Community-driven design: Collaborative objects,community-generated content,and the expanded role of architects

Introduction

“For designers and planners, the task of the twenty-first century will be to build the bitsphere – a worldwide, electronically mediated environment in which networks are everywhere, and most of the artifacts that function within it (at every scale, from nano to global) have intelligence and telecommunication capabilities.” ¹ This was the foresight of William J. Mitchell in 1995, amidst the advent of Web1.0. With the evolution to Web2.0, the participatory web, ² and now transitioning towards Web3.0, Mitchell’s “bitsphere” concept is progressively unfolding, pushing the boundaries of design possibilities.

This simple idea of creating objects with embedded intelligence and telecommunication capabilities is also at the core of our research, which we call “Collaborative Objects.” Aiming for a highly interactive design process of Collaborative Objects, we intentionally develop frameworks and interactive digital environments as well as design tools where the design process shifts from a singular activity to a multi-user design activity of co-creation. A shift that affects the design process as many people are involved and the resulting forms as a tectonic consequence of these activities.

As our research is ongoing, we strive to continuously reflect, refine, and emphasize the various possibilities offered by our conceptual framework of Collaborative Objects. This endeavor includes research and case study projects in academia and the public domain, numerous publications, and the development of innovative open design methodologies that enable real-time participatory design activities with groups of distributed co-creators. We delve into various themes, including decentralized co-creation, real-time participatory architecture, and speculative open architectures of Collaborative Objects. ³

Our exploration also builds upon and reflects on earlier principles of research regarding the impact of networks and the World Wide Web on architecture, as outlined by visionaries like William J. Mitchell. ⁴ We consider the emerging concepts of virtual design studios, ⁵ early experiments on decentralized participation, ⁶ and the strategies of co-creating through custom web applications. ⁷ We further engage with reflections on how these ideas of collaboration have evolved over time.^8–10 This research builds up from the principles of Parametric Design: “The intensity, complexity and dynamism of the social interaction and societal reproduction process can now be addressed via the new adaptive organizational and communicative capacities of a digitally empowered design process in which all elements of architecture have become parametrically malleable and responsive and subject to computationally empowering ordering process”. ¹¹ As well as aims to contribute to the current architectural discourses of Parametricism, ¹² discrete architecture,^13,14 an architecture for the commons, ¹⁵ and the second digital turn in architecture. ¹⁶ In this context, Collaborative Objects emphasize their communicative role as media objects, but also their tectonic role as architectural parts. The interactions between these objects form an intricate web of part-to-part relationships, with each part contributing to the overall form of the whole. By extending this relationship to include human-centered design, Collaborative Objects offer a unique blend of part-to-part, part-to-whole, and human-to-object interactions as well opening, guiding, and curating the process for community-to-object(s) interactions. By connecting these various strands of thought and practice, we aim to reconsider as well as illuminate new pathways in architectural design and collaboration.

Collaborative objects: A conceptual framework

Collaborative Objects is our conceptual framework in which we explore the formal consequences as tectonic objects as well as the informal consequences as media objects that result from embedding intelligence and networking capabilities into architectural objects during a computer aided architectural design process. As such we speculate on a paradigm shift in architectural design by opening up the design process and inviting multiple co-designers to collaborate.

Collaborative Objects are dynamic, smart, customizable digital objects with telecommunication capabilities, serving as the centerpiece around which community interaction, negotiation, and collective creativity unfold. The power of Collaborative Objects lies in their ability to receive, process, and send information in real-time in response to user inputs. Their capacities for synchronous and asynchronous communication function as tangible, living, breathing manifestations of collective creativity that dynamically change and adapt to the ever-changing desires and needs of the community.

As this concept is open to various tectonic and media content, these objects can embody a wide range of design ideas, preferences and experiences of the participating community. Unlike traditional architectural design methods, which are often static, rigid, top-down, and final, Collaborative Objects are open, flexible, bottom-up and continuously in the process of becoming. Each interaction, each shared idea, each input from the community contributes to the ongoing evolution of these objects, ensuring that the outcome is a true reflection of the collective vision of the community. By inviting community participation, it ensures that the resulting designs are grounded in local realities, reflective of local tastes, and responsive to local challenges.

