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.

@en

Cards for Biosafety is a serious game, which was developed as part of a national research project. The aim of this game is to let young biotechnology researchers learn about risks and mitigation measures in different biotechnology environments. To evaluate the game and its learning objective, an online questionnaire was developed and distributed to national and international biosafety experts who had received a print version of the game. In total, 17 participants completed the questionnaire. The results show that Cards for Biosafety supports learning on different cognitive levels of the revised version of Bloom’s taxonomy. Especially the influence of fun and humor on the game play and the learning process was emphasized by the respondents. In addition, the creativity of the participants plays a major role in learning. Future research is needed to draw valid conclusions about the effectiveness of learning after playing Cards for Biosafety in comparison to traditional tools.@en

Organizations will go through great lengths to prevent accidents from occurring. This is shown in the implementation of safety management systems in which all procedures are captured describing how work can be done safely. Stopping the work is seen as one of the last barriers in risk management. Our theoretical analyses and conducted interviews have shown that no interactive, innovative and analogue tools exist that effectively enable the use of the Stop Work Policy in a safe space. Serious games and the associated provision of a safe environment make it possible to let personnel speak up about perceived unsafe situations, as there are no consequences to fear. The present paper describes and discusses the development of the two serious games Dare to Repair and Danger Dialogue that aim to support the implementation of the Stop Work Policy effectively and thus enhancing the dialogue on working safely.@en

As part of a Dutch Science Foundation project called T-TRIPP, the authors developed the serious game Cards for Biosafety. The aim of Cards for Biosafety is to let young biotechnology researchers learn more about biosafety. Analyses of workshops with researchers from the biotechnology domain as well as results of interviews with several biosafety officers clearly indicated the need for such a serious game with a focus on educational learning. Cards for Biosafety is a physical (also playable online on Tabletopia) round-based card game and playable with up to eight players. The game itself consists of scenario, risk and measure cards, and the task of the players is to choose risk and measure cards that fit the scenario explained by the facilitator at the beginning of each round. To test the efficiency of Cards for Biosafety as a learning tool, the authors conducted two online-workshops with twelve participants. The results of these sessions have not only shown that Cards for Biosafety is a well-designed game, but also a successful game to achieve the intended learning goal. In addition, the authors recognized that ‘fun’ is an important element in the game which leads to ‘learning’ in a very effective way. Future research should focus on the role of such positive states in serious games and their influence on learning outcomes.@en

New technologies, complex problems, interconnectedness between different actors: All these are challenges of our today’s society and characteristics of complex systems. Simulation games are a suited approach to analyse complex systems. The process of designing and developing those games for complex systems follows certain steps. One of such steps is the definition of the underlying problem. Deriving a concrete problem statement under consideration of the changing complexity of today’s society is crucial for the validation of a simulation game. Therefore, the following paper will introduce IDEAS, an approach to derive a specific problem statement as one part of the simulation game design process. In general, IDEAS consists of four steps: interviews, discussion rounds with experts, moscow analysis and gamestorm. The approach itself as well as a case study, where this approach has been used, will be presented. Finally, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the approach and give recommendation for future work.@en

Background.: Simulation gaming sessions can be understood as a sequence of briefing, game play, and debriefing - with feedback loops and iterative steps in between. Often, these sessions are supported by a facilitator, who organizes the session, sets learning goals, and guides the players through briefing, game play and debriefing (Taylor, Backlund & Niklasson, 2012), which we call facilitation. Debriefing is a vital part of the facilitation process, as according to Crookall (2010) and Kriz (2010), it facilitates learning. Contrary to many traditional models that locate the debriefing phase at the very end of a simulation gaming session, we conceptualize debriefing as reflection moments during the whole session, in which participants have the opportunity to reflect on their game play, experiences, and learnings. Facilitation is the process of enabling participants to address challenging situations of the game play, and make connections between the game play and the real environment the game refers to throughout the simulation gaming session. Method & Results.: We analysed existing debriefing literature within the Simulation & Gaming journal. This review revealed that many existing approaches do not sufficiently consider changing needs of participants during a simulation gaming session to allow for a direct reflection on what is happening. Instead, a large number of debriefing approaches focus on a post-action reflection only. Moreover, the approaches analysed in our article often are abstract and only provide scarce practical recommendations. In addition to the literature review, we draw conclusions from observations of our own work in and with simulation gaming sessions. Based on the related and our own work, we propose a new model for simulation game facilitation, which better connects moments of reflection with the game play - the Impulse-Debriefing-Spiral. Conclusions.: We provide a holistic understanding of debriefing that helps facilitators when implementing simulation games for learning purposes. Our model, called the Impulse-Debriefing-Spiral, conceptualizes the role of facilitation between briefing and debriefing throughout the whole process of a simulation gaming session - starting with its planning to reacting on emerging needs of the participants in between, up to closing the session as last step before transferring new knowledge and competencies into a new context (learning transfer).

