Co-located augmented play-spaces: past, present, and perspectives

Abstract

In recent years, many different studies regarding Co-located Augmented Play-spaces (CAPs) have been published in a wide variety of conferences and journals. We present an overview. The work presented in these papers includes end user's perspectives as well as researcher's perspective. We place these within four aspects in this review: (1) Argumentation, the underlying reasons or the higher end goals to investigate interactive play from a user's perspective, (2) Systems, the kind of systems that are created, this includes their intended use which fits the end user's perspective, (3) Evaluation, the way in which the researchers evaluate the system, (4) Contribution, the goal of the studies from the researcher's perspective; what does the study contribute to the research community. CAPs are often multimodal in nature; this survey pays attention to the multimodal characteristics in relation to all four aspects. This overview contributes a clearer view on the current literature, points out where new opportunities lie, and hands us the tools for what we think is important: bringing the end-user and research perspective together in intervention based evaluations. In short, this paper discusses CAPs: their past, the present, and the perspectives.

A systematic review of physical–digital play technology and developmentally relevant child behaviour

“…Therefore, these technologies lend themselves more for the closed-ended than the open-ended side of the play spectrum. Additionally, rules are at the very heart of the play mechanics of a significant amount of phygital play technologies [46,47]. This inevitably constrains children to play within the limits of such predefined rules [48] rather than in flexible or open-ended ways.…”

The Participant Journey Map: Understanding the Design of Interactive Augmented Play Spaces

“…This can be facilitated by screens, projections (Gómez-Maureira, 2014;van Delden et al, 2017;Mast, 2019) and light, but also through sound (Schraffenberger and Van Der Heide, 2014), movement and other sensory perceptible manifestations. APS are also known as Co-located Augmented Play-spaces (CAPs) (van Delden et al, 2018), interactive play systems (van Delden et al, 2018), Interactive Playgrounds (Sturm et al, 2008), interactive open-ended play environments (Valk et al, 2012;de Valk et al, 2015) and Pervasive Games (Magerkurth et al, 2005).…”

“…APS can offer joyful, pleasant experiences, providing an entertaining pastime (van Delden et al, 2018). Furthermore, they can provide more serious benefits such as supporting a healthy lifestyle, facilitate social interaction (Bekker et al, 2010;Márquez Segura and Isbister, 2015), enhance cognitive development (Springlab Bewegend leren op de Springlab Beweegvloer voor kleuters en peuters, 2020; Hashagen et al, 2009;van Delden et al, 2018) and improve skills practice (van Delden et al, 2018).…”

A Quest for Co-Located Mixed Reality: Aligning and Assessing SLAM Tracking for Same-Space Multi-User Experiences

“…For collaboration, co-located MR has been deployed in a variety of contexts, from construction and engineering, education, entertainment and gaming, tourism and more, accounting for approximately 40% of collaborative MR research from 2013-2018 [2], with notable benefits in terms of cognitive load, cooperation, and awareness. For play, research into co-located augmented playspaces (CAPs) [34] has established benefits in terms of stimulating physically active behaviour, social interactions, cognitive development in children, and fundamentally in enabling unique, joyful experiences. And in art, co-located MR performances such as CAVRN [20], Holojam [15], and CAVE [23] have pushed the boundaries in terms of audience experience, with "the adaptation of both cinematic and theatrical elements offer[ing] a unique set of affordances for content designers and producers" [23].…”