Played the game in the studio, this was my chance to try it out with others playing it to see how they can interpret the signs though the large free standing sign we have created.
The signs with the arrows for guidance, and the illustrations worked well for a few signs, but signs that required more than one move were hard to interpret. Also signs that required movement away or into the body was harder to show in the instructions than signs that required the hands move side to side.
I thought the sign I had made with the images was enough to give the explanation for how the sign was made. Some of the signs really require more explanation in order for them to be conveyed to participants. It was interesting watching them trying to decipher them. I found I had to step in and show how the signs were made for certain rounds to occur.
Not sure why but when they played the game they seemed to find it extremely funny if they did the same sign. Once they did the same sign together twice in a row and this made them laugh even more. Why do they do this, is it a release. You start wanting to win the round, but when you have the same it seems to change the whole game mechanic. Is it the improbability of it, and the more it happens the more improbable it seems. Is it that you are wondering what the other person will do? This is a kind of chance dynamic I guess, but from there a game could grow
The hands are bit heavy for prolonged use, but ok for a couple of games. I could make them from a plastic, but feel that would in some way demean their toy like quality.
All this makes me think, should perhaps I move away from the PRS, is there a game where people have to actually make the same move from a number of options. There is some joy in feeling you have connected and chosen the same elements. Thinking on game mechanics, could there be a game where people have too out of a number of elements choose the same ones to do. In that way it does create a new game structure. It is pure chance I guess but could lead to lots of diff ways of playing
I started to bring into the work, the idea that they had to act out the connecting verb in some manner. They seemed to find the cockroach one amusing to do, survive, and the obliteration one. I felt that giving them the opportunity to come up with their own actions seemed to make it more fun. This does open up the game structure to their own input. I am beginning to think that one difference in art games that are participatory in nature is it needs some space for participants to express themselves or for the game structure to be something that brings out a biographical response as part of the game structure.