@en

Serious games as research instruments are seen as a special type of participatory modelling, allowing a researcher to observe the behaviour and decisions taken by players. Yet, games have their own dynamics and come with certain challenges when used as a research instrument. This article reports on specific challenges in using games as research instruments in the domain of transportation. Therefore, three digital games from the transportation sub-systems freight transport, airport management and public transport are presented. The cases are analysed according to the challenges faced during the phases of requirements analysis, design, implementation, usage as research instrument, and evaluation. Based on this cross-case analysis of the research games, Do’s and Don’ts as well as practical recommendations are derived to support researchers and practitioners in applying serious games as research instruments in transportation. The new ReDIRE-framework to analyse serious games for research purposes is presented for this aim. Design guidelines resulting from our contribution can be helpful for game designers and researchers alike.

@en

The aim of this paper is to analyse whether the design decision in terms of the choice between a digital or an analogue simulation game does have an influence on validity, play(er) experience, and learning outcomes. Therefore, we analysed and compared a digital and analogue version of a simulation game for port management regarding their validity, play(er) experience, and learning outcomes. Our results showed that engagement is one of the key factors for learning, but that simulation games need to be realistic enough to also guarantee specific learning outcomes. Further research is needed to statistically evaluate our findings and the applicability of these results in other games.

@en

With hybrid board games rising in popularity and game AI algorithms becoming more sophisticated, there is potential in involving AI to create novel game experiences and tools that can support developers. However, examples of hybrid board games that involve AI remain relatively sparse. In this work, we propose that creating a taxonomy of AI in hybrid board games can help the development of games that occupy as-of-yet unexplored areas of the design space. By mapping out different dimensions through which the involvement of AI in such games can be understood, we seek to encourage further academic discussions and applied explorations.@en

This paper concentrates on methods to facilitate interaction and exchange knowledge between different expert groups. The specific case examined is on expert groups from the aviation and humanitarian context. Both are highly complex, multidisciplinary systems where stakeholders work under high time pressure and uncertainty and in a complex decision-making environment. Especially during a sudden on-set (natural) disaster, stakeholders from the humanitarian field and airport management need to work closely together to guarantee the most efficient way of handling issues like overwhelmed customs officials, unsolicited aid donations and unsafe or unprepared warehouses. While several approaches are available, the question still remains: which method works best to create a mutual understanding between these two worlds. To answer it, three different approaches have been examined: (1) discussion rounds with experts (2) gaming-related method and (3) simulation game. The set-ups as well as the results will be described and pros and cons of each method discussed.@en

In this study, we explore the similarities and differences in learning effects produced by playing a digital and an analogue version of the disruption management game for container terminal operations. We organized the analogue game sessions with students in the United States and digital game sessions with students from Greece. We analysed a postgame survey that captured the learning experiences of the participants to compare the differences and similarities of the learning effects of either game. Based on the results, we conclude that the type of game has limited effect on the learning experience, while incorporation or exclusion of learning principles does have.@en

Global transportation knows many different modalities – goods arrive from far away places by ship, plane, railway, or truck. Airports and seaports both represent important nodes within the global transportation network. Both show distinct characteristics, but also similarities when it comes to challenges like required flexibility, robustness, reliability and situational awareness of the stakeholders involved. In this article, we introduce two different simulation games addressing some of these challenges in two complex transportation nodes and discuss the qualitative results of user tests with the games. Within a comparative section, we show how simulation games can be used to address the challenges of multimodal transportation.@en

The significance of teams, teamwork and team performance is unprecedented in many learning environments of institutes in higher education and organizations. While individual and team tasks are quite straightforward to define, teamwork is a set of interrelated cognitions, attitudes and behaviours that contribute to the dynamic processes leading to team performance. To address the research gaps related to team processes and team factors related to game based learning, we conducted a quasi-experimental gaming session using a multi-player game called Yard Crane Scheduler 3. Our analysis of the game session showed that mutual performance monitoring had a significant positive effect on team task performance, while mutual support between team members had a negative effect on the team task performance. Shared mental models and closed loop communication were important for the team task performance but the development of shared mental models through shared displays and the effectiveness of closed loop communication were hindered by time pressure related to the team task. Our findings indicate that knowledge of team factors and team processes that affect team performance can help instructors to design team tasks and evaluate students in an efficient and holistic manner.@en