
| |
| === General reflection === | === General reflection === |
| |
| |
| | photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/foam/sets/72157648703225680/ |
| | |
| | --- |
| |
| | Related: http://blog.longnow.org/02015/01/02/the-thing-from-the-future-prognostication-can-be-fun/ |
| |
| |
maja