Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 75, Issue 14, pp 8289–8317 | Cite as

Analyzing the influence of virtuality on playful social interaction

  • Mizuki Sakamoto
  • Todorka Alexandrova
  • Tatsuo Nakajima


Ambient intelligence technologies are making our daily life increasingly virtual, and the boundary between the real world and the virtual world is gradually disappearing. Computer games are often played on the Internet, which allows people to enjoy games with others, even when they are not at the same location. This paper analyzes the Trading Card Game (TCG), which has two versions. One version is played with paper-based cards, whereas the other is played on a computer. The computer-based TCG supports remote play and has a number of enhancements, such as providing special fictional effects on virtual cards. The two different versions are useful to analyze the influence of virtuality in making future social interaction more playful. First, we investigate potential pitfalls to introduce virtuality in TCG through the scenario-based analysis, which adopts a player’s personality to exploit potential difficulties. For investigating further insights on the influence of virtuality in TCG, we analyze some experiments with Augmented Trading Card Game, where a real opponent player is replaced with a fictional player. Our findings from the analyses show that the feeling of realness is essential to make incorporated virtuality successful. Recently some games’ concepts can be adopted in order to augment our real world. It is essential to investigate the influence of virtuality introduced with the games. The future social interaction will incorporate virtuality based on a variety of game-like features to make the interaction more playful. Therefore, the insights described in this paper will be useful to help the design of future playful social interaction.


Ambient intelligence Virtuality Realness Social interaction Gamefullness Game design Tangibility Persuasive affordance 


  1. 1.
    Antikainen M, Väätäjä H (2010) Rewarding in open innovation communities – how to motivate members? Int J Entrep Innov Manag 11(4):440–456Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bandai Character Research Center (2001) Card game as a drama to create with friends, Bandai Character Research Center Jidai Report No.2, Bandai Coorporation, (In Japanese)
  3. 3.
    Bartle R (2003) Virtual worlds: why people play. MMP Game DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baskinger M, Gross M (2010) Tangible interaction = form + computing. Interaction, January + FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baudrillard J (1998) The consumer society: myths and structures. Sage Publications LtdGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beyer H, Holtzblatt K (1999) Contextual design. Morgan KaufmannGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bogost I (2007) Persuasive game: the expressive power of video games. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cooper A, Reimann R, Cronin D (2007) About face 3: the essentials of interaction design. WileyGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Deci EL, Ryan RM (2000) The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol Inq 11:227–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deterding S, Dixon D, Khaled R, Nacke N (2011) From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “ramification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp 9–15Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ducatel K, Bogdanowicz M, Scapolo F, Leijten J, Burgelman J-C, (2001) Scenarios for ambient intelligence in 2010, Final Report. ISTAG European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hazenberg W, Huisman M (2011) Meta products: building the internet of things. BIS PublisherGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Horney K (1994) Self-analysis. W W Norton & Co Inc; ReissueGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Iwata T, Yamabe T, Nakajima T (2011) Augmented reality go: extending traditional game play with interactive self-learning support. In Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems ad ApplicationsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jordan PW (2002) Designing pleasurable products: an introduction to the new human factors. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehdonvirta V (2009) Virtual consumption. Publications of the Turku School of Economics, A-11:2009Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lindtner S, Nardi B, Wang Y, Mainwaring S, Jing H, Liang W (2008) A hybrid cultural ecology: world of warcraft in China. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp 371–382Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Magerkurth C, Cheok AD, Mandryk RL, Nilsen T (2005) Pervasive games: bringing computer entertainment back to the real world. ACM Comput Entertain 3:(3)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marzano S, Aarts E (2003) The new everyday view on ambient intelligence. 010 PublisherGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Messaris P (1997) Visual persuasion: the role of images in advertising. Sage PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mori M (2005) On the uncanny valley. Proceedings of the Humanoids-2005 workshop: Views of the Uncanny ValleyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nakajima T, Lehdonvirta V (2013) Designing motivation in persuasive ambient mirrors. Pers Ubiquit Comput 17(1):107–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nettle D (2009) Personality: what makes you the way you are. Oxford Univ PrGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ruth M, Schoormans JPL, Schifferstein HNJ (2007) Product attachment: design strategies to stimulate the emotional bonding with products. In Product Experience, ElsevierGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ryan FL, Pfeifer J (1979) Questioning-responding skills and social studies content in cooperative, competitive, and independent learning environments. J Exp Educ 47(3):215–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sakamoto M, Alexandrova T, Nakajima T (2013) Augmenting remote trading card play with virtual characters used in animation and game stories – towards persuasive and ambient transmedia storytelling. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions 2013Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sakamoto M, Alexandrova T, Nakajima T (2014) Introducing virtuality for enhancing game-related physical artifacts. Int J Smart Home 8(2):137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T (2014) Gamifying intelligent daily environments through introducing fictionality. Int J Hybrid Technol 7(4)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T (2014) A community-based crowdsourcing service for achieving a sustainable society through micro-level crowdfunding. In Proceedings of International Conference on Internet, Politics, Policy 2014: Crowdsourcing for Politics and PolicyGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T (2015) Incorporating fictionality into the real world with transmedia storytelling. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Design, User Experience and UsabilityGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T (2015) In search of the right design abstraction for designing persuasive affordance towards a flourished society. In Proceeding of the 9th International Conference on Design and Semantics of Form and MovementGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T (2015) A framework for gamifying human behavior with gameful digital rhetoric. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Design, User Experience and UsabilityGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T, Akioka S (2015) Gamifying collective human behavior with gameful digital rhetoric. Waseda University Technical Report DCL 2015-001Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sakamoto M, Nakajima T, Alexandrova T (2014) Enhancing values through virtuaity for intelligent artifacts that influence human attitude and behavior. Multimed Tools Appl. doi: 10.1007/s11042-014-2250-5 Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Stark L (2012) Leaving mundania: inside the transformative world of live action role-playing games. Chicago Review PressGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Suri JF (2005) Thoughtless acts?. Chronicle BooksGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Turner P (2005) Affordance as context. Interact Comput 17(6):787–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yamabe T, Nakaima T (2013) Playful training with augmented reality games: case studies towards reality-oriented system design. Multimed Tools Appl 62(1):259–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Zappen JP (2005) Digital rhetoric: toward an integrated theory. Tech Commun Q 14(3):319–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zichermann G, Cunningham C (2011) Gamification by design: implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps .O’ReillyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mizuki Sakamoto
    • 1
  • Todorka Alexandrova
    • 1
  • Tatsuo Nakajima
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringWaseda UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations