<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Interactive Players. LBMGs from a Design Perspective</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Ilaria Mariani</string-name>
          <email>ilaria1.mariani@polimi.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Davide Spallazzo</string-name>
          <email>davide.spallazzo@polimi.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Politecnico di Milano, Department of Design</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Milan</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="IT">Italy</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Adopting a player-centered approach, this contribution delves into the relationship and interactions LBMGs activate among people (between players, and among players and non-players), with the device, and with the spaces wherein the play activity takes place. In consequence, it taps into three different levels of implications: social, technological and spatial. It reports on some empirical advances gathered from a three-years analysis on three BSc courses and a total amount of 44 Location Based Mobile Games deliberately designed for prompting challenging interactions between the digital world and physical elements in the real space. Taking advantage of the potentialities of being situated and technology-supported, they enhance and facilitate immersion and sense of agency within the game. What emerges is a novel interpretation of LBMGs players as “interactive agents”, engaged in meaningful interactions with other persons, with the space and with technology.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>
        INTRODUCTION
Ranging from uncommon topics to unusual gameplays, we
are now being witnesses to the flourishing of play practices
that break our ordinary conventions to trigger perspectives
that differ from the ordinary. Location Based Mobile
Games (LBMGs) expand outside the traditional gamespace
(board or screen) [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">10</xref>
        ] and open up to contextual play
activities, where players are geo-located and transported
GHITALY17: 1st Workshop on Games-Human Interaction, April 18th, 2017,
Cagliari, Italy.
      </p>
      <p>Copyright © 2017 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copying
permitted for private and academic purposes. This volume is published and
copyrighted by its editors.
into a hybrid world where the boundaries between the real
and the digital spheres are blurred.</p>
      <p>
        Relying on an existent literature mainly characterized by an
approach that privileges case studies analysis, and
speculates about LBMGs impact, this contribution raises
from the need of an investigation that punctually unpacks
different typologies of interaction that such games include
and can trigger. Specific attention is due to the fact that they
move outside the traditional frame of the screen, having
different degrees of response and interaction with the real,
three-dimensional world. From a theoretical perspective,
this contribution reaches out to the disciplines of Game
Studies, Communication Design and Interaction Design,
tapping into transversal practices of interaction that link
theoretical assumptions and their translation into practice.
The reasoning unfolds a three years empirical research in
the Politecnico di Milano, School of Design, educational
context, that has as its linchpin our research intention to
question the tenet that LBMGs should exclusively rely on
digital/mobile components. We asked about 180 design
students of the BSc course “Augmented Reality and Mobile
Experience” (a.y. 2013/14, 2014/15, and 2015/16) to
conceive and craft LBMGs that mix digital contents and
physical artefacts, and address societal issues. During the
span of time of this investigation we collected 44 LBMGs
that flash out the consistent links between real and digital
spaces. In so doing we explored the forms of interactions
that players activate in such less-mediated situated
experiences. What characterizes this field of investigation is
the spread tendency to consider and design LBMGs as
technology-sustained games [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ] – as said, utterly
digital/mobile reliant. However, we consider worthwhile to
challenge this assumption, exploring how games can take
advantage of technology, being technologically supported
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ], rather than strictly and wholly dependent. Such an
approach has further relevance because it opens up a richer
design space, of which designers can take advantage of –
this in terms of communication activated by in-game
elements, artifacts and activities.
      </p>
      <p>
        In parallel to the technological perspective and the potential
benefits of a game that mixes physical and digital elements,
it lies an important reasoning on the advantages of
including narrative as a core game component. Whereas not
every game is narrative-based, stories are notably relevant
for some typologies of games [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">16</xref>
        ]. Among the others,
pervasive, persuasive, adventure games, LARP and ARG
recognize and confirm the central role of narrative; LBMGs
as well as urban games, on the opposite, generally tend to
relegate narrative to a design possibility. In the light of this
reasoning, here we do not question whether or not games
are narrative, but how narrative-based LBMGs activate
interactions – for example attributing the device the role of
storyteller. The LBMGs discussed in the following strongly
rely on stories (games of progression, using Juul’s
terminology [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">16</xref>
        ]) able to affect the way players interact
with the game itself, in particular through the three
perspectives presented above: socially, technologically, and
spatially.
