In any game where a single overarching adversary or problem is chosen the nature of that entity must be chosen carefully. In this case the onset of methane is a simple fact within the game - which immediately engages the players in a simple scenario and aim.
Therefore the requirement to evolve into a methanite is an immutable part of the game, giving the players a clear constraint to work within.
Within Evivve methane is used as a threat to stimulate the game narrative. The onset of methane cannot be argued with, outwitted, or fought against, forcing the players into a limited set of options. This drives the players to focus on the main task within the game, becoming a methanite, which can only be achieved through CROB and their Genome Alteration Experiment. Therefore team dynamics and resource management can be emphasised in any debrief, the all important Reflection stage of the AFERR model, because the players’ aim was clear.
Also the requirement to become a methanite gives the players a common cause, encouraging them to act together and see themselves as part of a single tribe. As participants will often be part of the same team or company, this gives any session of Evivve a positive start for the players to build on.
Within the game’s scenario the requirement to become a methanite, a being capable of surviving within a methanised atmosphere, is unavoidable; the limited options available to the players can be highlighted, and how they felt within these constraints can be explored to compare different personality types within the team.
Benefits and Challenges
A benefit of using a gas as a threat immediately constrains the options available to the players, forcing them to be creative within a limited range of options. This approach promotes critical thinking and strategic decision-making within a short time frame, preparing participants to handle similar challenges in the workplace while keeping Evivve sessions short and impactful.
One challenge of using gas as a threat is that this does not reflect all of the issues that the players may face in their real-world positions, as some threats will be more intelligent and innovative than this. Facilitators should be aware of players who see this distinction and acknowledge their understanding of the situation.
Leave A Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *