Playtesting informed research with a lot of data.
Playtesting 28 FEb 2025-14 October 2025
- Playtest 0.1 Tampere, Finland, 28 February 2025, Tampere University, 6 participants, 5 scenarios, 3h playtest
- Playtest 1.0 + Workshop, Tampere, Finland, 3 April 2025, Tampere University,14 participants, 5 scenarios, 5h playtest and
- Playtest 1.1, London, UK, May 2025, Independent playtest 3 participants, 1 scenario (Cake the Cat), 25 min
- Playtest 2.0, Florence, Italy, 23 June 2025, European University Institute, 30 participants 1 scenario (Birthday Desition) x 5 teams, 45 min
- Playtest 3.1, London, UK, 6 July 2025, Independent playtest, 5 participants, 1 scenario (Birthday Desition), 25 min
- Playtesting 4.1, RIT, MAGIC Spell Studio, USA, 4 September 2025, ROC Playtesting Night, 2 participants, 1 scenario (The Caretakers), 20 min
- Playtesting 4.2, RIT, MAGIC Spell Studio, USA, 5 September 2025, Sound Mixer Video, 3 participants, 1 scenario (Cake the Cat), 20 min
- Playtest 5.1 + Workshop, Bournemouth, UK, May 2025, Arts University Bournemouth, 5 scenarios (Cake the Cat), 1,5h
The powerful effect of the Playtest 1.0 was expressed in participant’s comment: “That felt very intense. I never had anything as challenging to decide in my life”. Their reflection on intensity of the experience people who forced to flee are going though.
During the Playtest 1.0, player playing mother character who had to decide they take their 18-th year old daughter away from her study plans and relationships said: “You’ll hate me forever, but I have to make this decision…”
“I felt responsible for the whole family,” Mother character ended up deciding for everyone, as they had the agenda in the card — to keep the family together.
Some people had challenges identifying with either different age and gender group — the male character refused to use first-person language while playing grandmother character. Or if that would not reflect political beliefs — “I hate playing this conservative person”.
This little challenges might push a limits of conform zone and can be associated with a discomfort, but the feeling of relief and stepping towards understanding those people can bring feeling of reward.
Other aspect of building empathy was depicted in the playtest 2.0, where 1 scenario was played in 5 groups. Players were asked to make a decision if to stay in Ukraine where is ongoing war or to leave abroad. Out of 5 groups, decision was made:
- 2 groups decided to stay in Ukraine
- 1 group decided to leave to Country X and review decision after 1 year, considering the older daughter wanted to stay
- 2 groups could not agree on a decition.
This data is echoing somehow the actual situation of forced migration. Some families decide to stay, some go out of their home county and come back later and some have reasons to stay in the ongoing war environment.
Understanding the complexity of the circumstances and nuanced life situations leads to refraining from judgmental statements like: “Kids must be safe and not be taking away from bombing”. That can be considered as a universal rule, however, it dosent take in consideration that if there are circumstances of having family separated for 3,5h year, peace of having both parents together might overcome the fear of potential risk during the bombing. Playing those characters and understanding the dilemmas people are facing develops understanding that most people who havent experienced war might not reflect of the complexity of the decisions. Players from playtest 1.0 were sharing: “Those life situations — such a tough situation!”, “That was so hard!”, “Terrible decision I had to make. I’ll be responsible for it my whole life.”