This conceptual framework opens up exciting possibilities for the future of architectural design, promoting a more inclusive, democratic and engaging approach to architectural creation by aiming for a world where everyone has a voice in shaping their built environment.

Expanded software applications

To bring our research to life and unlock the possibilities of Collaborative Objects, we develop custom workflows and create digital interactive environments that we call “expanded software applications.” Our objective is to enable open conceptual environments where various tectonic and media objects can be applied and examined as Collaborative Objects. We envision these applications as adaptable platforms, capable of individual customization through the integration of diverse functionalities and design perspectives. Consequently, coding became our primary tool for creation, offering us the greatest freedom to create and add various custom functions.

Adding new functions to design software is already a common practice in architectural design, especially when the software allows for scripting. In conventional Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software, users can freely design various geometries—provided they can successfully operate and master the tool. The result is usually static or, in some cases, dynamic geometries that are still interactive and allow the modification of parameters such as size, dimensions, and material properties. Nevertheless, when the complexity exceeds the built-in capabilities of the software, customized solutions are required, and scripting is one way to achieve the desired results. A good example of software that offers a very flexible setup for adding needed features is Rhino 3D. It offers an open framework and scripting environment, Grasshopper 3D, developed by David Rutten. This tool lets users apply complex design techniques such as parametric design and scripting logics and even make their own plugins to enhance the software’s capabilities. This use of CAD software has proven successful in the traditional, professional field of architectural project development with its iterative development process and close client discussions as these projects usually evolve asynchronously over time.

However, to facilitate a dynamic environment that supports multi-user engagement in the design process, we chose to develop our applications using the Unity game engine. Unity’s open development platform aligns perfectly with our interactive and collaborative aspirations as well as provides a flexible setup to develop expanded software applications. While it also offers a 3D environment and enables the construction of virtual worlds, Unity’s design methods differ significantly from traditional CAD programs. Given Unity’s fundamental nature as a game engine, it is primed to handle various degrees of interaction and user input common in gaming. It enables a real-time environment perfect for synchronous multi-user interaction and participation.

Unity operates as a combinatorial set of components that can be assembled to form a customized environment, a scene that can be executed like a game application. Its structure consists of two primary modes—an editor for setup and a play mode for activation. The components, referred to as GameObjects, can be either empty for file structuring or can hold certain objects such as: geometries, materials, functions, tags, interactive functionalities, and more. The presence of scripts within individual GameObjects that trigger specific events fosters an object-oriented logic. This facilitates the interaction of multiple individual objects under particular conditions, leading to complex global behaviors. Unity’s approach is distinct from the custom scripting logics of traditional CAD programs, as it allows multiple scripts to run simultaneously, triggered in specific events. Furthermore, Unity provides an environment where networking capacities can be applied to these GameObjects, allowing these objects to be shared with other online users, fostering real-time participatory design activities—enabling Collaborative Objects.

Additionally, Unity enables standalone exports such as custom desktop applications as well as WebGL applications that can be embedded into any website, creating an easy-to-use and widely accessible application. In doing so, it pushes the boundary of architectural design software from a straightforward design environment to a realm of expanded software applications—real-time participatory platforms—that enable community-generated content.

