JIBBER JABBER
The Process Generate the Game
An inclusive game for reclusive children
Jibber Jabber is an inclusive game for reclusive children
Though the product resembles a reconstruction of the game Exquisite Corpse, the premise of Jibber Jabber reflects the corollary much more. Here, the process generates the game, and this is what Jibber Jabber is all about.
First Stage
As a class assignment in Industrial Design, students were divided into pairs and picked their adjectives & demographics out of hats. My work partner and I picked “antisocial 5 & 6-year olds.” Our aim was to design a toy for that age group, so we started by designing some preliminary games that served as a form of testing; we wanted to test the children’s drawing ability and determine their creativity and skill levels.
The first game we designed resembled a Pokemon-esque, rock-paper-scissors format; and we tested them on our classmates’ nephews. We asked the kids to draw a monster and the partner they played with would have to draw a monster that would be able to defeat the other person’s monster. The rules were rather vague but simple, and they managed to bring out the most logical faculties of the children we worked with. We were surprised by the level of talent. The game at this stage, however, did not sufficiently address the antisocial premise. In addition, it was too limited to drawing ability, so the kids who were the most talented artists ended up receiving the most rhetoric. It was a fun mess.
Here's what we learned in the first round
1. Once parts start being passed around, they intuitively start interactiving with each other. ESPECIALLY the kids that were characterized as "quiet kids."
​
2. The more constraints we put on the output, i.e. times, shapes within the template, etc., the less interactive they are
​
3. There was a clear neat for closure, or finality
​
Primary Research Was Key
At this point in development, we realized that the first game was successful enough to build on and make our sole focus. The kids blew us out of the water with their ability to draw and reason; we simply needed to add social cooperation to meet the criteria and find some kids with social disabilities. Our new challenge was to center the game around the kids becoming as socially engaged and thrilled as possible.
Through personal contacts, we received supervised access to an elementary school–Lincolnwood School District 74. We separated the kids into 4 groups, each of them balanced with 3 boys and 3 girls and a child with a severe social disability. Our first revision of the “sketch battle monsters” game included chopping up the monster into 3 sections–head, body, and feet. This was essentially the same competitive sketching game as before but, this time, the kids had a designated drawing section and played 3 versus 3. We thought we would use competition as the incentive to get the kids to make their creation. After testing this version of the game a few times with stricter formats such as adding shapes (which the kids didn’t like at all), we took a left turn and decided to abandon the entire team versus team approach. We simply put all 6 kids into a circle and made sure there was something to create but nothing to win.
The following format had the biggest social breakthrough:
Everyone in the circle is given a paper with 3 sections labeled “head, body, and feet”;
The kids were instructed to draw ahead and pass it to the left;
​
Then draw the body and pass it to the right;
Then draw the feet and pass them to the right or to the left;
​
Finally, they had to come up with a name drawing; and
Game over.
Final Template
The objective was realized when the children without disabilities seemed to have an equal amount of fun but the kids with disabilities participated at a higher level than the others. The classroom teachers and supervisors (older students from the 8th grade) conveyed to me that the involvement of their socially challenged students was utterly surprising and unprecedented.
The kids sit in a circle and a given a template and asked to draw a character
