Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Redesign the exhibition experience of computer games for future visitors at the CSM
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Redesign the exhibition experience of computer games for future visitors at the CSM


Published on

Published in: Design, Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. 1
  • 2. Documentation › Content Introduction › Seite 5* Project Pitch › Seite 5* Design Thinking › Seite 6* The Process › Seite 9 Understand › Seite 9* Observe › Seite 11 Synthesis › Seite 13 Ideation › Seite 21* Prototyping › Seite 22 Testing › Seite 24 Iteration › Seite 26* The Concept › Seite 28 Business Design › Seite 32* Summary › Seite 34 The Team › Seite 36 Appendix › Seite 38 * parts written by Frederike Engelhardt
  • 3. 4 5 Introduction › The Challenge Introducing our six weeks challenge … our challenge: Redesign the exhibition experience of computer games for future visitors in the context of an expanding organization. our project partner: The Computerspielemuseum Berlin (csm) is the first of its kind. Opening its doors in 1997 it is the only permanent exhibition worldwide of computer games, showing over 300 exhibits. The museum is priva- tely held and open to the public six days a week. Project Pitch › Future Games Experience The csm lacks a clear defined vision. Our solution is an example of how the games museum could be turned into “Berlin’s most playful museum”. Providing an example of a game-like tour guide that adapts to the needs of the individual museum visitor, the concept transforms the exhibition into a game itself. Nintendo C o m p u t e r s p i e l e C o m p u t e r s p i e l e M u s e u m V I S I O N Experience Gaming Concept Sketch
  • 4. 6 7 Design Thinking › The Process How do we tackle a complex problem without getting lost in its complexity? How do we manage to understand our users and design without biased lenses? How do we create this understanding, and how do we find the main problem? How do we solve users pain points and come up with great ideas? Do we generate lots of quantitati- ve data and statistics? Or do we develop products and processes to try and find user groups to like them? What is our working environment, structure, and culture? Do we sit in an office with a desk and chairs? Do we stare at white walls and a computer? We could, but we have found a different way and invite you to follow us on our Design Thinking (DT) journey... Design Thinking is always human-centred, this is why the user’s experience and story are at the core of our concept. Design Thinking is comprised of three parts: people, place, and process. We work in multidisciplinary teams and are able to apply different angles when analysing challenges. We exchange cross discipline knowledge, experience, and skills. We also work in variable spaces that allow us to be active – DT encourages a visual and hands-on working approach. The fluid six-step model – a “system of spaces” (Tim Brown, 2008), encourages failure and provides a space for continuous iteration and therewith, improvement. We have learned that it takes more than just an approach and toolkit to be confident in creating. Using Design Thinking, we hope to grow our emotional intelligence to gain empathy and create designs that matter in the long term. “As more of our basic needs are met, we increasin- gly expect sophisticated experiences that are emotionally satisfying and meaningful. These experiences will not be simple products.” (Tim Brown, 2008) Quelle: HPI School of Design Thinking
  • 5. 8 9 The Process › Understand Slightly contradictory to most practices, in order to move forward, we need to take a few steps back. This means that we deep dive to gain understanding before tackling a new challenge. A solid foundation will include but is not limited to context, background, characters, statistics, time frame, and many individual facets/factors acquired through user research. ‘Understanding’ is the first step in the Design Thinking process. Our first challenge as a team was to learn about each other, finding a team symbiosis to bond and allow for open and honest communication and feedback. We then discussed the challenge from various perspectives accounting for many small details that in turn gave us a holistic picture of the csm landscape. Using the human- centred approach, we identified existing and possible future users, stakeholders, as well as the environment they operate in. Meeting our project partners added another level of understanding. It paved two different paths of how the challenge could be approached: #1 Designing within the current exhibition space: Ge- nerate practical ideas of how to manage a private museum business, to develop it and to run it with limited resources and a low cost budget. #2 Thinking about the future: Create a future concept for the expanding museum with a vision that will attract potential investors.
  • 6. 10 11 Key take-aways from the kick-off meeting: The museum is visited by extreme and diverse user• groups The project partner is looking for a cost-effective• solution to design the exhibition experience that will attract a diverse pool of users The development of gaming is related to our high-• tech fast developing society Everyone has a connection to games• The museum is expanding and might move into a• bigger space in the near feature (1–3 years) The project partner wants practical input that can be• implemented in the future The Process › Observe Field Research | Observation | Interviews at the CSM why: Our objective was to gain insight into the different user experiences at the csm. We also wanted to gather stories about worst and greatest museum moments, find out what could prompt them to go to a never before visi- ted museum, as well as understand what their major pain points were within and around exhibitions and museums in general. how: First phase: participant observation at various muse- ums in Berlin. Second phase: conducting (20+) interviews through qualitative research. where: We did ethnographic field research at the follo- wing museums; Deutsches Filmmuseum, DDR Museum, Haus der Geschichte, csm. Most interviews were con- ducted on site at the csm, but we also talked to visitors of the other museums. whom: Our user pool was quite diverse; offering a fair representation of gender, age, frequency of museum visi- tations, and computer game playing level engagement. (more importantly) what: We asked users some of the following questions: What did you enjoy the most at the Kick-Off meeting
  • 7. 12 13 csm today? What did you like least? What’s your favou- rite museum experience? What would you change here if this was your museum? Would you recommend the csm to a friend – why or why not? initial observations We looked at diversity, mood, focus, immersions, multip- le senses, excitement and themes. Initial Observations – described in adjectives: “cool” / “modern” / “spacey” / “pixel-y” / “dry” / “static” / “monotone” / “informative” / “out-dated” Other comments: “information-overload” / “not kid-friendly” / “old- school” / “2009 and then what?” / “no clear orientation” / “gaming levels missing” / “random objects in corners” / “what? There is a structure?” Findings Gold nugget: People gather around interactive areas. Contradiction: People told us “One floor is not enough” – but at the same time they had no patience to investigate the whole museum. Most funny post-it: “When I was small” (a lot of people enjoyed themselves being nostalgic). Mr. Noseum: “Usually I don’t go to museums but here I’d go…” / “I’m usually not a museum person...” The Process › Synthesis Important/interesting details from the interviews: say: More play, less info – actually engaging with the consoles rather than reading lengthier pieces about them, inclined users to have more fun. do: Play – playing against an opponent, whether friend or stranger, created excitement and amusement amongst users. think: Fun – the gaming through games component brought in a element of challenge and competition, which was perceived as a fun collaborative task to tackle together. feel: Nostalgia – by being able to revisit either childhood or teenage years, the csm instilled an overall positive feeling amongst users.
  • 8. 14 15 SYNTHESIS #1 Findings of the first observation session THE STAIRCASE MODEL After observing and gaining insights from a variety of visitors, we decided to analyse the connection between identified needs among visitors (end users) and existing resources. To visualise the connections between the findings, we created a staircase-like model that sorted our findings. Reflecting on the value creation directly affecting the visitors, we tried to find a crucial touch point that needed development to increase the end user satisfaction. The LEARNINGS of our staircase model showed: An unclear vision leads to• inefficiency within the organisation, which leads to an unfocused exhibition. The level of satisfaction of the visitors seems to be• connected to the feeling they get when visiting the museum. This is highly connected to their ex- pectations. If visitors don’t know what to expect, they tend to end up with higher expectations than the museum can meet. It is easy to put physical objects in a room, but hard• to fill them with life. Just because a game itself is interactive, it doesn’t mean the museum it is placed in automatically becomes interactive. CONCLUSIONS from the use of the staircase model: A lack of vision has a huge effect on every other• activity of the museum The identified problems do not arise from a lack of• objects (nor information) to experience. Right now, the csm does not seem to use the potential of how existing objects could be experienced. Prior to the staircase model analysis we still lacked key in- formation on visitors to create a persona to focus on and design for. Going back to the museum for more research can be seen as our first iteration within the process phases. Stair Case Model on a white board
  • 9. 16 17 SYNTHESIS #2 Insights of our second observation phase observations A lot of old gamers said “I go here because I want to• see what I used to play”. There is a lot of one directional information presen-• ted in tiny text. It’s hard to get the logic of the labelling of the diffe-• rent sections. It’s difficult to understand how to play a lot of games• and which ones are suitable for beginners. There is no consoles nor objects that kids can play• with – in fact, there isnt any playing ground for kids. There is democratic way of presenting objects and• information, everything seems to get the same atten- tion and space. No instructions which games are in english.• Information hasn’t been updated since 2009.• Unclear which machines you have to pay for to play.• The different game- and reading stations seem to• disturb each other. insights A lot of the visitors said “I´m not a museum person”• but they’d come to the csm because they expected it to be playful. Many of the older visitors seemed to be most excited• of the nostalgic feeling of seeing “their old games”. People today are used to “self explained” games and• technology and get frustrated trying a game they don’t understand immediately. You don’t respect game “equipment” when you are• angry – visitors lost patience trying to start playing a game. People get confused when nothing is highlighted and• “recommended” in the museum – there is a lack of information distribution and hierarchy. More diversity among expectations among customers• than in other museums – many people with a “close relationship” to the subject leads to expectations. I’s therefore crucial to know what to expect (vision) to avoid disappointment. There is a lack of what computer games mean• for people; challenge against yourself and others, competition, possibility of entering another world to become someone else, etc. Many people tend not to come back because their• expectations were not met during their first visit. A lot of people kept telling us: “I’m not a museum person, but I went here” … and we found that really interesting!
