Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

154 K. Poels et al. If we apply this reasoning to digital gaming as one particular kind of perceptual stimulation, we could assume that for habitual players of digital games, real-world perceptions, cognitions, and actions will be partly structured by their repeated exposure to the game environment. This means, habitual players use their knowledge from the game environment when perceiving and interpreting real-life environmental stimuli. We expect that long-term postgame experiences can be established through this process. These postgame experiences can relate to all kinds of environmental stimuli, such as objects, situations, sounds, and words. Moreover, their impact can presumably affect various affective, cognitive, and behavioral processes. Examples could be seen in the context of objects in the real world that are associated with objects from the game world, sounds or songs heard in real life that trigger lively memories of a game world, and language and expressions used in the game world that show up in everyday vocabulary. We expect the concrete manifestation of these long-term postgame experiences to depend on the type of game or game genre one is repeatedly engaging in. This means, frequent players of First Person Shooter games will probably experience different things, make other associations, and use other game-related slang, compared to habitual players of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games (MMORPGs). To the best of our knowledge, there has not yet any research been carried out to investigate the existence and conditions of these specific kinds of postgame experiences. In this chapter, we present a focus group study that was specifically designed to explore concrete manifestations of long-term postgame experiences. 9.3 Focus Group Explorations The focus group method is a qualitative research tool that is frequently used in social sciences to explore people’s meanings, ways of understanding, and experiences of a complex phenomenon (Lunt and Livingstone 1996). Since there is not yet much documented about postgame experiences, the current focus group studies aimed at exploring the nature, the diversity, and the occurrence of particular postgame experiences. Given various individual differences with respect to play styles or motivations to play games (Yee 2006, Bartle 1996), we further wanted to provide in-depth, contextual, and motivational insights into the specific experiences of different types of gamers. We present two focus group studies: one directed at short-term experiences and the other probing long-term postgame experiences. 9.3.1 Exploring Short-Term Postgame Experiences We defined short-term postgame experiences as experiences that occur immediately and directly related to a specific game session. The main objective of this study was to explore firsthand verbalizations of how gamers feel or what they experience directly after they stopped gaming.
9 Digital Games, the Aftermath 155 9.3.1.1 Participants and Procedure We organized six focus groups with gamers. The composition of the focus groups differed according to several variables such as game frequency, age, and occupational status. Two focus groups (FG1 and FG2) included infrequent gamers (i.e., people who game at least once a month), two focus groups (FG3 and FG4) consisted of frequent gamers (i.e., people who game at least once a week), and two focus groups (FG5 and FG6) were a mix of frequent and infrequent gamers. Participants’ ages ranged from 19 to 37 years. In FG1, participants were five undergraduate students of which two were female. FG2 consisted of three male participants, also undergraduates. FG3 had four male participants and was a mix of undergraduate and graduate students. FG4 had four participants; these were people over 30 years of age, all with a full-time job. Participants from FG5 were four working people in their late twenties/early thirties, two of them were female. All three participants from FG6 were female undergraduate students. The focus groups were led by a moderator and an assistant moderator. Each focus group began with an introductory round in which the moderator and the assistant moderator presented themselves and gave a brief description of the main goal of the focus group. More concretely, they explained that the focus group was about digital games and player experience. Participants were further told that they could freely talk about how they experience digital gaming. Then, participants presented themselves, giving their name, game frequency, and the type of games they usually played. The actual focus group discussion was clustered around three core questions by means of a semi-structured questionnaire. The three core questions were fixed but additional questions could be posed, probing for clarification or more in-depth insights. The three core questions were (1) On what occasions do you typically start gaming? (probing both motivations and opportunities for game play), (2) what do you experience or feel while gaming? (i.e., in-game experiences), and (3) what do you experience or how do you feel after gaming? (i.e., postgame experiences). In this chapter, we only discuss the third question about postgame experiences. For a detailed description of the remainder of this focus group study, we refer to Poels et al. (2007). Each focus group took about 90 min in total and approximately one-third of the discussion time was devoted to the question concerning postgame experiences. Participants were rewarded 10 C for their participation. All focus group interviews were recorded and transcribed. Citations we report in the results section are all translated from Dutch. 9.3.1.2 Results Given the exploratory nature of this focus group study and the newness of the topic, we did not employ a formal coding scheme to analyze our results. This result section is structured according to the different experiences that we proposed in the theoretical part of this chapter.
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 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134: 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 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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?