Submissions

Presentations
A presentation is an individual 15-20 minute talk, standard to most academic conferences. We’ll cluster three presentations into each session and assign a discussant to the entire enchilada to draw out common themes and field questions from the audience. Let us know when you submit if you have any special needs for your presentation beyond a projector and a screen. Peer review is double-anonymized.

Symposium
Symposia are a coordinated series of paper presented in a coherent 1-hour session, similar to presentation sessions but crafted around a specific theme or issue by the authors themselves. Format can vary from a cluster of three or more presentations with a designated discussant to a themed and interactive poster session. Be creative! Go wild! Every symposium ends with audience Q&A, but we especially welcome symposia that promote engagement and interaction throughout. Submissions should provide a description of the overall symposium topic and of the individual presentations that constitute it. Peer review is not double-anonymized.

Panels
Panels bring together three or more experts around a single theme and let them discuss and debate it for an hour. Interactivity with the audience is encouraged—what better way to add liveliness to your panel than to let questions from the audience spark new ideas? Save the sequential presentations for the paper or symposium sessions; panels are lively, unscripted conversations among colleagues in a public setting guided by a panel moderator with a treasure trove of thoughtful questions. Submissions should provide a description of the panel topic, why it’s important, who the panelists are, and why they are the right group to discuss it. Peer review is not double-anonymized.

Workshops
An interactive 1 hour-long hands-on working session that tackles a new practice or strategy approach to a process of interest. Workshops are highly participatory and include discussion and debriefing following the activities. Make things, build things, test things—the sky’s the limit! Submissions should provide a description of the workshop focus and presenters as well as an overview of the participatory workshop activities and what participants will get out of the event. Peer review is not double-anonymized.

Well Played
Well played sessions are 1 hour live walk-thru’s of a selected game as a way to interpret and analyze key game design elements, aesthetic effects, meaningful moments, game feel, or other aspects unfold in a given title. Presenters are highly encouraged to engage the audience in kind of conversational scholarship via live gameplay and analysis of key moments of the game experience. This session format is rooted by the Well Played book series and journal. Their goal is to help further develop and define gaming literacy, appreciation, and critique. Peer review is double-anonymized.

Posters
GLS 2022 will again feature our Massively Multiplayer In-Person Poster Session (MMIPPS) with delicious hors d’oeuvres and an open bar. The poster format is ideal for those who wish to engage in informal, face-to-face discussions about their work with colleagues and attendees. We encourage the submission of work in progress but save your game demo submissions for the GLS showcase. Peer review is double-anonymized.

Game Showcase 
The GLS Game Arcade & evening GLS Showcase Awards Event highlights original games for impact or entertainment. Selected games will be featured in the all-day-every-day Arcade for attendee’s gaming pleasure, with games selected for honors and awards featured in our rowdy, fun-loving, irreverent evening awards event on the outdoor terrace. Submissions should include a description of your game, its design goals, and links to downloadable demos, gameplay videos, and/or trailers. All Showcase submissions that are accepted through peer review are automatically nominated for review by a panel of judges composed of industry and academic experts for inclusion in the GLS Showcase Awards Ceremony. Submission peer review is double-anonymized; second review for consideration for awards is not.

Hall of Failure
Developing our collective understanding of games, their contexts, and their consequences requires more than just case-studies and positive examples of success; it also requires negative examples and knowledge sharing of what does not work. The GLS Hall of Failure is our explicit invitation to share with colleagues generative explorations of what does not work, does not jibe, does not impact, and/or does not delight. Hall of Failure sessions feature candid, reflective discussions of research logically conceived but fundamentally flawed in some key aspect under scrutiny, game designs that shoot for the moon and land in the dumpster, and the ever-elusive public airing of research with no significant or meaningful findings where such was originally anticipated. Hall of Failure sessions are for the brave, the willing, the self-reflective, and generous of spirit. Here we share what not to do with colleagues so they can learn from our generative mistakes. Submission peer review is double-anonymized.