  • 10. 18 19 SYNTHESIS #3 Our personas and important insights on how to meet their interests After a lot of interviews and observations of people, both visitors at the CSM but also visitors in other museums and people that usually don’t go to museums, we started to see patterns. These patterns resulted in 3 important customer types for the CSM, so called personas. Mrs Gamer feels nostalgic while she’s experiencing what she used• to play likes challenges/competitions• goes to the CSM with high expectations• Wants to be updated on the latest games, though she• isn’t updated anymore brings her kids to the museum• Important insights about the different visitor groups: An easy customer to get there but hard to satisfy. She will go there if she gets the information. but, she has a lot of expectations to meet, so its important that you keep her satisfied. She has also a great ambassador poten- tial if you play your cards right. She is the one who will bring friends, and maybe also can contribute with her knowledge if you create a connection with her. She is also the customer that most likely will come back if she likes it. Mr Museum likes museums• wants to learn new things• thinks information is entertaining• is able to process a lot of information• He is also easy to make go to the museum, and will come if he get information about it. He is satisfied with the existing museum setting today. To make him come back you need to change content though Mr Museum is always looking for new information. Mr Noseum “I’m not a museum person, but I went here” doesn’t like regular museums• likes to play and compete• more interested in doing than reading• enjoys himself together with others• has little patience though he’s used to intuitive• technolog
  • 11. 20 21 The biggest group of people and a great po- tential to new visitors. Will go to the museum if their interests are met. A lot of these people go to the museum today but are disappointed though they don’t find the museum interactive and playful enough. The Mr. Noseum people seemed to be the most promising group to design for. It is the largest group of people and a great potential to new visitors if you meet their interests. What’s also very interesting is that a lot of Mr. Noseums al- ready seem to find their way to the museum. So we started to investigate: why? … and our focus was now set on them. The Process › Ideation Within ideation we focused on the following brainstorming questions: How to make people addicted to the• csm? How to turn the• csm into a game itself and make it a challenge, competitive and playful? Here a a few of our main ideas/findings that came up within the session: The vision cards: Create a set of cards that enable the museum to chose from when developing a vision with components they should mind The tour: Create an individualised tour so different visi- tors will experience the museum in different bur suitable ways. During iteration we realised that we still needed time to reflect on our insights between brainstorming sessions. Although creating lots of ideas, it was crucial for the team to also discuss the ‘staircase model’ again and gain an understanding of how a vision could look like for the museum. We also realised that at this stage, we were not able to generate a suitable Point of View.
  • 12. 22 The Process › Prototyping The aim of prototyping was to visualise our main ideas from ideation. We wanted to develop a better under- standing of how an individualised and playful game experience in the csm could look and feel like. While prototyping we relied on a mixture of analog and digital methods, mainly to create an understanding of how the gaming process is perceived by the user. For example, we prototyped a green screen solution to bring the visitors closer to their avatar into the game. We wanted to re- create the experience of what it could feel liek to truly be in a game. While prototyping, we realised that the museum game should be divided into three parts: a check-in, the tour itself and a check-out. As our prototyping was closely related to the testing phase, we collected a variety of physical materials we needed for the in-house sessions (ie. clothes to dress up and create an avatar and a cube that served as a check- in-tool) and took them to the museum with us. Since we tested our idea with people from a variety of backgrounds and interests, ie. gamers and non-gamers, we prototyped different game tours while testing, all consisting of the previously mentioned three parts. To be able to test in a safe and quiet environment, we went to the museum on its closing day. Testing at the csm
  • 13. 24 25 The Process › Testing After creating our basic prototype, we moved on to tes- ting. This was done through an iterative and experimental way based on ‘quick and dirty’ prototypes. The feedback we got during testing, combined with observations gave us the opportunity to create a deeper understanding for our users. It also showed us how challenging it can be to build a tangible prototype for an intangible experience. Goals of testing: To investigate what makes people excited when it• comes to gaming – what are the most important components? To experimenting with a individualised guided• gaming tour. To prototype the feeling of how to be in a game• yourself Main results from testing: While prototyping, it evolved that the game should• include three parts: a “check-in”, an “individualised guided tour” and afterwards a “check-out”. “The check-in gets us into the mood for gaming –• this is essential. The individualised tour is key because we found our• test-users liked to be guided and appreciated it more than experiencing the museum by themselves The check-out was helpful as it summed up how the• testers liked the competition part, adding that they would like to rather compete against friends than strangers, which helped us ideate of how we could get people to come back to the museum. By scanning the following QR-Code, you can get some impressions of the testing in the museum:
  • 14. 26 The Process › Iteration As previously shown in the reflection of our Design Thinking journey, iteration within the process did not just occur at this late but also at a quite early stage when we realised that our observation data was not sufficient to work with. We had to go back to the museum conduct more interviews and generate more insights. Looking back we realised that while working there are smaller and bigger iteration phases. Testing showed us that our visitors liked the idea of playing their way through the museum but something seemed to be missing: There was no real setting for our game, the visitors did not see a context in which to play. For us, this was the realisation that a game without a story does not work. Coming back to we started to build a story around the game. Through brainstorming we collected ideas of what kind of stories could suit the csm and ena- ble them to present their content in a plausible way. In the end we developed of a story about travelling to the past to experience different epochs of gaming. The story appealed to us because it seemed easy to be modify and also a good way to adapt to different interests as well as various visiting times of users. As lots of visitors of the museum that we talked to asked for more updated and re- cent information, a chronological content structure might help the museum to update their exhibition continuously.
  • 15. 28 29 The Concept › The CSM – A Game Itself The observation phase showed that the museum’s vision affects the way the exhibition is set up. As people want to experience the museum in an interactive way, we developed a claim for the museum: “Berlin’s most playful museum”. This claim next had to be transferred into the exhibition experience. Analysing our insights from testing, it became clear that people like to play their way through the museum. Thus, to make this exciting there is a need for an overall story, as is the case with any popular engaging game. … and our story ended up something like this: When entering the museum the visitors check in by putting in information about their age, game experience (please see testing videos for full explanation). Thereafter they enter a time machine that should take them to the future, BUT something goes wrong and the group ends up in the past. To get out of there, they are presented with multiple challenges to play their way back to the present. To make the csm into a game itself, the most crucial part is to incorporate the component that makes people love games. We found out that these components are: to solve challenges• beat records• compete against others• step into another world and be someone else• immerse in the setting (music, visuals, bodily consi-• deration movement & interaction)
  • 16. 31 VISION »The future Computerspielemuseum will be a computer game itself« Mission »Transform the Computerspielemuseum into the world’s most playful museum« Claim »Computerspielemuseum – Berlin’s most playful museum« the core parts of the concept The check-in:• The visitor creates his/her own avatar that will lead through the exhibition. This avatar can exist on any given device like a smartphone, augmented reality or even just on a piece of paper. To customise the experience, the visitor also has to answer questions about his expectations, time cons- triction, and interests in connection to the museum. This information provides a basis on which matching questions and tasks a smart algorithm sets up as an individualised game. The individualised guided tour/gaming:• The visi- tors navigate through the museum by playing their way through different decades. This they do by, for example answering questions and collecting points. Prior to the game itself, they are shown a short trailer of their situation (in this case: how they accidentally end up in the past) to get them into the gaming mood. The check-out:• A point system allows the visitors to post their high scores and gaming pictures on different social media platforms (eg. Facebook/ Twitter/Instagram). This helps the csm reach a wide audience as it challenges visitors’ friends to engage on a light-hearted playful manner. The competition part is a golden nugget for communication activities.
  • 17. 32 33 Business Design › technology, business & user-desirability Approach challenge on two levels: #1 Vision – structure all activities under one vision will help the museum to position itself. This leads to: #2 Experience – develop a museum experience that fits the vision. This means: If the csm wants to become “Berlin’s most playful museum”, it has to be transfered into an individualised game itself. This will allow diffe- rent visitor groups to experience the museum in different ways. Feasibility: How could the gaming experience look like? Transforming the museum into a differentiated gaming experience can be done in an analog or digital way. Depending on the investment, the game could be a “low cost” (analog) solution or more of a “high end” product on a mobile device. Regarding the development of the smartphone technology, it might make sense to set up the game as a mobile application and provide it by either allowing a free download or handing out suitable devices. How viable is the idea? The• csm has the opportunity to integrate our concept on different levels. If the museum plans on working on their organisational structure and defining a vision, this means that activities on all levels (normative/strategic/operative) would have to be conducted according to it. Furthermore, a vision could lead to a creation of a common understanding of where the museum is going to head in the future. By creating this understanding, the museum can approach stakeholders in a clear way. The museum also has the opportunity to start on a• smaller level, by testing out different gaming formats and setting up a suitable game. This format can easily be integrated into the current structure of the museum.
