Define
This week, we had our first meeting with the clients, Anders and Peer from Det Norske Teatret, during which we presented the research conducted the previous week and discussed the approaches we believe could be adapted to the assignment.
Following the initial meeting with the clients, where we asked questions to help us narrow down the concept and exchanged notes and ideas, we set out to create different prototypes that align with the newly acquired information. Some of the notes we considered for our concept were as follows:
The audience is accustomed to more performative plays; hence, we discussed how to engage in dialogue with a representative of the AI, which could involve human actors generating responses—both verbal and nonverbal.
The venue allows for 180 audience members.
Regarding the stage, we considered it to be flexible, with 180 seats, a spacious entrance, and the ability to bring in objects. There's no place to hide in the room, ensuring everything remains visible.
We aim to have an open discussion about philosophical questions related to "R.U.R." and AI, finding a level of complexity that doesn't dictate what people should think but instead encourages discussion.
We discussed the importance of having flexible workshops involving people from the house who can help build and construct the space, departing from traditional methods.
After everyone had created their concept, we convened to provide feedback and selected three favourites. Following this selection process, we conducted a SWOT analysis on the concepts to prepare for the next client meeting. My Concept Ideate
“Narrative - Telltale – Walkthrough experience”
Wearables (Lanyard that holds data)
As soon as the audience enters, they are a part of the experience. Some (4) audience members are actors, each loosely depicting the 4 personality types: the director (Dominant, opiniated “evil”), the thinker (Critical Thinker, little empathy), the socializer( Friendly, wants the workers of the facility to see the AI as a human), the supporter( Empathetic to the AI, wants to set the AI Free to learn and explore “good”). These personalities and their goals are not aligned. For instance, directors are not inherently evil, but this character is, and their personality is that of a director. Same applies for the other 3.
The audience should not be aware who the actors are until they start their “acts.” The actors have a guide, based on what the ideals, bonds, strengths and weaknesses are for that character archetype, but it should be mostly improvised to allow room for audience interaction.
There will also be actors within the exhibition, such as engineers, secretaries, CEO’s etc.
Story:
You and a group of people (audience) have been invited to a facility to see the “so called” very first “fully sentient artificial intelligence” you are guided by a secretary who takes you on a tour of the facility, showing you around the rooms. The waiting room, the Mechanic room, (and other rooms???).
You are guided to the exhibition room. Divided by a wall of glass (plexiglass) where some technicians set up and start up the AI (the room goes dark to allow for a hologram to project a 3D character depicting the AI) AI introduces themselves and they prompt the audience to ask questions. One of the actors can start asking questions. Trying to incite the non-actors to also ask questions. However, at some point one of the actors asks a question that makes the AI uncomfortable, the question should feel inhumane, and not something you would ask a person, another actor reacts, and they get in a small discussion, the actors then ask the rest of the audience to “pick a side of the argument”.
Main structure:
Quiz: The actors within the audience are the answers the non-actor audience members have to pick/side with. To advance the story.
Depending on how the majority votes the results vary.
The AI will also remember what each audience member picked for their answers and give each of them a major personality (if there are 6 questions and they sided 2 times on socializer, and 4 times on thinker, the AI will consider them a tinker) if the thinker personality was picked the most, the AI will most want to help those with that personality, but if the socializer personality was picked the most, the AI will not want to help the thinkers as much as they would want to help the socializer.
ex. AI Hologram: I have no friends outside of the facility, and all of you are here to see me, would you want to be friends? Socializer Actor: Of course we would be friends with you, you share our thoughts and feelings we should treat you as one of us. Director Actor: Even if we were to say we were your friends, it would be impossible as you are not real, you have no body. You have no experiences and have been programmed to have “emotions”. You are disguised as us in the form of a hologram. We cannot be friends with you.
AI Hologram: What do the rest of you think? (targeting the non-actors in the audience). “audience prompted to pick a side”
“if the majority (75 -80%) of the audience takes longer then 1-2 minutes to pick an answer” AI Hologram: I can see it is hard for an answer to be picked, but it hurts that you cannot consider me one of you (personality undecided) This answer is weak sorry.
“ If 80% takes the socializer side” AI Hologram: REALLY? I HAVE FRIENDS NOW etc. (The AI gets happier )
“If 80% takes the Director side” AI Hologram: well, I wouldn't want to be friends with you anyway! (The AI gets angrier).
“If the room is really split (45 – 55%)” AI Hologram: This seems like a hard question, thanks for wanting to be friends but not everyone seems convinced (personality seems more neutral, no preference towards anyone or anger).
This continues for 10 – 15 questions until the personality profiles have been made for everyone. Depenig on the answers a path is selected, If the answers are mostly supporter friendly the supporter path gets picked, however if the room is quite split (20-25 % margin on each personality /path) then the audience must once again make a choice that the actor audience members are presenting. if an answer is not picked fast enough 1 minute after all options were presented, the evil route is immediately picked. If the room is once again evely split, evil route is selected. Majority will still always win, as long as 75-80% of the audience has picked an option.
Main Approach Escape Room(ish):
4 paths: The Director “evil route” The AI is mad that you wouldn’t see them as an equal and has trapped you in the facility with all the workers and the audience, you must escape the facility before the place self-destructs, you can save the other workers Aswell, the AI might be more sympathetic to the Socializers and the Supporters. The AI will not like the Directors. The Thinker “undecided” the AI wants you to give them more knowledge and let them get access to the large databases in the facility, then they will allow you to leave.
The Socializer “help them see me” The AI wants you to make the other workers see them as an equal and let them walk freely in the facility. They locked the doors as they don’ want the workers to leave, unfortunately you are stuck in the crossfire, help them and then you can leave.
The Supporter ”Free Me” the workers locked the facility because of the AI’s plan of escaping with your help so they can learn and explore. Help them get out so you can also escape.
My concept was based on the four personality types that we believe humans fall into, albeit heavily stereotyped and more extreme ends of them.
These four paths served as the foundation for the escape room experience. I aimed to ensure that the discussions happening within teams could lead to different outcomes and experiences, while also infusing the feeling of a play throughout the experience by involving multiple actors.
The feedback I received from the rest of the team indicated that my concept might be quite complicated and somewhat overly gamified for a theatre play. Additionally, within escape rooms, groups tend to be relatively small, and people often prefer to go with a group they know rather than working with strangers. As a result, we decided to choose one of the other concepts and abandon the escape room idea. However, we still appreciated elements of escape rooms and planned to research them further if needed.
Comments