Towards conducting public case studies

To research the practical implications of Collaborative Objects embedded in custom, expanded software applications, our primary method of exploring these concepts is through their application in case study projects. ¹⁷ A method that celebrates the playful nature of collaborative creation within a shared space, where feedback is instant and various design strategies can be experimented with and evaluated. These case studies typically begin with a research and development phase where either specific previous workflows are refined based on feedback from previous projects or new ideas are tested to explore the variations possible with this conceptual framework. It’s worth noting that our initial case studies took place in an academic environment, such as in seminars, workshops, or design studios, involving student groups either in-person or through remote teaching. Typically, these groups of students are given an introduction to the workflow and step-by-step instructions on how to work with these software workflows, where to contribute their design intentions, alongside our guidance and mentoring to create innovative projects using this method. While at first glance it may seem like a fairly narrow, constrained workflow, it turned out that the setup was usually open and flexible enough to allow for highly personalized projects with creative individual design contributions. Although these earlier case studies covered various scenarios and concepts of open architecture, they all shared a common feature: they were conducted under our guidance in a controlled environment. This involved regular meetings, tutorials, and design critiques, creating a setting where design outcomes could be influenced, guided, and curated.

Recognizing the importance of openness in collaborative design, we began to rethink conducting our case studies in highly controlled academic environments. This led us to broaden the design process to engage a wider audience. The three case studies highlighted in this article were developed with this openness in mind, aiming to involve the public in an environment that is less controlled, more accessible, inclusive, and democratic. Unlike in an academic setting, this approach means less direct guidance and individual critique. Without detailed explanations or tutorials, users must navigate and utilize the design applications in a self-exploratory manner. Ideally, this fosters playful and individual design activities that reflect a variety of design intentions. Moreover, to demonstrate the creative versatility of the Collaborative Objects framework, we chose to showcase three projects. Each project facilitates distinct design activities, resulting in formal, informal, and tangible outcomes.

The first two Case Study Projects H = N Co-Doodle and H = N BLOCK were designed with an intentional simplicity ¹⁸ to make them accessible to a broad public audience. In essence, they were conceived as digital sandboxes, inviting users to explore and play within the constraints of two universal creative activities: doodling and block building. By leveraging these universally understood concepts, we aimed to tap into the collective creative power of the public, allowing for an uninhibited space of flows ¹⁹ of ideas and designs. These projects serve as our steppingstones into an innovative decentralized and open, community-driven design method. Unlike its playful predecessors, the third Case Study Project Meta Block Linz embodies the Collaborative Objects concept in a physical form: a community-designed digital sculpture that merges into a tangible architectural prototype. This project demonstrates the power of community-driven design in creating tangible architectural works pushing the boundaries of traditional architectural design methods.

Case study 1: H = N CO-Doodle

Doodling has long been considered as an individual activity, intuitively free often associated with personal reflection, meditation, and spontaneous creativity. With this case study H = N Co-Doodle, we’ve embarked on an endeavor to reframe and enhance this conventional understanding. Our goal is to elevate doodling from a private endeavor to a communal, inclusive, and engaging experience. Through the development of an expanded software application designed to promote online collaborative doodling, we are opening the doors to a wider public audience, inviting them to join us in a lively and imaginative exploration of shared creativity (Figure 1).OPEN IN VIEWER

The art of sketching has been a timeless means of self-expression and creative exploration. This age-old tradition was reinvigorated in the digital realm with the advent of Sketchpad by Ivan Sutherland in 1963, one of the pioneering CAD software applications designed to facilitate digital sketching. ²⁰ Collaborative sketching environments subsequently began to take shape, marked by groundbreaking projects such as ClearBoard ²¹ and GroupSketch. ²² These initiatives paved the way for a series of research projects that further enriched the domain, exemplified by experiments like ColabSketch that delved into collaborative concept design sketching.^23,24 The rise of Web 2.0 heralded a new era of shared whiteboards, making collaborative sketching more accessible through online platforms integrated into virtual meeting software like Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Slack, and Miro. The very nature of the sketching environment began to evolve as well, shifting from 2D to 3D, with commercial virtual reality applications such as Google’s Tilt Brush and Gravity Sketch. The journey extended further with the integration of mobile augmented reality applications like Inkspace ²⁵ and Weird-Type, ²⁶ as well as our own case study project. ²⁷ This progression illustrates the rich and multifaceted journey of sketching, from its foundational roots to its contemporary, interconnected, and multi-dimensional manifestations. Furthermore, the influence of the art world is evident in this research, notably in the light drawing experiments by Gjon Mili. Mili experimented with long exposure photography, capturing mesmerizing trails of light. His collaboration with Pablo Picasso in 1949 led to the creation of the “Light Drawings” series. ²⁸ This series was an embodiment of a harmonious blend between technology and art. Picasso skillfully mastered the tool to create unique drawings reflecting his style. Upon careful examination, a distinctive feature of these drawings comes to light. Picasso’s 3D space drawings reveal certain curvatures, likely due to his stationary position and arm movement radius. This invisible spherical movement canvas becomes apparent in the published images, further accentuating the intricate interplay between art, space, and technology.