  • 18. 34 35 Summary › The Future Games Experience Our challenge was to redesign the exhibition experience of computer games for future visitors in the context of an expanding organization for the Computerspielemuseum Berlin. To get a deeper understanding of the challenge we visited a lot of different museums and talked to a lot of different people, basically, we did a lot of observing. By gathering our insights we created the persona Mr. Nose- um. He is the guy, who is usually not visiting any muse- ums. While ideation we thought about many possibilities to attract him coming to the csm regularly, knowing that he expects to play. We prototyped these ideas, we tested them and we came up with a vision: Making the csm the most playful museum in Berlin by turning it into a game itself.
  • 19. 36 37 The Team › Level Up Wilhelm Rinke HU Berlin Pascal Ackerschott HTW Berlin Business Communication Management, M.A. (ongoing) Communication Design, B.A. Integrated Natural Resource Management, M.Sc. (ongoing) Biology, B.Sc. Integrated product development, M.Sc. Mechanical Engineering, B.Sc. Business (Innovation Management/Organisation), M.Sc. (ongoing) Business/Hotel and Tourism Management, B.A. Sociology, Literature, B.A. Double Major Frederike Engelhardt University of Potsdam Maria Udèn KTH Stockholm Anita Mya Sehagic University of British Columbia Johannes Marx Psychologist and Musician Donia Hamdami Industrial Design und Szenografie Claudia Brückner newthinking communications GmbH Projektmanagement Event coaches: team:
  • 20. 38 39 Appendix › Additional ideas How to make the csm into a game itself? Challenges: an important and crucial aspect to integrate into the museum this can be used in how to navigate the museum. now: Challenges could be created easily in the current settings with colour coding our small symbols. in 5 years: In the future different rooms for the dif- ferent decades would be a suitable setting for the current content. Treasure hunting is exciting – By trying to find objects you get permission to enter another room/the next level. Finding the bad guy – A bad guy always make the game exciting, can you integrate that in how to move on to the next level. Battle other people – Challenges are exciting. Can you beat someone else? Then you are allowed to move on. Or maybe you can collect points by “stealing” from others when beating them playing a game. Earn points by answer questions or play games – When you reach a certain level of points are you allowed to move on. Time pressure is a classic way to make it a challenge: Can you solve the tricky game in time or maybe there is someone chasing you. Are you logical enough to find your way out of the room. Maybe its not clear at first but if you look for it you might find out. What if I just destroy that pigs house over there and then I’m free to move on to the next level? (Wait that sound familiar?! – lets do it!) Playfulness: The most important aspect of them all i. Try to integrate some kind of nerve - would it for ex- ample be possible to make yourself invisible for others in the game? People like the social game Mafia – what if other visitors didn’t know your identity and you have to find out who to trust to make an alliance. Labyrinths are exciting – what if you had to collect points to find your way out.
  • 21. 40 41 It’s fun to engage your whole body in the game such as: dive through holes, jump for points that makes sounds, to actually be in a game, enter a world in google glasses, avoid the lava on the floor or the quicksand are example of details that add an extra nerve. How to make people addicted to the csm? Work with high scores – What if the person with the highest high score became “the boss” of the game and the other visitors had to beat that person to become the new boss. Challenges are addictive – Create the possibility to challenges friends and other visitors. Make it so fun that they can’t resist going there – make every experience unique by creating different possible routes in the museum. People like to learn and feel smart – Make sure that in- formation is presented in an interactive, fun and focused way that makes people feel that they’ve learned a lot. Everybody likes to win- create prices for people with a great score, in the testing most people chose the price: return with a friend. Create a strong community and make people involved- gaming is a strong culture, use it! - maybe someone wants to share their knowledge in a seminar or similar. The trend of geekiness is here to stay- take advantage of that! The Photo Booth for social media – What if I can end my experience with an instagram picture together with my favourite game character – Social media it too important to not put effort in especially when the visitors do the work themselves!
  • 22. Hasso-Plattner-Institut HPI School of Design Thinking Prof. Ulrich Weinberg Prof.-Dr.-Helmert-Str. 2–3 D-14482 Potsdam Germany Phone: +49-331-5509-123 Email: Web: These ideas were created by a multidisciplinary team of students at the HPI School of Design Thinking.