Reflections on these experiments
Shared body & Shared weird body
It’s fun to see a body on screen which is clearly responding to your own movements, but is also affected by someone else, with equal weight. I wonder how this shared ownership of the body would affect the participants’ feelings in various scenarios; for example, seeing the body come under some harm, or experience something positive.
We found ourselves working together to turn the shape into something recognisable (a crown, a cat, a circle). However, it did feel very clear which points each person was controlling – perhaps this isn’t the truly equally weighted collaborative control I’m seeking.
The players movements are combined into one ball, which moves freely around the screen. One player tries to grab the red targets, and the other the blue.
Fun to play (until I pulled a muscle) but I did feel like I didn’t want to completely block my opponent from grabbing their targets, because that leads to an impasse. We found ourselves letting each other win. I wonder if this has anything to do with the shared presence in the player. I think a competitive scenario is less relevant to my goals.
The angle of one person’s right arm controls the inner pendulum and the other person controls the outer pendulum.
This is the most unusual method of collaborative control – it isn’t just averaging values, but combining inputs. While it’s clear who is controlling what (as in the connected body), the outer pendulum is affected by the inner pendulum’s movement, so the control feels more connected. The design is simple and the range of movement is limited but it’s an interesting route to explore.
I’m keen to explore what the effects are of creating the subconscious consensus that Carpenter talks about. Is it possible to create a feeling of connection between people as they collaborate and operate as one amoebic entity in this way?