      </p>
      <p>Adopting a player centered approach, we delve in particular
into the relationship and interactions these games trigger
among people (between players, and between players and
non-players), with the device, and with the surroundings,
namely the space wherein the play activity takes place. In
consequence, it taps into three different levels of
implications: social, technological and spatial. What
emerges is a novel view on LBMGs players, here framed
and discussed as “interactive players” a category that differs
from those of digital games and urban games, by virtue of
our peculiar way of intending LBMGs themselves. In a
spectrum ranging from urban games to video games, being
physical-digital its two polarities, we set the LBMGs here
discussed close to urban games, mixing a small digital
component with a paramount physical one, whereas the
most common commercial LBMGs (e.g. Ingress, Pokémon
GO) set closest to the digital pole.</p>
      <p>Rather than using the space as interchangeable background,
we propose a stricter relation with the surrounding space,
aiming at taking full advantage of its potentialities. As it
commonly happens in urban games, every place acquires
meaning in the play activity and within the game narrative,
being steps of a story that progresses according to players’
movements in the urban space. The mobile device, instead
of being the main mean of the play activity, becomes the
main trigger for contextual narratives. In this sense, these
LBMGs differ also from urban games, by attributing a
relevant and essential role to mobile devices.</p>
      <p>
        METHODOLOGY
The reflections here presented are part of a larger research
activity based on an empirical research we conducted
analyzing the processes of both designing and playtesting
44 persuasive LBMGs. Over three years, a total amount of
180 students were asked to face actual societal problems or
taboos, and evolve them into concepts to be translated into
LBMGs. Our aim was to study how these games function as
engaging systems able to entertain players and convey
information in the meanwhile. Ranging from exploring
design as a process of enquiry, to assessing playing as a
way to acquire knowledge, we observed and analyzed our
sample of persuasive LBMGs conducting ethnographic
analysis and interpretive research. In order to lessen biases
and weaknesses of the chosen methodology [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10 ref6">11, 7</xref>
        ], we
applied a mixed methods approach, collecting multiple
forms of data relying on a triangulation of different
methods. During the iterative cycles of design that spanned
over three consecutive months for each academic year, we
ran interpretative ethnography and participant observation
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11 ref26">27,12</xref>
        ]. In parallel, we conducted rapid ethnographies,
shadowing, questionnaires and informal interviews with
students – in turn as designers or players (see Figure 1).
Especially conducting moderate participation [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">12</xref>
        ], we
understood on the one hand how designers crafted the
games embedding their point of view, on the other how
players received games and made sense out of them. In
doing so, we grasped an important amount of insights
regarding the relationship between initial expectations and
effective players’ perceptions.
RESULTS
The results discussed in the following are mainly gathered
from our direct observation of players during the playtests
and from the informal interviews that followed, albeit
useful reflections are triggered by some of the
questionnaires we collected. Data gleaned portrait a novel
category of LBMGs player, that we define “interactive” at
large, since s/he is characterized by a threefold active
interaction: with others, with technology, with the
surroundings.
      </p>
      <p>Reviewing how LBMGs are designed and played, with a
consistent shift from the digital realm towards the physical
one – as previously discussed – brought to rethink the way
players are engaged socially, spatially and technologically.
Hence, a functional way to frame the three typologies of
interaction, according to which we will analyze and discuss
players’ interactiveness, is:</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>1. Player to others/persons</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>2. Player to space</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>3. Player to device</title>
      <p>
        Acknowledging that games are complex systems, and that a
consistent literature investigated the varied degrees of
interaction between the player and the game
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13 ref16 ref20 ref21">21,14,2,17,22</xref>
        ], our focus here is on the specific way in
which LBMGs can activate player’ interactivity,
distinguishing themselves from the other typologies of
games. Hence, we resonate on three typologies of
interaction, not reciprocally excluding, that coexist at a
different extent during each game session, that portrait a
more comprehensive and holistic view of the player,
differing from that of video games and commercial LBMGs
as well as from that of urban games.
