Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

138 H. Desurvire and C. Wiberg same games. The issues found for each evaluation were categorized either as an accessibility/approachability issue or as a playability/usability issue. As noted earlier, the terms accessibility and approachability are used interchangeably depending upon which of two communities one inhabits. In academia, the term accessibility would be associated with disabilities of one kind or another and therefore the use of the term approachability. The gaming community is more familiar with the term accessibility. The accessibility issues were then categorized as one or more of the accessibility heuristics. The accessibility issues in the games were compared to see what issues the Heuristic Evaluation found that usability did not, what issues usability testing found that the Heuristic Evaluation did not, and what issues both methods found. In addition, the GAP Heuristic Evaluation and the Usability Testing results were compared to determine the number of accessibility issues identified in each, as well as the overall number of issues found by both methods. Finally, the descriptions of the issues identified by both methods were compared to determine any similarities or differences in the granularity of each method’s description of the issues. 8.4 Results of the Heuristic Evaluation by GAP Heuristic Counts The GAP Heuristic Evaluation identified a higher percentage of accessibility issues as well as more types of accessibility issues than the Usability Testing, while the Usability Testing found more issues relating to playability/usability. For the four games, the Heuristic Evaluation identified 90 issues, 48% (or 43 issues) relating to accessibility and 52% (or 47 issues) relating to playability/usability (see Table 8.1). The Usability Testing found 207 issues in total, 11% (or 22 issues) relating to accessibility and 89% (or 185 issues) that were issues of playability/usability. In addition, the Heuristic Evaluation found more types of accessibility issues than in the usability study. The issues found in the Heuristic Evaluation incorporated ideas across six categories of accessibility heuristics, as compared to four categories in the usability study. The following quotations and screenshots provide examples for the types of accessibility issues found only in the Usability Testing, only in the Heuristic Evaluation, and those shared in both the Usability Testing and the Heuristic Evaluation. 8.4.1 Examples of Approachability Found in Data 8.4.1.1 GAP as Heuristic Evaluation Not Found in Usability Testing The GAP principle of Amount and type of demonstration occurred twice in the Heuristic Evaluation and not at all in the Usability Testing. An example of this Amount and Type of Demonstration was identified in the Shooter game, where the player was unable to win against the Artificial Intelligence (AI) opponent, even when not making any mistakes. The players did not recognize they could get extra
8 User Experience Design for Inexperienced Gamers 139 Principle Table 8.1 Accessibility heuristics identified Amount of practice: player provided with opportunities to practice new skills so as to commit skills to memory Amount and type of demonstration: player given opportunity to model correct behavior and skills Demonstrate actions and reinforcement: player able to demonstrate and practice new actions without severe consequences. Player knows what actions to take Self-efficacy: player able to succeed at playing game after training period, i.e., first level or tutorial Usability testing – 5 – 2 2 7 – 3 Gee: Identity: player identifies with character Co-design: player affects the game world Customization: player able to use preferred style Manipulation and perception: player given increased capabilities/tools to use Information on demand and in time: player has access to answers regarding: the game whenever needed and when first coming across new material Sandbox: player feels rewards and punishments for game play action were appropriate – 9 Information presented on demand and in time, system thinking: actions and skills learned were important for playing the game not just for a single event in the game 1 – Scaffolding-failure prevention: player provided 1 – with help to meet goals of game Build on prior knowledge: games similar to others in same genre allowing new skills to be built on previous knowledge HEP and PLAY: player able to succeed at game’s goals and found their expectations fulfilled Entertainment and coolness: player was entertained and enjoyed playing the game Self-mastery: player able to master game using skills and tools provided – – 17 12 – – – – Total 22 43 Heuristic evaluation points by doing combination moves, required in order to win, as these were not obvious from playing the game. Having AI Non-Player Characters doing these moves would demonstrate to the player that this is both possible and an option. Furthermore, demonstrating the controller buttons and thumbsticks using a controller image and an increased health meter would demonstrate exactly how to do this. Usability Testing did not find this GAP principle.
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:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Chapter 4 Assessing the Core Elemen
Page 79 and 80:
4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101:
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 116 and 117:
86 E. Brown Game developers have be
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 167: 8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
Page 177: 8 User Experience Design for Inexpe
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 213: 10 Evaluating User Experience Facto
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?