Introduction
This thesis explores how physical, light-rule-based games can foster spontaneous social interaction, co-creation, and emergent behavior in public spaces—particularly within temporary event settings. Initially aiming to break social and cultural boundaries between strangers, the research shifted focus to exploring how spatial and rule-based boundaries can invite interpretation and interaction.
Three games—Fulcrum, Knock Blocks, and Coopetition—were developed and tested with mixed-age groups on the University of Anhalt Dessau campus. Rather than enforcing strict rules or outcomes, these games used form, movement, and shared space to provoke playful, open-ended engagement. Observations revealed that participants often reinterpreted the games creatively, negotiated new rules, and interacted through gestures or observation, even without direct engagement between strangers.
The study concludes that such games act less as tools for immediate social bonding and more as platforms for exploring meaning, participation, and togetherness. It is guided by one central research question:
How physical games can encourage spontaneous social interaction in public spaces?
And two sub-questions focused on design strategies and elements that support co-creation and emergent play.
How can physical games be designed to encourage spontaneous social interaction in public spaces?
What design elements in physical games foster co-creation and emergent behavior among participants in public spaces?
The thesis ultimately proposes a framework for understanding public games as experimental interfaces for social exploration.
Design Criteria
The development of three physical games (Fulcrum, Knock Blocks, and Coopetition) was guided by five core design criteria derived from literature review, game studies, and fundamental theories. These criteria (Discernibility, Ease of Entry and Exit, Multiple Modes of Participation, Invitation through Physical Form, Support for Social Interaction, and Lightness and Flexibility of Rules) were determined using concepts from the literature and were used as guiding criteria during the prototyping phase.
Each criteria was selected to capture specific values emphasized in previous research on games and design, particularly how people interact in public settings and how meaningful interaction can emerge. The aim here was to define criteria in line with the research questions. By connecting these criteria to theoretical principles, the games functioned as both playful interventions and embedded design experiments.
Discernibility
Games are designed to communicate gameplay and possible scenarios through form and interaction rather than explicit instructions. This approach is consistent with Salen and Zimmerman’s (2004) concept of “meaningful play”, where players must perceive the relationship between their actions and their outcomes. “Meaningful play” occurs when the outcome of moves is understandable and this applies to the entire game (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004, p. 34).
Ease of Entry and Exit
Games in public spaces should accommodate entrances and exits, taking into account the circulation of people in the space. This should also not ignore the varying attention spans and desires of participants to participate. Games are structured so that individuals can join and leave at any time without ending the game. This design decision reflects Bekker et al.’s (2010) emphasis on low-threshold interaction and is consistent with theories about how people navigate public spaces in ways that allow for both participation and abandonment.
Multiple Modes of Participation
Games should support participants in different ways of participating. This is important to allow for different forms of interaction. Forms of participation should allow for participation as competitive, collaborative, spectator or experimental. This versatility stems from Caillois’ (1961) classification of games (agon, alea, imitation, ilinx) and Flanagan’s (2009) argument for immersive, interpretive play experiences. Participants can shape their roles in the interaction, supporting Bekker et al.’s (2010) suggestion of facilitating user-centered, flexible interactions.
Invitation Through Physical Form
In physical games, ambiguity can invite participation by stimulating curiosity through design. Salen and Zimmerman (2004) argue that the mechanical structure of a game with a ‘lusory attitude’ exploits spatial and social ambiguity, thereby increasing players’ voluntary participation. For example, games that use implicit information (e.g. the drawing prompts of Pictionary) or tactile exploration (e.g. the unstable blocks of Jenga) create ambiguity through physical form (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004). The ‘magic circle’ frames the game space as a space where ambiguous rules or materials invite collective interpretation, relying on nonverbal cues (gestures, proximity, object manipulation) to guide interaction (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004).
Rule Lightness and Flexibility
Games should foster player reinterpretation and communication within the game to create social interaction without being bound by rigid rules. This approach aligns with Salen & Zimmerman’s (2004) account of social play and emergent player behavior. Similarly, Bekker et al. (2010) call for the design of systems that allow players to invent, modify, and negotiate the game as it unfolds.
These five criteria served as practical guides for prototyping and refinement, while also serving as conceptual touchpoints grounded in the broader discourse on games and interaction. By embedding these values in the physical form, rules and possibilities of games, the project examined the ephemeral, emergent interaction in public space.
GAMES
Fulcrum
Fulcrum is a collaborative, rule-light physical game designed to foster spontaneous interaction in public space through balance-based play. It uses a semicircular base and movable boxes to create a dynamic, puzzle-like structure that invites exploration without written instructions, relying on form and ambiguity to communicate gameplay. Field testing at Anhalt University showed high engagement and positive social interaction, though some players hesitated due to unclear rules and fragile construction. Based on feedback, the game was iterated with more pieces, stronger materials, and a redesigned structure, maintaining its core design while improving durability and playability
Knock Blocks
Knock Blocks is a physical, competition-inspired public game designed to encourage spontaneous play through a simple yet ambiguous setup: players use balls to knock over wooden blocks placed on a concave playing surface. The game relies on visual curiosity, intuitive interaction, and light rules to invite exploration and co-creation. Field testing revealed high engagement, with players creatively interpreting gameplay, though limitations like unclear ball guidance, lack of color, and lightweight structures affected clarity and competition. Based on feedback, the design was iterated with stronger materials, vacuum-formed polycarbonate surfaces, fixed and colored pipes, additional colored balls, and improved layout to enhance structure, visibility, and gameplay fluidity while preserving its open-ended, participatory nature.
Coopetition
Coopetition was a team-based public game blending competition and cooperation, where players first knocked over colored puzzle pieces using rope reels and were then expected to collaboratively reassemble the pieces. Designed to blur social boundaries and encourage dynamic role shifts, the game aimed to transition participants from opposition to cooperation without written rules, relying on ambiguity and discovery. Despite its layered concept, field testing showed minimal engagement—players only interacted with the competitive phase, failing to recognize the puzzle elements or transition to cooperation. The game's unclear affordances, high ambiguity, and lack of feedback led to it being the least successful prototype, and no further iterations were pursued, though its failure informed the improvement of the other two games.
Results
This research created three public space games—Fulcrum, Knock Blocks, and Coopetition— to provoke social interaction through established 5 criteria. Afterwards, the research evaluated these three games based on these criteria and their ability to create socail interaction. Fulcrum was the most successful, effectively balancing clear game elements with open-ended play, leading to high levels of co-creation, negotiation, and group interaction. Knock Blocks invited individual exploration but suffered from poor fluidity and slow group dynamics, while Coopetition failed to engage due to unclear elements and excessive ambiguity. Although the games did not spark interaction between strangers, they enabled varied forms of participation and personal reinterpretation. The study demonstrated that discernibility, fluidity, and strategic ambiguity are key to engaging public game design. External factors—such as the limited testing period, rapid prototyping, and unsuitable test location—also impacted outcomes. The findings highlight the need for long-term testing in more socially dynamic environments using refined prototypes to better assess social interaction potential in public play.