H = N Co-Doodle, short for Hic et Nunc Collaborative Doodling, represents a playful case study in open participatory design. At the heart of H = N Co-Doodle lies the concept of Collaborative Objects—digital objects jointly manipulated by multiple participants. By simply adding networking capabilities to a doodle, solitary doodling turns into an activity of shared creativity. The participants play with the objects in real time, creating intricate 3D doodles and pushing the boundaries of community-driven design.

The project was developed using Unity, a real-time development platform. We incorporated multiple C# scripts that allowed for various functionalities—from 3D navigation to line drawing. We used a professional service plugin, PUN Networking, to enable networking capabilities and a multi-user environment. This approach eased the creation of a shared environment, enhancing the synchronous and asynchronous interaction. However, this established a temporarily persistent shared 3D canvas, the environment resets when everyone leaves, opening up a new blank canvas for subsequent sessions.

The primary objectives for this publicly shared project were to ensure ease of use and intuitiveness. Upon visiting our expanded software application, users can immediately explore the functionality of the application, with familiar navigation commands using WASD keys or arrow keys and by moving the mouse to look around, users can maneuver in the 3D environment, flying through the virtual space and exploring the collective co-creation. The drawing feature in the application is designed to be both intuitive and simple. A glowing sphere, positioned about one meter from the user’s camera, acts as the drawing tool. Users can move this sphere, akin to moving the ball that is at the tip of a ball-pen, by clicking, holding, and moving within the 3D environment. This method allows users to draw lines in 3D space, making the drawing experience both playful and engaging. The moment a user completes a line and releases the mouse button, a function is triggered. This function activates the network capabilities of the object, sharing the drawn line with other online users. This turns an individual doodle into a Collaborative Object embedded within a multiplayer virtual environment, where many doodles aggregate in real time. Following Picasso’s “Light Drawings,” the lines generated were rendered with a white light material. However, since we were aiming for a more playful experience, a different display mode could be activated that rendered the lines in colorful, animated light gradients, celebrating the infinite variety of digital creations. Since the digital drawing/doodle mode at H = N Co-Doodle had a similar mode for drawing the lines as Picasso, which was mostly static when drawing and only moved the light pen resulting in slightly spherical doodles, some digital doodles created by a user who did not move in 3D space and drew only by moving the mouse resulted in a similar effect of slightly curved doodles in 3D space, as again the radius of the drawing tool resulted in a spherical canvas. When visitors moved around while drawing lines in 3D space, this effect was much less prominent.

Furthermore, the project was exported as a custom WebGL application and minted as a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) on the Hic et Nunc (Latin for 'Here and Now') platform, ²⁹ built on the proof-of-stake Tezos blockchain. This approach guaranteed an archival function and established a Web 3.0 decentralized framework for expanded software applications, allowing them to be embedded as independent software on any website and thus offering broad, open, and inclusive access to the application. This allowed for various modes of interaction, from asynchronous interaction when only one user was currently doodling, to synchronous co-creations when multiple users were drawing and contributing at the same time, to live design sessions that we previously announced via social media. The inclusion of live events further enhances the communal experience, sparking joy and fostering a sense of shared creativity among the participants. The project launch was quite successful via social media, as the public actively engaged with the tool, people shared their creations via social media, and invited followers to explore their temporary doodles and to experience the joy of community-generated content.

