Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

86 E. Brown Game developers have been creating enjoyable experiences since the early days of video game development and games like PONG (Atari 1972). The industry has evolved, games have become more complex, team sizes have expanded, and so have the numbers of people playing games. During this time, the industry has taken on board user experience evaluation tools, particularly those that provide insight into usability flaws in a game. The most powerful tools offer insight not just into the user experience but into the exact elements influencing the experience. Although these usability tools are being used, the evaluation of experience in relation to fun is still being done, a majority of the time, without formal tools. Watching players during evaluations and using expertise to gauge the impact of any game elements are still the core methods used. These are successful methods, but if we look at the impact of usability tools, they have been able to support the creation of great games. So, what more can we do to help create even more enjoyable game experiences? 5.5 Conclusion There is a great deal of experience evaluation that takes place throughout game development. The majority of evaluation is expert based and relies on the knowledge of the designers involved. There are also tools that provide extremely detailed and actionable information about usability. However, there is a great deal of potential to develop new tools and integrate them into the process. To do this, there needs to be more active discussion between academic research and the industry. This chapter tries to bridge that gap and challenges us to explore how new methods and tools can fit into the working life of games development. References Atari(1972) PONG, Arcade Machine. Björk S, Holopainen J (2005) Patterns in Game Design. Charles River Media, Hingham, MA. Chapman J (2005) Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy. Earthscan, London. Desurvire H, Caplan M, Toth JA (2004) Using heuristics to evaluate the playability of games. CHI 2004 Extended Abstracts. Electronic Arts (EA) (2004) SimCity, PC. Federoff M (2002) Heurisitcs and usability guidelines for the creation and evaluation of FUN in video games. Thesis at the University Graduate School of Indiana University, December 2002 (http://melissafederoff.com/heuristics_usability_games.pdf). Henderson J(2006) The paper chase: Saving money via paper prototyping. http:// www.gamasutra.com/features/20060508/henderson_01.shtml. Hight J, Novak J (2008) Games Development Essentials: Game Project Management. Thomson Delmar Learning, Clifton Park, NY. International Game Developers Association (2005). Game developer demographics: An exploration of workforce diversity. http://www.igda.org/diversity/report.php.
5 The Life and Tools of a Games Designer 87 Jennett C, Cox AL, Cairns P, Dhoparee S, Epps A, Tijs T, Walton A (2008) Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 66(9): 641–661. Kim JH, Gunn DV, Schuh E, Phillips BC, Pagulayan RJ (2008) Tracking real-time user experience (TRUE): A comprehensive instrumentation solution for complex systems. CHI Proceedings 2008, pp. 443–451. Mandryk RL, Atkins MS (2007) A fuzzy approach for continuously modeling emotion during interaction with play technologies. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65(4): 329–334. Nokia C (2006) Mobile game playability heuristics version 1.0. http://www.forum.nokia.com/ info/sw.nokia.com/id/5ed5c7a3-73f3-48ab-8e1e-631286fd26bf/Mobile_Game_Playability_ Heuristics_v1_0_en.pdf.html?language=japanese. Norman DA (2002) Emotion and design: Attractive things work better. Interactions Magazine ix(4): 36–42. Pruitt J, Adlin T (2006). The persona lifecycle: Keeping people in mind throughout product design. The Morgan Kaufmann Series in Interactive Technologies. Snyder C (2003) Paper prototyping: The Fast and Easy Way to Design and Refine User Interfaces. Morgan Kaufman Publishers, San Francisco, CA. Sony Computer Entertainment Europe (SCEE) (2004). SingStar. PlayStation 2. Sweester P, Wyeth P (2005) GameFlow: A model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. ACM Computers in Entertainment 3(3): 1–24.