      </p>
      <p>
        Player to Others/People: interaction between players or
between players and non-players
“Interacting with other players is one thing that makes the
game bigger than just a casual on-screen experience” [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ].
In-game social interaction occurs between players, and/or
between players and non-players, and its dynamics strongly
depend on the typology of game as well as by its design. In
this sense, by virtue of their nature, partly digital and partly
physical, LBMGs provide designers with the opportunity of
conceiving complex social interactions, engaging players in
a multitude of varied experiences.
      </p>
      <p>
        Likewise video games, LBMG players can dialogue and
have social relationships with other players, ranging from
being more or less mediated by the technological device
(e.g. chat or voice chat, instant messages, calls), to directly
sharing the play activity with other players (in-person play
activities as challenges, quests, etc., that involve more than
a player in the meanwhile). What features LBMGs as
pervasive games is their potential ability to involve players
in richer, in-person social engagement with both other
players and non-players they may encounter. A
characteristic common to urban games, which, on the
contrary, do not provide players with technology mediated
social engagement. Different considerations should be
made about commercial LBMGs, as Ingress and Pokémon
Go, that mainly pertain to the category of video games and
from which infer the model of social engagement,
characterized by the mediation of technology [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">10</xref>
        ]. In doing
so, the kind of social engagement they commonly trigger
can be defined as “alone-together”, a sense of social contact
that springs by feeling surrounded by other, albeit
unknown, players [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">13</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        When designed capitalizing on the cultural capital of play
in public spaces [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">24</xref>
        ], taking advantage of the potentialities
of creating partially technology-mediated game
experiences, LBMGs offer designers the unique opportunity
to provide players with different social configurations
during the play activity. In particular, wittingly embedding
the way of playing typical of urban games, they can fully
exploit in-person social contacts as well as the context
wherein they take place. As a matter of fact, designers can
provide players with a personal play activity or, on the
contrary, to require the continuous collaboration of a team
of players to proceed. Other games could ask a team to split
in order to complete quests, or players to socialize with
non-players and even unknown persons [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">26</xref>
        ], namely
strangers [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">25</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        Furthermore, designers can impact on the quality of the
social interaction the game triggers. For example, they can
force players to go a step further from the common
inperson social relation between players, and get engaged in a
direct physical contact. In addition, such interactions also
give room for challenging implicit social norms. This is
what happen in the game Keep (the Date) Safe [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ] aimed at
sensitizing players on the pros and cons of the most
common contraceptive systems. Players, in the role of
couples, face diverse stereotyped scenarios, ranging from
the new year eve party, to the home-without-parents night,
and are involved in activities and mini-games that
frequently ask for transgressive social behaviors, e.g.
playing twister in a public space. Designers took advantage
of the direct social engagement between players,
challenging them to go far beyond the comfort zone – from
1 to 1.5 meters –, and invade that space that proxemics [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">15</xref>
        ]
would define as personal. The embarrassment of touching
or being touched by non-intimate persons is further
increased by being in a public space. This condition was
taken in due account by designers that employed the twister
game activity as a metaphor for an intercourse, and
embedded the possible consequences of “unprotected sex”
into three oversized dice (contraceptive, pros and cons,
venereal disease) to roll after every in-game
sleeping-withsomeone occurrence.