Embracing the openness of sharing our expanded software application with a broad audience led to a variety of design intentions from participants. These ranged from simple attempts to familiarize themselves with the tool to more advanced efforts aimed at creating specific drawings. Some participants endeavored to master the tool, crafting drawings with artistic intentions, while others produced unexpected results. In these cases, participants utilized the real-time shared setup for writing messages, unlocking the communicative potential of doodling. H = N Co-Doodle transforms the humble doodle into a shared virtual experience, highlighting how decentralized expanded software can support diverse participatory activities and revealing the vast potential of collective creativity in the digital age.

Case study 2: H = N Block

Block building, typically seen as a playful and intuitively free activity of spontaneous creativity, also serves as a medium for interaction, exchange, and collaborative construction. In this case study, H = N Block, we aim to reshape and enrich this playful tectonic activity by reimagining it within a Collaborative Object’s framework. Our objective is to transform digital block building from a largely solitary pursuit into a community-oriented, inclusive, and captivating shared activity. By developing an expanded software application that facilitates online collaborative block building, we are broadening access to a diverse audience, encouraging their participation in a dynamic and creative journey of collective imagination and creativity (Figure 2).OPEN IN VIEWER

The history of building with blocks in computer-aided architectural research is rich and varied, reflecting the intuitive and widespread appeal of this concept. The Architecture Machine Group and Nicholas Negroponte’s pioneering project, Seek, speculated on continuous feedback loops and computer-aided reconfiguration of architectural volumes.^30,31 Further explored in early tangible computational experiments like the Generator Project and the Walter Segal Project by John Frazer, both of which laid the groundwork for a highly interactive approach to shaping architectural volumes and forms in both real and virtual space. ³² The research landscape continued to flourish with innovative undertakings such as ActiveCube, ³³ which further extended into multi-user experiences in projects like DDDoolz. ³⁴ Focusing on combinatorial complexity, these principles have become increasingly accessible in playful applications like Block’hood. ³⁵ The ease and appeal of placing blocks in virtual space have caught the imagination of many, leading to a thriving community engagement in games like Minecraft. ³⁶ The game’s widespread influence even established it as a research platform itself, fostering speculation on public architectural applications.^37,38 Furthermore, block-building followed us into the era of Web 3.0, ³⁹ where the idea of collaborative building with blocks has been further broadened and examined, notably as in metaverse applications such as Crypto-Voxels, ⁴⁰ empowering online co-creation of virtual spaces.

Our endeavor with H = N Block not only adds to this rich tapestry of research and practice but also presents a new pathway for public engagement in the continuously evolving field of virtual construction and collaboration. By applying the concept of Collaborative Objects to building blocks, simply adding networking capabilities to each block, solitary block building turns into an activity of shared creativity. Additionally, in our effort to make the design process more accessible to the public, we introduced an easy-to-use tool for shared block building, a custom expanded software application, designed to inspire collaborative creativity and appeal to a broad public audience.

This expanded software application, H = N Block was developed in and exported from Unity as a custom WebGL application and minted as a non-fungible token on the Hic et Nunc platform to provide a decentralized accessible software. Once again, we employed the Pun Networking tools to create a temporary persistent shared environment allowing for multi-user block building activities and synchronous as well as asynchronous modes of interaction.

Upon entering the application, users can navigate, steer, and explore the shared virtual space using the familiar WASD and mouse movement combination. In order to start the creative journey, users can place blocks in the 3D shared environment, akin to building structures in games like Minecraft. The placement of blocks is straightforward, a ray casting algorithm. Clicking the left mouse button on any block’s surface in the space instantly creates a new block at that location. Furthermore, this click event triggers a networking function, instantiating this block as a Collaborative Object, instantly sharing it with all the other co-creators in real time. To correct designs or remove unwanted blocks, a simple right-click does the trick.

