342
J. Kleinen and L. Kurz
completed it as quickly as possible. Games as systems of rules can be executed
regardless of whether the participants want to do it or not. Play, though, can only
occur voluntarily (Carse 1986; Huizinga 1949). Deterding (2012) described play as
“the open-ended recombination of behaviors and meanings in a safe space of ‘asif’ and ‘what if’” and this is what the method attempts to channel. However, these
play-centric benefits are only reaped if “play” takes place. The experience of this
group implied that they did not “play”. In contrast, group C, which spent the most
time immersed in storytelling, actually referred to the task as “a game”, perceiving
themselves to be playing.
Groups B and C also -at times- deviated from the strict storytelling structure and
branched out into discussions. In contrast to group A though, they always returned
to the structure after one aspect was discussed and they upheld the decision-making
power of the person whose question it was. For example, either the person with the
question would ask for the others’ input (e.g. “Do you have an idea who could also
be on the losing side?”) or the others would address clarifying questions to them:
“Will these also be constructed by the AI?”. The answers given by the one in charge
of the question were accepted as “real” and fixed, reacting to it with statements like
“Oh, it’s getting worse and worse.”
Moreover, groups B and C referred to the imaginary world they were creating as
though it was real: “ As soon as he leaves the factory, there is a big park and, a little
to the right, the factory has a larger lake. There is a bench, which he actually likes to
sit on quite a bit.” They made little use of the subjunctive, in contrast to group A.
Both groups spent more time on the storytelling than group A and added more
depth to the storytelling than specified in the instructions. They chose to name their
protagonist of their own accord. Group C even requested additional material: “We are
starting to need a map of the galaxy” and they considered multi-sensory aspects of
their world: “What does it sound like, when an AI laughs?” and reported experiencing
losing track of time, a testament to their engagement with the task.
To aid with this kind of immersion into the world of the fiction, a facilitator
serves two important purposes: Enforcing the storytelling mechanic, and setting the
foundation for the desired atmosphere by tailoring the questions and how they are
framed to the individual group dynamics, which stabilizes the method.
Most participants are not used to being allowed to weave an imaginative story.
This is something they address among themselves: “We need to do this seriously.
3 ”
Group C explicitly gave themselves the permission to follow their impulses several
times:
• Person 4: “I think we’re answering the questions a little too excessively, well,
more excessively than it is.”
• Person 5: “Probably.”
• Person 6: “Probably it’s not bad, then it’s becoming a story.”
They also stated: “we can think a little more sci-fi” and “well, it’s sciencefiction…”. A facilitator can reassure and push them here.
3 German: “Seriös”, meaning seriously with strong connotations of respectability.
J. Kleinen and L. Kurz
completed it as quickly as possible. Games as systems of rules can be executed
regardless of whether the participants want to do it or not. Play, though, can only
occur voluntarily (Carse 1986; Huizinga 1949). Deterding (2012) described play as
“the open-ended recombination of behaviors and meanings in a safe space of ‘asif’ and ‘what if’” and this is what the method attempts to channel. However, these
play-centric benefits are only reaped if “play” takes place. The experience of this
group implied that they did not “play”. In contrast, group C, which spent the most
time immersed in storytelling, actually referred to the task as “a game”, perceiving
themselves to be playing.
Groups B and C also -at times- deviated from the strict storytelling structure and
branched out into discussions. In contrast to group A though, they always returned
to the structure after one aspect was discussed and they upheld the decision-making
power of the person whose question it was. For example, either the person with the
question would ask for the others’ input (e.g. “Do you have an idea who could also
be on the losing side?”) or the others would address clarifying questions to them:
“Will these also be constructed by the AI?”. The answers given by the one in charge
of the question were accepted as “real” and fixed, reacting to it with statements like
“Oh, it’s getting worse and worse.”
Moreover, groups B and C referred to the imaginary world they were creating as
though it was real: “ As soon as he leaves the factory, there is a big park and, a little
to the right, the factory has a larger lake. There is a bench, which he actually likes to
sit on quite a bit.” They made little use of the subjunctive, in contrast to group A.
Both groups spent more time on the storytelling than group A and added more
depth to the storytelling than specified in the instructions. They chose to name their
protagonist of their own accord. Group C even requested additional material: “We are
starting to need a map of the galaxy” and they considered multi-sensory aspects of
their world: “What does it sound like, when an AI laughs?” and reported experiencing
losing track of time, a testament to their engagement with the task.
To aid with this kind of immersion into the world of the fiction, a facilitator
serves two important purposes: Enforcing the storytelling mechanic, and setting the
foundation for the desired atmosphere by tailoring the questions and how they are
framed to the individual group dynamics, which stabilizes the method.
Most participants are not used to being allowed to weave an imaginative story.
This is something they address among themselves: “We need to do this seriously.
3 ”
Group C explicitly gave themselves the permission to follow their impulses several
times:
• Person 4: “I think we’re answering the questions a little too excessively, well,
more excessively than it is.”
• Person 5: “Probably.”
• Person 6: “Probably it’s not bad, then it’s becoming a story.”
They also stated: “we can think a little more sci-fi” and “well, it’s sciencefiction…”. A facilitator can reassure and push them here.
3 German: “Seriös”, meaning seriously with strong connotations of respectability.