Dit proefschrift presenteert twee theoretische kaders voor het ontwerpen van games en beschrijft hoe game designers deze kunnen inzetten om het game ontwerpproces te stroomlijnen. Er bestaan op dit moment meerdere ontwerptheorie¨en voor games, maar geen enkele kan rekenen op een breed draagvlak binnen de game industrie. Vooral academische ontwerptheorie¨en hebben regelmatig een slechte reputatie. Het eerste kader dat game designers inzicht biedt in spelregels en hun werking heet Machinations en maakt gebruik van dynamische, interactieve diagrammen. Het tweede theoretische kader van dit proefschrift, Mission/Space, richt zich op level-ontwerp en spelmechanismen die de voortgang van een speler bepalen. In tegenstelling tot bestaande modellen voor level-ontwerp, bouwt Mission/Space voort op het idee dat er in een level twee verschillende structuren bestaan. Mission-diagrammen worden gebruikt om de structuur van taken en uitdagingen voor de speler te formaliseren, terwijl space-diagrammen de ruimtelijke constructie formaliseren. Beide constructies zijn aan elkaar gerelateerd, maar zijn niet hetzelfde. De verschillende wijzen waarop missies geprojecteerd kunnen worden op een bepaalde ruimte speelt uiteindelijk een belangrijke rol in de totstandkoming van de spelervaring.
DOCUMENT
In social settings, people often need to reason about unobservablemental content of other people, such as their beliefs, goals, orintentions. This ability helps them to understand, to predict, and evento influence the behavior of others. People can take this ability furtherby applying it recursively. For example, they use second-order theory ofmind to reason about the way others use theory of mind, as in ‘Alicebelieves that Bob does not know about the surprise party’. However,empirical evidence so far suggests that people do not spontaneously usehigher-order theory of mind in strategic games. Previous agent-basedmodeling simulations also suggest that the ability to recursively applytheory of mind may be especially effective in competitive settings. Inthis paper, we use a combination of computational agents and Bayesianmodel selection to determine to what extent people make use of higherordertheory of mind reasoning in a particular competitive game, theMod game, which can be seen as a much larger variant of the well-knownrock-paper-scissors game.We let participants play the competitive Mod game against computationaltheory of mind agents. We find that people adapt their level oftheory of mind to that of their software opponent. Surprisingly, knowinglyplaying against second- and third-order theory of mind agents enticeshuman participants to apply up to fourth-order theory of mindthemselves, thereby improving their results in the Mod game. This phenomenoncontrasts with earlier experiments about other strategic oneshotand sequential games, in which human players only displayed lowerorders of theory of mind.
DOCUMENT
Aim. Although cultural dimensions theory is a topical strand of quantitative cultural research, few intercultural simulation games use it. We present the design and review of the application of OASISTAN, an intercultural role-playing simulation game that is specifically based on cultural dimensions theory. Method. OASISTAN was first designed in 1999 for use in Master’s courses on cross-cultural management at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, attracting 20-23 year old students with a Bachelor degree in engineering and from various cultural backgrounds. Since its first design the game has been played approximately 45 times at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands and three times at Harbin Institute of Technology in China in the years 2006-2008. We reviewed their experiences designing and facilitating OASISTAN since 1999. Results. The game has a no-tech role-play design and revolves around the geopolitically complex region of the Caspian Sea, specifically the fictional country of ‘Oasistan’. The game consists of students forming small teams of Oasistani, Western and non-Western public/private actors collaborating with each other to try and reach the common goal of oil exploration and production in this country. In total 15-30 students were involved. We found that OASISTAN allowed its players not only to intensely experience the difficulty and awkwardness of being confronted with cultural differences, but also to interpret and understand these differences through cultural dimensions. Students who played OASISTAN identified ten out of the 12 dimensions by Maleki and De Jong. The two dimensions that students were not able to identify are uncertainty avoidance and collaborativeness. Conclusion. OASISTAN shows how a game design field (i.e., intercultural simulation gaming) can be reinvigorated in light of new or updated scientific theories pertaining to the field’s subject matter (i.e., cultural dimensions). Several opportunities for future research are identified.
MULTIFILE
