Mobile, collaborative and location-based learning

A case study of the MobiMissions prototype

August 2007
Lyndsay Grant, Hans Daanen and Tim Rudd, Futurelab

The full version of this report is available to download in pdf format - see box below. On this page you'll find the report's introduction and executive summary.

Introduction

MobiMissions is a new location-aware mobile phone game prototype created in partnership between Futurelab and the Mixed Reality Lab (MRL) at the University of Nottingham.

The MRL’s initial concept used cellular phone networks as a locative device to provide the structure for a mobile phone game called ‘Hitchers’[1]. As players move around, their phone connects to different cells, each of which has a unique ID. Some new types of phone can access the ID of the cell they are currently in, which can then act as a rough indication of the phone’s location.

This initial concept was submitted to Futurelab’s Call for Ideas[2], and developed to a prototype-stage game called ‘MobiMissions’. The final game centred on the creation of ‘Missions’ consisting of photographs and text on a mobile phone, which were then released into the players’ current cell, where they remained until discovered by another player. On finding a Mission, players were able to pick it up, respond to it and drop the Mission in their current location, where it would remain. As a player’s phone moves from one network cell to another in the course of a normal day, different Missions become available to that player. Players were awarded points for creating and responding to Missions, as well as for the quality of their Missions and Responses. All Missions and their Responses were available to be viewed on a website.

Executive summary

Design and trials

Informant design workshops developed the initial game concept, creating a new experience called ‘MobiMissions’. MobiMissions was trialled over a period of five weeks with 17 volunteers, aged between 16 and 18 years old.

Key findings

1. Local, social play
Players preferred playing with others at the same time and in the same place to playing on their own. Through reciprocal play, groups co-created the meaning of their Missions and Responses, and reinforced social ties.

2. Asynchronous, solitary play
Social reciprocity did not extend to players playing asynchronously. This was partly because authors of Missions were anonymous, and partly because solitary play often occurred at home, where other players were less likely to be located in the same cell and therefore find Missions.

3. Content of Missions
The majority of players felt it was more important to create ‘interesting’ Missions than to maximise points by creating and responding to as many Missions as possible.

4. Location of play
The majority of play took place at home, late at night, when players felt free from other commitments. Play took place in short episodes in a limited number of locations, rather than throughout the day in many different locations. Location was not used strategically, only opportunistically.

5. Conversational learning
MobiMissions has the potential to support learning conversations through the exchange of photographs in specific located contexts. Support for greater immediacy, longer duration, and multiple participants to conversations could further promote learning conversations.

6. Competition and motivation
The emergent goal was to create ‘interesting’ Missions, rather than score maximum points. Points therefore did not provide suffi cient feedback to assess progress against the goal of ‘level of interest’. The game focused more on social feedback than competition.

Future possibilities
The development of the game and the trials indicated future directions and learning possibilities for these types of technologies and experiences. These are described in the ‘Future possibilities’ section towards the end of this report.

top of page