Page 2 and 3:
Human-Computer Interaction Series E
Page 4 and 5:
Regina Bernhaupt Editor Evaluating
Page 6:
For Philippe
Page 9 and 10:
viii Foreword Chapter 3, Presence I
Page 11 and 12:
x Foreword personality which evolve
Page 14 and 15:
Contents Part I Introduction to Eva
Page 16 and 17:
Contributors Regina Bernhaupt IRIT,
Page 18:
Contributors xvii Manfred Tscheligi
Page 21 and 22:
xx About the Authors Emily Brown is
Page 23 and 24:
xxii About the Authors a post-docto
Page 25 and 26:
xxiv About the Authors Christina Ko
Page 27 and 28:
xxvi About the Authors MIT Media La
Page 29:
xxviii About the Authors Theft Auto
Page 33 and 34:
Chapter 1 User Experience Evaluatio
Page 35 and 36:
1 User Experience Evaluation in Ent
Page 37:
1 User Experience Evaluation in Ent
Page 41 and 42:
Chapter 2 Enabling Social Play: A F
Page 43 and 44:
2 Enabling Social Play 13 It is als
Page 45 and 46:
2 Enabling Social Play 15 observati
Page 47 and 48:
2 Enabling Social Play 17 for playe
Page 49 and 50:
2 Enabling Social Play 19 to provid
Page 51 and 52:
2 Enabling Social Play 21 Colwell J
Page 53 and 54:
Chapter 3 Presence, Involvement, an
Page 55 and 56:
3 Presence, Involvement, and Flow i
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66: 3 Presence, Involvement, and Flow i
Page 77 and 78: Chapter 4 Assessing the Core Elemen
Page 79 and 80: 4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 101: 4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 104 and 105: 74 E. Brown (2005). Björk and Holo
Page 106 and 107: 76 E. Brown 5.2.3 How We Work Toget
Page 108 and 109: 78 E. Brown could be simulated on p
Page 110 and 111: 80 E. Brown 5.3.2 Pre-production At
Page 112 and 113: 82 E. Brown from the code. This is
Page 114 and 115: 84 E. Brown At this point, there is
Page 119 and 120: Chapter 6 Investigating Experiences
Page 121 and 122: 6 Investigating Experiences and Att
Page 135: 6 Investigating Experiences and Att
Page 138 and 139: 108 G. McAllister and G.R. White Th
Page 140 and 141: 110 G. McAllister and G.R. White su
Page 142 and 143: 112 G. McAllister and G.R. White of
Page 144 and 145: 114 G. McAllister and G.R. White te
Page 146 and 147: 116 G. McAllister and G.R. White qu
Page 150 and 151: 120 G. McAllister and G.R. White 7.
Page 154 and 155: 124 G. McAllister and G.R. White an
Page 156 and 157: 126 G. McAllister and G.R. White Al
Page 158 and 159: 128 G. McAllister and G.R. White Ne
Page 161 and 162: Chapter 8 User Experience Design fo
Page 163 and 164: 8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
Page 165 and 166: 8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
Page 167 and 168:
8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177:
Page 180 and 181:
150 K. Poels et al. in games. This
Page 182 and 183:
152 K. Poels et al. their game char
Page 184 and 185:
154 K. Poels et al. If we apply thi
Page 186 and 187:
156 K. Poels et al. Participants ge
Page 188 and 189:
158 K. Poels et al. 9.3.2 Exploring
Page 190 and 191:
160 K. Poels et al. If our train is
Page 192 and 193:
162 K. Poels et al. would be intere
Page 195 and 196:
Chapter 10 Evaluating User Experien
Page 197 and 198:
10 Evaluating User Experience Facto
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213:
Page 217 and 218:
Chapter 11 Evaluating Exertion Game
Page 219 and 220:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 189 pr
Page 221 and 222:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 191 th
Page 223 and 224:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 193 to
Page 225 and 226:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 195 co
Page 227 and 228:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 197 11
Page 229 and 230:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 199 an
Page 231 and 232:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 201 11
Page 233 and 234:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 203 to
Page 235 and 236:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 205 Ac
Page 237:
11 Evaluating Exertion Games 207 Pa
Page 240 and 241:
210 M. Brown et al. challenges that
Page 242 and 243:
212 M. Brown et al. was also happen
Page 244 and 245:
214 M. Brown et al. Another importa
Page 246 and 247:
216 M. Brown et al. Albinsson and Z
Page 248 and 249:
218 M. Brown et al. asked to report
Page 250 and 251:
220 M. Brown et al. Table 12.2 Mean
Page 252 and 253:
222 M. Brown et al. Table 12.7 Cont
Page 254 and 255:
224 M. Brown et al. Table 12.9 Cont
Page 256 and 257:
226 M. Brown et al. Count 450 400 3
Page 258 and 259:
228 M. Brown et al. feedback. Thus,
Page 260 and 261:
230 M. Brown et al. Desurvivre H, C
Page 263 and 264:
Chapter 13 Using Heuristics to Eval
Page 265 and 266:
13 Using Heuristics to Evaluate the
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Index A Advanced interaction games,
show all

Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?