      </p>
      <p>In parallel LBMGs become trigger of social engagement
with non-players, passers-by not (formally) taking part to
the game. In The Infection [3] designers involved players in
unexpected contacts with non-players. Created to sensitize
towards STDs – Sexually Transmitted Diseases – the game
uses smartphones and several game (physical) elements to
transform the playground into a fictional world where four
bosses – symbolizing four diseases – must infect as many
people as possible. Among others, one of the missions asks
players to increase the amount of their disease-fellows by
sticking adhesive labels – the viruses – to unaware
passersby without being caught. Another quest requires players to
stop random non-players and ask them to explore their body
looking for the stickers/viruses. Players are engaged not
only in direct social relations with unknown persons, but
also in overcoming the boundaries of the comfort zone
discussed above. From a non-player perspective, the
activities of this game resulted into situations of surprise
and amusement, that triggered curiosity. Stickers have been
used on players and non-players as game mechanics, as
well as means to spread knowledge in an unconventional,
unexpected way.</p>
      <p>Player to Space: distributed narrative and situated
meanings
Using to advantage the fact of being narrative-based, these
LBMGs use distributed and situated narratives shaped as
small fragments of storyline related to the space wherein
the game is taking place. To progress and complete the
story (and the game), players are asked to explore the
surroundings, interacting with the urban space that conveys
specific meanings and serves as a source of in-game
information, rather than being mere playground. From a
player-to-space perspective, the mobile device is the game
element that to different extents allows players to activate
spaces and make them interactive.</p>
      <p>
        Since the diffusion of mobile technology, several authors
explored how games can extend, integrate and
digitallyoverlay the physical space. Particularly relevant to our
reasoning are the rumination advanced by Montola, Waern
and Stenros [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ] and De Souza e Silva [9] who investigated
the way games interact with people and the surroundings,
and how players interact with the public spaces because of
mobile gaming (play in public [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ]). As a matter of fact,
each place takes part to the game as a physical space
wherein players move and act, and as a literally meaningful
(being a repository of specific in-game meanings) setting
for the fictional world, overlapped to the physical one
thanks to the mobile device. In doing so, such LBMGs
encourage players towards situated meaning-making, where
having contextualized experiences is a source of further
understanding.
      </p>
      <p>
        The Fellowship of the Umbrella [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">5</xref>
        ] is a LBMG about
physical disabilities that echoes the cultural capital of play
in public spaces [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">24</xref>
        ]. Employing a fairy-tale fictional
world, it uses some metaphors to transpose (and expose)
some obstacles that disabled persons daily face, making
players physically experience impairments. Wearing a
specific role, every player is specifically equipped with
costumes and game kits, and is required to move around
following the features (actual limits) of their character. In
this LBMG, the urban space and some of its architectural
barriers are integrated into the game serving to nurture
experience-based knowledge and awareness, in which
players meaningfully step [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">18</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        If on the one side, the space can serve to convey
information, on the other, it can become servant to the
activity of playing. In this case, play can be appropriative
and take over the context in which it takes place [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">23</xref>
        ].
SOSRescue Squad [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">20</xref>
        ] works on the concept of appropriation
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18 ref22">19,23</xref>
        ], as several physical element, including the urban
space itself, are appropriated in the game – often without
letting non-players know. For instance, in a quest, players
are asked to circumscribe spaces with tapes to keep
passersby far away. The game becomes a way to temporarily
modify the way people interact with spaces. As a matter of
fact, once players encircle a bench with tape, they cause a
shift of meaning. From being a space with a social function,
the bench assumes the role of a space of non-sociality.
Player to Device: smartphone as storyteller
The last typology of interaction here discussed is player to
device, an exploration on how the smartphone entered the
play activity. The discourse is not focused on issues
pertaining the field of HCI or UI Design, but rather on the
role of the smartphone as storyteller, a narrator
accompanying players through the game. This typology of
interaction takes place between players and digital
characters, as manifestation of the game system.
As a matter of fact, the analyzed LBMGs are in great part
designed relying on a distributed situated narrative [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">19</xref>
        ],
employing the device as provider of narrative contents,
triggered where they are needed, and spread across the
urban space as playground. The device acts as storyteller, a
digital guide across the story and the urban space, that
provides players with pieces of the narration, following the
progression of the game and players’ movement in the
urban space. The situatedness of the narration implies a
strict relation between the places and the story. In doing so,
mobile technology nurtures the layer of the fictional world
continuously hybridizing the real and the digital realm. In
this sense, mobile technology functions as bridge between
the two worlds.