To foster personalization within the limited geometric possibilities of a spatial grid, we introduced the ability for users to choose block textures, allowing them to express their unique design intentions in real time with others. We offered six distinct, simple textures to enable the creation of diverse, customized structures. Initially for each block, textures were assigned randomly, but users could select any texture by pressing keys 1–6 on the keyboard to assign desired textures to each block. Pressing seven would revert to the mode where textures were randomly chosen again. Although these customization options were limited to a small set of six textures, they still provided users the opportunity to build structures reflecting their personal style, adding a sense of individuality and creativity to their block building creations.

In this case study application, we aimed for creating awareness of temporary ownership; therefore, we implemented a highly transparent method. Each shared block features an overlaid text, centrally positioned, displaying its spatial coordinates and the creator’s name. When users access the WebGL application through a website, a custom script retrieves the user’s Tezos wallet address, if available, and incorporates this data as an attribute in the virtual environment and displays the information on each contributed block as the creator’s name. If the wallet address is not obtained, or if a user intentionally wants to stay anonymous, the script assigns a generic identifier, such as “P_HereAndNow_Visitor_XX.” Although the environment is structured to persist only temporarily—meaning the collective content remains accessible as long as any user is online, after which the scene resets—this additional information overlay enriches the pervasive collaboration experience by making contributions more identifiable and personal.

To document the collective block building activities in our environment, which resets to its original state when no users are online, and thus does not store data by default, we created custom scripts. These scripts, only available to our team on demand, are designed to capture screenshots and videos of the virtual collective block constructions. Additionally, our scripts are capable of saving data for all blocks, including their coordinates, the sequence in which they were instantiated, and the identifier names of their creators. This functionality allows us to provide a degree of persistence to the project, its results and artifacts. It also enables us to reconstruct these structures if necessary. If we captured data, we announced it in advance via social media.

At the release of this expanded software application, we experienced an overwhelming level of active participation from the audience. To somewhat synchronize these design efforts, we chose to publicly announce design sessions through social media, encouraging everyone to co-create and join this playful, community-driven design process. We also announced our plan to document the first six significant design activities, underscoring our commitment to capturing the dynamics of this collaborative endeavor. The co-creation mode in our application was designed to be intuitive and user-friendly, which fostered a dynamic creative environment in the initial design sessions. In these sessions, we saw participation from 10 to 100 people, each contributing to the emerging aggregating collective form by instantiating and placing anywhere from 1,000 to 10,000 blocks. The diversity in design intentions was notable, as many users quickly adapted to the block-building approach and began creating intricate three-dimensional designs. Some users delved into the creative possibilities of customization, intentionally selecting, and placing specific textures to differentiate certain design ambitions. The variety of contributions in these collaborative constructions led to a wide range of forms: from randomly placed blocks with no intentional design to strategically placed blocks creating defined spaces and structures with unique spatial qualities. Users also used blocks to form letters and words, build recognizable figures, and even create memes (Figure 3). This open, sandbox-like environment showcases the raw, diverse, and creative formal and informal consequences that arise from facilitating Collaborative Objects in such an expansive framework.OPEN IN VIEWER

This case study evolved architecturally with the follow-up project H = N BLOCK + A. ⁴⁴ It was built based on the same expanded software, but instead of offering customization through a variety of textures, it provided architectural modular geometries for selection and placement. In this version, the original simple blocks were substituted with more architecturally oriented modular components such as floors, diagonal walls, and stair elements (Figure 4). Although this introduced an additional layer of complexity, it paradoxically resulted in a decrease in active usage. This seemed to be due to the participants finding it more challenging to engage with the more complex geometric forms compared to the simpler tasks of placing textured boxes in the previous project. Despite the decreased participation in this more complex follow-up iteration, the project still highlighted the transformative power of co-creation and pointed to a promising future for open participatory design.OPEN IN VIEWER

Case study 3: Meta Block Linz

This case study, Meta Block Linz represents a tangible application of the Collaborative Objects concept, where community-driven digital design resulted in a physical sculpture, a hybrid architectural design. This novel method pushes the conventional limits of architectural practice, highlighting the significant potential of community-generated content. It leverages our conceptual framework of Collaborative Objects integrated within an expanded software application, demonstrating its effectiveness in realizing tangible architectural creations.

