Checklist: factors impacting games in the public realm

Consideration by designers and notification to players should be given regarding the following:

Safety

  • Notification to gamers that ultimately they are responsible for their own safety and should remain vigilant during games
  • Vehicle movement. Games better suited to non-vehicular or pedestrian-orientated environments. Also be wary of cycle lanes, bus stops and car parks. Consider warnings or geo-fences when in close proximity roads, rails lines. Minimise crossings where possible.
  • Proximity to water bodies, including the sea, lakes, rivers. Consider warnings or geo-fences
  • Surfaces. Be wary of uneven, loose surfaces and steep gradients.
  • Impact of the weather. Extreme climates may be less appropriate.
  • Daylight and artificial light.
  • Accessibility. Is the area well serviced with access points? Is there clear visibility for passive surveillance? Does the game also operate at night? Refer to CPTED principles (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design)
  • All-inclusive access provision e.g. ramps, lifts, gentle gradients
  • Land ownership. Be respectful of private, semi-private locations
  • Cultural sensitivity. Is the location highlighted as being of cultural significance and could the game be deemed inappropriate or offensive?
  • Emergency and maintenance access

Amenities

  • Wi-Fi and mains connectivity preferable. Strength of signal e.g. multi-stories, underground locations may impact game flow
  • Access to toilets, baby change facilities
  • Shelter from extreme weather, including buildings, structures and trees
  • Access to food and water
  • Parking, including disability
  • Access and frequency of public transport

Character. Opportunity to leverage off/integrate the following in the games:

  • Commendable public locations such as streets, squares, parks and water bodies
  • Prominent landmarks including architecture, public art, monuments
  • Integration of local knowledge for cultural relevance
  • Connectivity of prominent public spaces with walkable distances between (around 400m) and overall potential distance traversed (provide estimate)

Other considerations

  • Permanency of referenced physical features. The planned removal of features may be detrimental if integral with the game
  • Coordination with other programmed outdoor activities and events, including place making initiatives
  • Land use & user conflict
  • Suitability of game actions in public locations
  • Commercial endorsements
  • Public notification of games in progress

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s