      </p>
      <p>The analysis of the LBMGs, object of the study, highlighted
diverse strategies of use of the smartphone. Some set the
device in the role of omniscient narrator, out of the story, an
external, neutral entity that guides players, provides hints in
the proper location of the clues and proposes dilemmas to
be solved. It is the case of The Lost Papyrus [4], a LBMG
about Alzheimer's disease aimed at inform players about the
impact this illness has on the everyday activity of sick
people and of those who live with them. Structured as a
metaphor of the disease and its degeneration, the game
involves four players in the role of an expert archaeologist
and his brave assistants, exploring a still undiscovered tomb
to find a renowned papyrus and facing more and more
difficult quests that symbolize the degeneration of the
illness. The mobile device is interpreted in the game as a
powerful tool, a quite magical machine that guide players
from outside the story.</p>
      <p>Other times the mobile device becomes a personified
storyteller and enters the story as a character. In The
Treasures of Captain Torment [6], the device actually
embodies the spirit of the Captain that guides players to his
treasure, across a story dealing with the very common, but
often ignored, mental condition of depressed people. As
active character of the story, the spirit of the Captain
communicates with players through the mobile device,
telling stories, providing hints and testing the bravery of his
fellow pirates with questions and quests. The device is here
both storyteller, narrative voice, and character of the story,
with his personal aims to be reached with the help of
players.</p>
      <p>
        Other games interpret the mobile device as guidance,
authoritative voice, that guides players not only across the
game but also towards a specific behavior. The 10
Commandments [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">8</xref>
        ] sets players in the role of a girl who
must attend a casting, and the device provides her with ten
commandments to be followed in order to have a “perfect
slim body”. Facing daily activities, players are continuously
proposed a dilemma to be solved, making direct or indirect
reference to the commandments. What players do not know
is that the commandments are based on real online blogs
which claim the so-called Pro-Ana behavior, presenting
anorexia as a positive philosophy of life. By choosing to
respect the commandments, players lose energy; by not
obeying the sense of guiltiness is fomented. In both cases
players are destined to fail. Designers exploited here the
power of mobile device as authoritative voice,
disconcerting players with a final plot twist that questions
the role and credibility of the narrative voice.
      </p>
      <p>CONCLUSIONS
The cases presented and discussed take advantage of the
gamut of features and potentialities of LBMGs to design
games that intensify and accent meaningful interactions, not
only with the game itself as a system, but also with people
(players and/or non-players), mobile device, and space.
Furthermore, they are characterized by the inclusion of
challenge-based, distributed narratives that enhance and
facilitate immersion and sense of agency within the game:
once again the game prompts players to challenge their
comfort zone, pushing their own boundaries. Being
LBMGs, this mainly regards social and spatial interactions.
The analysis we proposed stems from a player-centered
standpoint and aims at portraying LBMG players as
“interactive agents”, engaged in meaningful social, spatial
and technological interactions. A model of interactiveness
made possible by the way these games have been designed,
that is, as said, closer to urban games than to video games.
As a matter of fact, the image of the player that emerges is
far from that of the most renowned commercial LBMGs
(e.g. Ingress, Pokémon GO), as well as from common video
games. The player here portrayed engages directly with
other persons, through in-person, non-technologically
mediated interactions. In commercial LBMGs the direct
social engagement is a choice given to player – just think
about Pokémon GO –, while the cases discussed above
frequently require social interaction to proceed in the game.
The progression is not only due to the mix of technology
and space (geo-location) but also to the social interaction
with persons, being them players or non-players.