The project was part of “Meta.Space” a group exhibition curated by Markus Reindl and Fabian Fabian Müller-Nittel at the Francisco Carolinum, ⁴¹ involving more than 60 artists, each contributing unique perspectives on the topic of space. Our contribution was a space sculpture, collectively designed in the metaverse and later brought to life as a 1:1 scale physical prototype at the museum. The resulting form, an aggregation of multiple discrete parts assembled in varied configurations, bore the creative imprints of many contributors (Figure 5).OPEN IN VIEWER

To facilitate real-time participation, a custom Unity WebGL application was developed (Figure 6). This expanded software application, minted as a NFT on the Tezos blockchain, enabled an open and easy to use access to decentralized synchronous and asynchronous participation – inviting everyone to co-create with us. At this application, users could place either vertical or horizontal blocks or remove blocks within a shared virtual space, replicating the actual exhibition space. Custom scripting logics were embedded to ensure structural feasibility, such as avoiding overhangs and staying within a certain volume of the real exhibition room at the museum. This mode of placing blocks enabled individual expression mostly through complex configurations of these horizontal or vertical blocks, favoring bottom-up tectonic features rather than top-down figurative expression. Furthermore, a generative algorithm aided the design process, distributing materiality between wood and black-colored blocks and introducing coded variation into the collaborative effort.OPEN IN VIEWER

Furthermore, the project also included a comprehensive “automation and documentation” function, capturing geometric and metadata every time 80 blocks were placed, thus marking a new design cycle. This data, accompanied by a short video, was immediately shared on social media, keeping the global audience engaged in the creative journey. Over a 2-week span, more than 500 individuals participated, creating over 50 unique structures, which we refer to as the Community Structures.

Out of this plethora of Community Structures, one was selected to take physical form for the exhibition at the museum. It was transformed into a full-scale prototype composed of 80 discrete blocks, assembled to a space sculpture of around 3 × 3 × 3 meter weighing approximately 1,000 kg—a physical manifestation of collective creativity and digital media—a Meta Form. In essence, Collaborative Objects materialized as tangible Meta Form, a site-specific project that highlighted digital materiality and community-generated content production within the metaverse.

Following the physical exhibition, the Meta Block Linz project took another exciting turn. The unbuilt Community Structures, the digital artifacts that did not find physical form at the museum, were given their own space to shine in the virtual realm at a dedicated online exhibition in Crypto Voxels, a Web3.0 three-dimensional open sandbox metaverse environment on the web. Our digital exhibition “Open Form - Variation through Code and Participation” at the Digital Francisco Carolinum ⁴² highlighted the collective effort that marked the entire project (Figure 7).OPEN IN VIEWER

In this digital space, this metaverse application, there were no constraints to limit the exhibition to a single structure. Hence, all the community structures were exhibited, allowing visitors to appreciate them as digital models and understand the breadth and diversity of the creative process. Interactive elements were embedded in the exhibition, allowing visitors to browse through different community structures and explore them at a 1:1 scale. Another feature enabled visitors to flip through rendered images of the various structures, providing a comprehensive view of the collective creativity.

The Meta Block Linz project, with its translation to the metaverse, further demonstrates the adaptability of Collaborative Objects. It showcases the transition from physical to virtual spaces, with the exhibition becoming a digital Collaborative Object. Visitors can explore, interact with, and even manipulate the exhibited structures, thereby becoming co-creators in the virtual realm. This project opens new dimensions of community engagement, fostering an open and inclusive approach to art and architectural exhibition.

Reflections on public case studies

The case studies in this article demonstrate the versatility of the Collaborative Objects framework. By integrating networking capabilities into objects, like freeform doodles and customizable blocks, and embedding them in user-friendly, expanded software applications, we create a 3D virtual environment for real-time interaction and co-creation by multiple users. This increase of the objects interactive capacity leads to two main outcomes: as media object, it enables various interaction scenarios, including synchronous and asynchronous settings; as architectural element, it promotes an aggregatory design logic where individual contributions build a collective whole.

