Working Title:
Moving Through Strangeness: Immersion into Te Ao Maori via Virtual Reality
Research Question:
How might designing a VR experience that as a tactic harnesses strangeness (uncanny aesthetics), lensed through a te ao Māori pūrākau worldview, build a meaningful user experience that informs about pūrākau (Māori storytelling) through interaction and play?
Ethics Statement (Revised):
An ethics application will not be necessary despite the use of Playtesting. Any playtesting done in virtual reality can be done by myself, so I do not risk potentially triggering anyone, virtual reality sickness, and/or negative exposure. Also, with the inclusion of te ao Maori in my project, I will only be using pre-written stories (such as that of the book Purakau: Maori Myths Retold by Maori Writers*1) and voice actors (or myself) to narrate any of these stories. In case of overstepping, I will be consulting other indigenous identities, whether through a supervisor or other professional, to make sure it is ethics appropriate.
Methods:
As the Iterative Design Process*2 (IDP) is a relatively standard approach to game designing, I plan to use three aspects from it as some of my methods, these are: conceptualization, prototyping, and playtesting. There is another method, Participatory Research, that I will be using. While it is important, it is not the highest on the list compared to others.
The use of Conceptualization will be in the forms of Moodboards and Sketching. Prototyping will incorporate "white-boxing"*3 and fine-tuning after playtesting. Playtesting will be used to test how it runs, "if it does not, then why?" and if any failures have produced better outcomes. Participatory Research will be the use of recording a voice actor narrating the stories chosen.
Conceptualization:
Also known as Pre-Visualization, it deals with the beginnings of a creative design process. This will predetermine scale, heights, layout, color, and textures for the project, to name a few. If there are any rooms or levels within the project, they will be planned and identified. I will be using the following in small amounts to identify what I aim to complete:
- Mindmapping
- Mood Boards
- Listing
- Sketching
I plan to use these in conjunction for conceptualization as they are quick-fire ways of visualizing ideas without creating fully fleshed artefacts.
Moreover, tools I will use to do this:
- Photoshop
- Quixel's - Megascans
Mixer
Bridge
Using this method, the benefits reside in its ability to scope via what is wanted to be completed. However, it is easy to generate new ideas from new experiences; thus, it means having to restart the method with each increasing idea. This method does not require ethics, but it is wise to be mindful of imagery.
Conceptualization starts with notions of ideation through which previous knowledge (be that of studied discipline or practice) informs design decisions. In the article Conceptualizing Concepts: A New Approach to Industrial Design*4, they state that "When the teams working on new concepts begin their work they do so from the position of an inherent knowledge of the subject, from a viewpoint informed by meticulous research and with the benefit of thorough benchmarking." I believe this to be mostly true; however, creating concepts can be generated from knowing less to find out more.
Prototyping:
There are many forms of prototyping, in Game Designing prototyping is a means of creating games or levels that are somewhat playable or can visually articulate what is to be expected. For example, a room may have been built inside a game engine*5 with no mechanics*6 but allows the player to see how the room would appear. The tools I will use for this are as below:
- Unreal Engine 4(.26)*7 (UE4)
- Megascans
- Bridge
The boons of prototyping can be a means of quick building, making many things in short succession. It can also mean improving can be done at a faster pace. A downside can be that it may take many prototypes to find the one that works best. Ethics is unnecessary for this method as it is local (to the creator) and puts no one, person or otherwise, at harm.
Two popular ways of prototyping are paper (physical) prototypes and digital prototypes. To create a paper prototype, you can use paper, pens, and anything at hand. You can roughly work out mechanics, estimate scale, and place color coordinated blocks to represent where certain textures could go. It can also be a visual means by which you can figure out the user interface (UI) or viewport (camera). A digital prototype does something similar but can be called "white/grey boxing," there are no textures or materials, just what the objects are preset to*8. As Tracy Fullerton says, "Generally, digital prototypes are made with minimal art or sound; even their gameplay is incomplete, focusing only on unanswered questions and parts of the design that need clarity." In the prototyping stage, it is unnecessary to have fully realized assets; it is merely a means to an end, helping the creator make and fix.
Playtesting:
To playtest something is to make a build*9 to test if everything works well. This takes place after prototyping an initial build but before the next increment. It uses a "follow-through steps 2-4 and repeat 'til satisfied" approach where the creator constantly works on the project to get it to a potentially marketable standard.
What I will be using to get it to a playable standard:
- UE4
- Quixel's Megascans
- Virtual Reality (VR)
- 3rd Person Playing*10
Advantages to playtesting are that by having players test the game, the creator can find and fix bugs*11 that appear; the only downside is that if the creator cannot use others to play the project, there may be bugs missed. Because of this, ethics come into question. While it is essential to have others see and play the game, it is not necessarily required to produce (and work on) a prototype. Another option is to playtest it myself and see, through previous game experience and knowledge, if I can find potential problems on my own. Taken from Fullerton, as mentioned earlier, whose book is Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games (Fourth Edition), is a model of iterative design processes. It is similar to the iterative design process mentioned earlier. However, it shows that as the creator progresses, closing in on the marketable and final version of the game, the tighter and smaller the changes become as not to make any drastic changes.
Methodology:
This project takes the position that games are effective means of informing and educating in a playful and meaningful manner; virtual reality aids this via immersion. The use of this will be to educate myself and others on te ao Māori through interaction with evocation and uncanny aesthetics.
I aim to understand how VR changes a player's journey in a space; what about this medium influences the space? Will scale change the space? How immersive it is versus if it is disconcerting, and if it is so immersive, will it also lead down the uncanny valley route?
Next is considering if the strangeness and Māori stories are balanced in a way that is evocative but informative, so where is the most pleasant spot between them? Does strangeness change the way information is received in VR? Each will determine the evocation inside the game so that fine-tuning this balance will lead to better output.
Last is investigating whether the environmental storytelling and wayfinding narrative influences the player experience. If wayfinding with audio will work just as well with fewer visual cues and how much it influences the player's experience. It will aid in working out whether this is an excellent way of moving players along, and by doing this, can I prove that VR games can be a means of informing and educating.
The methods I will use are taken from Iterative Design Processes (IDP). For example, the Māori creation story started with nothing, then the concept of the universe came to be. Then comes, through story evolution, prototyping where its connection to the interactive process lies in how storytelling changes person to person. Playtesting is the form of showcasing these stories and furthering their reach. While not a part of the IDP, Participatory Research is voicing the stories, bringing new life to them in new mediums.
Comments