Another remarkable difference is that the space wherein
players move becomes something more than a mere
background for the gameplay, acquiring meaningfulness in
both the physical and in the fictional world provided. Places
are involved in the story for what they really are (e.g. a
bench, a tree) and for what they become in the story (e.g. a
dangerous place to be evacuated, a space-time portal). Thus
we could talk of situated meaning, since the physical
characteristics of places, as well as their agency on players,
are exploited by game designers to trigger a continuous
negotiation of meaning between real and unreal, creating
also a sort of narrative friction between what players see
and the game fictional and digital overlay. LBMGs can
indeed work on a twofold level: in terms of physicality,
they challenge players as bodies moving, walking, running;
in abstract terms, they require players to interpret the
surroundings and its elements as part of a fictional layer
that can be accessed via mobile device.</p>
      <p>The mobile device is what makes this kind of LBMGs
similar to the commercial ones, since they both exploit
location-awareness as the main means of progression in the
game, but, at the same time, its employment is rather
different. Instead of being the “place where everything
happens”, the mobile device acquires the role of storyteller,
trigger of actions that are only partially performed on the
device itself. The smartphone becomes a means of urban
exploration and social engagement. Expanding a concept by
De Souza e Silva [9], digital and physical spaces can be
designed to resonate, encouraging a more social-, digital-,
and location-aware experience.</p>
      <p>It is evident that the games here presented shift LBMGs
towards urban games. Nevertheless, we claim that some
differences can be traced back to the background in the
design field of the students who crafted them, and of those
who guided them. These games have been designed as
artifacts able to maximize the interaction of their users
(players) with other persons, with the space and with the
device, that is what normally interaction designers do.
Starting from a design standpoint, these games have been
designed with an accent on the physicality of the
interactions, thus characterizing players as interactive
agents, physically engaged with what surrounds them, and
not only with the device.</p>
      <p>Designing LBMGs as artifacts closer to urban games and
aimed at stimulating richer interaction of players at the
three levels we highlighted – person, space, device – clearly
implies a shift in how LBMGs are commonly played.
Instead of being always-playable games, they become
happenings, events to be organized considering the
subsequent implications of such a way of staging a game.
Nevertheless, the emerging image of interactive player here
outlined opens up to opportunities for LBMGs designers to
expand the level of interactivity of their players, marking
the difference from video games and fully exploiting the
potentiality of playing in a public space rich of possibilities
to be caught.</p>
      <p>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A special thanks goes to the students who put themselves to
the test by participating in the design and evaluation
activities, giving us constant feedback and helpful
comments through questionnaires and interviews; but also
analysing their own projects via rapid ethnographies.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Valeria</given-names>
            <surname>Aufiero</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Valeria Boffo, Arnau Regàs, and Valentina Teruzzi,
          <year>2015</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>Keep (the Date) Safe</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Richard</given-names>
            <surname>Bartle</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1996</year>
          .
          <article-title>Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs</article-title>
          .
          <source>Journal of MUD research 1</source>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          ,
          <fpage>19</fpage>
          . Retrieved June 5, 2017 from http://www.arcadetheory.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/1996bartle.pdf Greta Bassanese, Luca Bonfarnuzzo, Pham, Redana,
          <year>2015</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>The Infection</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Andrea</given-names>
            <surname>Benedetti</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Carmen Conesa, Alice De Marco and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Jessica</given-names>
            <surname>Piatti</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2015</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>The Lost Papyrus</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Sara</given-names>
            <surname>Bianchini</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Laura Mor, Valerio Princigalli &amp; Martina
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sciannamé</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>The Fellowship of the Umbrella</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Alessia</given-names>
            <surname>Boni</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <source>Greta Frizzi and Silvia Taccola</source>
          ,
          <year>2015</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>The Treasures of Captain Torment</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          7. John W. Creswell.
          <year>2008</year>
          . Research Design:
          <article-title>Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches</article-title>
          . SAGE.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lesley</surname>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Culla</surname>
          </string-name>
          , Laura Di Filippo,
          <source>Chiara Frisia and Maia Golan</source>
          ,
          <year>2014</year>
          [LBMG]
          <article-title>The 10 Commandments</article-title>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Adriana De Souza e Silva</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2006</year>
          .
          <article-title>From Cyber to Hybrid: Mobile Technologies as Interfaces of Hybrid Spaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>Space and Culture</source>
          <volume>9</volume>
          ,
          <issue>3</issue>
          :
          <fpage>261</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>278</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Adriana De Souza e Silva</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>Pokémon GO as an HRG: Mobility, Sociability, and Surveillance in Hybrid Spaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>Mobile Media &amp; Communication</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          :
          <fpage>20</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>23</lpage>
          . http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050157916676232
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          11.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Norman</surname>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Denzin</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yvonna</surname>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lincoln</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2011</year>
          .
