IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v55y2024i2p323-341.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Funnel of Game Design – An Adaptive Game Design Approach for Complex Systems

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Freese
  • Heide Lukosch

Abstract

Background In a world of ever-increasing complexity, organizations and people have an ever-increasing need for support systems that help them understand and shape the world around them. While simulation game design derived from the very idea to propose an instrument able to address complexity, seminal approaches dealt with a different level of complexity. In a networked, digitalized world, complexity has increased, and traditional approaches towards designing games show certain shortcomings that have to be overcome. Aim This article proposes a new process of game design for complex problems and complex systems that can both be used by game designers as well as the scientific community in the field. This process is represented within a framework, based on two parts. The so-called ‘Funnel of Game Design’ based on the IDEAS approach represents the process of problem derivation, while the ‘House of Game Design’ also covers possible steps towards the final game product and process, including de-briefing and evaluation. Method Based on hands-on experiences and related work, we developed several steps of a game design process (IDEAS approach). In face-to-face interviews, we discussed the first version of the framework with experts in the field of simulation game studies. Results This process led to the framework presented in this article, which shows the steps of problem derivation as well as challenges that can occur, and proposes adaptive methods to overcome these challenges. The framework includes elements that support the definition of complex problems, and their translation into game designs. Recommendation We recommend practitioners and scientists to apply the new framework presented here in their efforts to define the underlying problem that should be addressed by an envisioned simulation game, and in translating this into a valid, engaging and meaningful game experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Freese & Heide Lukosch, 2024. "The Funnel of Game Design – An Adaptive Game Design Approach for Complex Systems," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 55(2), pages 323-341, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:55:y:2024:i:2:p:323-341
    DOI: 10.1177/10468781231222524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10468781231222524
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10468781231222524?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heide K. Lukosch & Geertje Bekebrede & Shalini Kurapati & Stephan G. Lukosch, 2018. "A Scientific Foundation of Simulation Games for the Analysis and Design of Complex Systems," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 279-314, June.
    2. Sebastian Schwägele & Birgit Zürn & Heide K. Lukosch & Maria Freese, 2021. "Design of an Impulse-Debriefing-Spiral for Simulation Game Facilitation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(3), pages 364-365, June.
    3. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    2. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    3. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    4. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    5. Kik, M.C. & Claassen, G.D.H. & Meuwissen, M.P.M. & Smit, A.B. & Saatkamp, H.W., 2021. "Actor analysis for sustainable soil management – A case study from the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Mark K. McBeth & Donna L. Lybecker & James W. Stoutenborough, 2016. "Do stakeholders analyze their audience? The communication switch and stakeholder personal versus public communication choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 49(4), pages 421-444, December.
    7. John Manso Frimpong & Jacob Kuutoume & Christiana Abrafi Gyamfi, 2024. "Supply Chain Integration and Organizational Resources and Capabilities: The Moderating Effect of Stakeholders’ Support," International Review of Management and Marketing, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 72-82, July.
    8. Christophe Favoreu & David Carassus & Christophe Maurel, 2015. "Strategic management in the public sector: a rational, political or collaborative approach? [Le management stratégique en milieu public : approche rationnelle, politique ou collaborative ?]," Post-Print hal-02152509, HAL.
    9. Sandra Ricart & Antonio M. Rico-Amorós, 2022. "Can agriculture and conservation be compatible in a coastal wetland? Balancing stakeholders’ narratives and interactions in the management of El Hondo Natural Park, Spain," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(2), pages 589-604, June.
    10. Ashton W. Merck & Khara D. Grieger & Alison Deviney & Anna-Maria Marshall, 2023. "Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-10, July.
    11. Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk, 2021. "Ethics and the Simulation Facilitator: Taking your Professional Role Seriously," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(3), pages 312-332, June.
    12. Ogunlowo, Olufemi O. & Bristow, Abigail L. & Sohail, M., 2017. "A stakeholder analysis of the automotive industry's use of compressed natural gas in Nigeria," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 58-69.
    13. Austen Agata, 2012. "Stakeholders management in public hospitals in the context of resources," Management, Sciendo, vol. 16(2), pages 217-230, December.
    14. Sandra Ricart & Anna Ribas & David Pavón, 2016. "Qualifying irrigation system sustainability by means of stakeholder perceptions and concerns: lessons from the Segarra‐Garrigues Canal, Spain," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1-2), pages 77-90, February.
    15. Cathy Macharis & Peter Nijkamp, 2013. "Multi-actor and multi-criteria analysis in evaluating mega-projects," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 11, pages 242-266, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Jan HG Klabbers, 2018. "On the Architecture of Game Science: A Rebuttal," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 356-372, June.
    17. Maciej Dobrzyñski & Krzysztof Dziekoñski & Arkadiusz Jurczuk, 2015. "Stakeholders Mapping - A Case Of International Logistics Project," Polish Journal of Management Studies, Czestochowa Technical University, Department of Management, vol. 11(2), pages 17-26, June.
    18. Szymaniec-Mlicka Karolina, 2016. "Impact of strategic orientation adopted by an organisation on its performance, as shown on the example of public healthcare entities," Management, Sciendo, vol. 20(2), pages 278-290, December.
    19. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    20. Mingers, John, 2011. "Soft OR comes of age--but not everywhere!," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 729-741, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:55:y:2024:i:2:p:323-341. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.