Design games as a tool, a mindset and a structure Kirsikka Vaajakallio

epresentations such as co-constructed stories or scenarios as tools for
personal discoveries, not as a complete description of a “user” that can be
handed over to a third party, I could not communicate it for people having
different assumptions about the value of user involvement.
To avoid this kind of situation and set correct expectations for the participants,
both researchers and others, the nature and meaning of various
use(r) representations in design need to be addressed. Halse’s (2008,
p 102) point that one should avoid producing overly naïve user accounts,
which falsely try to communicate that the user can be defined and that
the account evidently leads to novel design ideas, obviously need to be
discussed by a multidisciplinary design research team. For example, in
the Character Game the intention was not to give or produce persona
descriptions, to use Cooper’s (1999) terms, but rather to evoke empathic
understanding by making participants work with the user study material
in a way they wouldn’t do as part of their daily practices. The aim was to
get people personally and emotionally engaged by inviting them to reflect
on their own experiences in relation to those of the people they are designing
for. Hence, the user representations were intentionally left openended
for new interpretations and to inspire personal insights.
False expectations may not only result from a different way of seeing
user information and its representations, but also from expecting design
games outcomes to be ready concepts or final design outlines – which is
rarely the case. Gray et al. (2010, pp 10–14) illustrate three stages of games
aimed at innovating that are opening, exploring and closing implied keywords:
divergent, emergent and convergent. In most design games, as has
been shown, the focus is on the first two activities and often the third is
left out because of a lack of time or energy after the intense play.
Whereas the games discussed in this chapter are valuable in providing
many insights, design drivers and ideas for further consideration, they
are rather insignificant in pointing out exact design solutions. Although
they often include initial prioritising, there is no final design decisions
made during the games. The divergent nature of design games could be
better communicated in the co-design gatherings to show the value of
rather ambiguous outcomes.
In Chapter 3, I summarised the characteristics of design games both
as an attitude and as a tool. The Extreme Design project, discussed in
this and the previous chapter, showed that design games may also be a
structure for the collaboration in a full-scale design research project, including
design game materials and the dynamic interaction between different
performance roles. In the next chapter I will summarise the Play
framework that has been developed during this dissertation based on the
literature and practical design research cases.
213