          <article-title>The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research</article-title>
          . SAGE.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          12.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kathleen Musante</surname>
            <given-names>DeWalt</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Billie R. DeWalt</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          .
          <article-title>Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers</article-title>
          . AltaMira press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Nicolas</surname>
            <given-names>Ducheneaut</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Nicholas Yee,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Eric</given-names>
            <surname>Nickell</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Robert</surname>
          </string-name>
          J Moore.
          <year>2006</year>
          . “
          <article-title>Alone Together?” Exploring the Social Dynamics of Massively Multiplayer Online Games</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06)</source>
          ,
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>10</lpage>
          . http://doi.acm.
          <source>org/10</source>
          .1145/1124772.1124834
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          14.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Laura</surname>
            <given-names>Ermi</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Frans</given-names>
            <surname>Mäyrä</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>Fundamental Components of the Gameplay Experience: Analysing Immersion</article-title>
          . Worlds in Play:
          <source>International Perspectives on Digital Games Research</source>
          <volume>37</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>2</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          15.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Edward</surname>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hall</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1990</year>
          .
          <article-title>The Hidden Dimension</article-title>
          . Anchor, New York.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          16.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Jesper</given-names>
            <surname>Juul</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2005</year>
          .
          <article-title>Half-Real. Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds</article-title>
          . The MIT Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          17.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Nicole</given-names>
            <surname>Lazzaro</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2009</year>
          .
          <article-title>Why We Play: Affect and the Fun of Games. In Human-Computer Interaction: Designing for Diverse Users and Domains, Andrew Sears and Julie A</article-title>
          . Jacko (eds.). CRC Press,
          <fpage>155</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>176</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          18.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Ilaria</given-names>
            <surname>Mariani</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <article-title>Meaningful Negative Experiences Within Games for Social Change</article-title>
          . Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.
          <source>net/10589/117855</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          19.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Markus</surname>
            <given-names>Montola</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Jaakko Stenros, and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Annika</given-names>
            <surname>Waern</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2009</year>
          .
          <article-title>Pervasive Games: Theory and Design</article-title>
          . Morgan Kaufmann.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          20.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Martina</surname>
            <given-names>Panza</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Leonardo Pozzi,
          <source>Paolo Rota and Debora Veschi</source>
          ,
          <year>2016</year>
          [LBMG]
          <string-name>
            <surname>SOS-Rescue Squad</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          21.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Katie</surname>
            <given-names>Salen</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Eric</given-names>
            <surname>Zimmerman</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2004</year>
          .
          <article-title>Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals</article-title>
          . The MIT press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          22.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karen</surname>
            <given-names>Schrier</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>David</given-names>
            <surname>Gibson</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2010</year>
          .
          <article-title>Ethics and Game Design: Teaching Values through Play: Teaching Values through Play</article-title>
          .
          <source>IGI Global.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          23.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Miguel</given-names>
            <surname>Sicart</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2014</year>
          .
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Play</given-names>
            <surname>Matters</surname>
          </string-name>
          . The MIT press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          24.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Miguel</given-names>
            <surname>Sicart</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          .
          <article-title>Reality has always been augmented: Play and the promises of Pokémon GO</article-title>
          .
          <source>Mobile Media &amp; Communication</source>
          <year>2017</year>
          ,
          <volume>5</volume>
          ,
          <issue>1</issue>
          :
          <fpage>30</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>33</lpage>
          . http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050157916677863
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          25.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Georg</given-names>
            <surname>Simmel</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1950</year>
          .
          <article-title>The stranger</article-title>
          .
          <source>In The sociology of Georg Simmel</source>
          , Kurt Wolff (ed.). Free press, New York.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          26.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Davide</given-names>
            <surname>Spallazzo</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2012</year>
          .
          <article-title>Mobile technologies and cultural heritage. Towards a design approach</article-title>
          . LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, Saarbrucken.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          27.
          <string-name>
            <surname>Robert</surname>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stake</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>1995</year>
          .
          <source>The Art of Case Study Research. SAGE.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>