In general, these public case studies reveal various opportunities and challenges. A notable aspect is the users' capacity to manifest their design intentions. In the first case, H = N CO Doodle, the intuitive nature of sketching facilitated diverse individual expressions. The second study, H = N BLOCK, offered a more restricted environment, where users expressed ideas by placing blocks within a spatial grid. However, the option to customize blocks with textures allowed for creative exploration. The third study, Meta Block Linz, presented an even more constrained design space. The expanded software in this study ensured feasibility and structural integrity, limiting individual artistic expression. Users could only express their designs through complex block placements, forming intricate spatial patterns. This was evident in the final built community structure, where distinct design intentions like columns and roofs were clearly discernible.

Throughout these studies, our goal has been consistent: to open the design process with an accessible tool that fosters collaborative creation and resonates with a broad audience. In contrast to our previous research conducted within controlled academic environments, these case studies ventured into the dynamic realm of public engagement. While this loss of control might seem as a challenge, especially when a specific output is anticipated and required, it also unlocks the power of community-generated content that represents the vast, raw and un-curated potential of cultural diversity.

To balance control and openness, we fine-tuned and embedded guiding functions within the process, moderately limiting the solution space. This balance is nuanced, as solutions within a constructed framework typically occur within a predefined space, which may seem restrictive in a fully open framework. However, our concept of expandable software allows for individual enhancements, thus broadening the scope of possible solutions.

Another approach to steer these processes involves communication, which, though less intensive than in academic environments, facilitates direct feedback and helps organize structured collective design sessions. It’s important to note that public engagement primarily arises from actively promoting, sharing, and inviting participation, rather than just launching a project and expecting immediate community involvement. Therefore, clear transparency regarding the project and addressing ethical concerns through open communication is essential to initiate and maintain this process.

The expanded role of architects

While the Collaborative Objects framework presents many opportunities and challenges, it also raises important questions about the role of the architect in this new context. Enhancing the interactivity of a design framework to enable user-generated content, both in controlled and conceptually open settings, presents challenges, particularly given the specific requirements of architecture. In this context the research conducted by ZAHA Code plays a crucial role, as they put forth the proposition of a Spatial Technology Stack. This stack incorporates an array of computational design strategies and tools, including platforms that foster a degree of co-creation. Their work marks a crucial shift from user-generated content to professionally generated content. In the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) field, they argue that the Spatial Technology Stack, when combined with professionally curated components, can significantly facilitate participatory practices. This alleviates some of the pressing limitations associated with exclusively Professionally Generated Content (PGC) as they outlined in their section. ⁴³ A balanced approach that enables user or multi-user interaction in certain aspects, while incorporating professional expertise in others, may provide a hybrid solution.

The architect’s role in this new paradigm expands from the lone author to a facilitator and guide. They steer the collective intelligence towards sustainable and buildable architectural solutions, navigate the complexities of construction, and ensure the coherence of the final design. However, it is crucial to remember that while these participatory approaches open up the field of architecture to a wider range of voices, they also bring about new challenges. Architects need to balance the freedom of collective design with the necessities of functionality, regulatory compliance, and aesthetic integrity. The methods for guiding this process vary, from expanding and constraining the design workflow to actively communicating to curate the design process. It is a challenging task, but one that presents exciting possibilities for the future of architecture—a future in which design is a shared, inclusive, and dynamic process, led and facilitated by architects who understand the value of participation and community.

Conclusion

In summary, this article’s research introduces the conceptual framework of Collaborative Objects, applied within custom expanded software applications to enable a collective design process. Diverging from prior academic-focused research, these case studies investigate the possibilities of engaging a diverse public audience in design, embracing both the formal and informal outcomes of a shared process. This research uncovers significant potential in community-generated content, representing an initial step towards untapped possibilities. While further research is necessary to align with the architectural profession’s capabilities, it offers a glimpse into a future shaped by an architecture of collaborative objects.