Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

180 M. Lankes et al. Comparing still and animated scenario, no significant difference could be found. The animated scenario is thus not contributing to a positive user experience in the setting. The employment of animation in stimuli did not have the anticipated positive effect on UX. (H3) The perceived user experience will be higher for consonant settings than for settings with dissonant stimuli. Overall, the perceived user experience is rated different for consonant and dissonant settings. The ANOVA performed showed significant differences for consonant and dissonant settings (F = 13.6, p < 0.000). Looking into the differences in more detail, a second ANOVA showed that all scenarios were rated significantly different in terms of hedonic quality (HQ) (F = 5.25, p < 0.000), as well as for attractiveness (F = 9.16, p < 0.000) and pragmatic quality (F = 14.23, p < 0.000). Figure 10.2 shows these results in more detail: showing higher ratings for consonant scenarios (upper right) and lower ratings for dissonant scenarios (lower left). The interactive scenario is rated best in both conditions. The type of the presentation medium is heavily influencing the overall user experience in which an emotional stimulus is shown (in this case, a facial expressions of an ECA). For research on emotional aspects in psychology, it can be concluded that the context description can have a significant influence on how an emotion is perceived, as well as the scenario the stimuli are presented in. For the games industry, the user experience in terms of facial expression of ECAs can be enhanced by providing consonant stimuli (consonant facial expression and description) and allowing direct interaction with the ECA (not only still or animated sequences). 10.5 Conclusions and Future Work Investigating user experience and possible influences on user experience is a difficult task. We were interested in the relationship between emotions and perception of emotions and how the user experience for such a setting would be. To investigate this aspect, we (had to) carefully construct(ed) the stimuli material (emotion descriptions, ECAs showing these emotions) and to control any unwanted influences balanced various influencing factors (female/male ECA, etc.). The experiment showed that people do perceive ECAs that display emotion differently depending on the context description (emotion-eliciting situation) given. If the presented material is consonant, the overall user experience is higher, if the presented material is dissonant, the user experience is lower (even negative). User experience can thus be influenced (and can be designed positively in a game) giving congruent information in form of (written) scenario and presented emotions of the ECA. Second, user experience is not higher for semi-animated facial expressions. In general, user
10 Evaluating User Experience Factors Using Experiments 181 experience is higher for interactive settings. The implications of this first results show that investment in small animations (for improving still images presenting emotions) is not improving the user experience, except the user is allowed to interact with the ECA. Creators in the games domain are interested in establishing an entertaining and intense gaming experience for their audience. A lot of production time is spent on creating realistic characters in detailed environments. Most situational aspects are defined without any theoretical foundation by focusing on artistic procedures. The work should show the necessity to relate to character-based communication channels (such as facial expression) with the current event the player confronts. From the methodological perspective on how to evaluate user experience in games, we can summarize that experiments are one way to better understand the more general aspects of UX in games. As user experience is consisting of a wide variety of factors, it is difficult to find an experimental setup limiting the possible influencing experimental components. A careful experimental setup (including many prestudies) is thus a long process, and results for influencing factors on user experience are not immediately available. In general, experiments are a necessary means to understand the scientific basics of user experience, for an industrial context this kind of methodology might not be applicable. On a long-term basis, we see this kind of experiments as a necessary means to lay the foundations for understanding user experience. References Bailenson JN (2008) Avatars. http://www.stanford.edu/∼bailenso/papers/avatars.pdf. Accessed 22 May 2008. Bartneck C (2000) Affective expressions of machines. Master’s Thesis, Stan Ackerman Institute – III, Eindhoven, Netherlands. Bates J (1994) The role of emotion in believable agents. Communications of the ACM 37(7): 122–125. Bernhaupt R, Boldt A, Mirlacher T et al. (2007) Using emotion in games: Emotional flowers. In: Proceedings of ACE 2007, ACM, New York, pp. 41–48. Bernhaupt R, Ijsselsteijn W, Mueller F, Tscheligi M, Wixon D (2008) Evaluating user experiences in games. In: Proceedings of CHI 2008, ACM, New York, pp.3905–3908. Bernhaupt R, Palanque P, Winkler M, Navarre D (2007) Model-based evaluation: A new way to support usability evaluation of multimodal interactive applications. In: Law E et al. (eds) Maturing Usability: Quality in Software, Interaction and Value. Springer, London, pp. 95–127. Bernhaupt R, Sloo D, Migos C, Darnell M (2008) Towards new forms of iTV user experience. Workshop During EuroiTV 2008, 2nd July 2008, Adjunct Proceedings of EuroiTV 2008. Bickmore T, Cassell J (2001) Relational agents: A model and implementation of building user trust. In: Proceedings of CHI 2001, ACM Press, New York. Branco P (2003) Emotional interaction. In: Proceedings of CHI 2003, ACM, New York, pp. 676–677. Cassell J (2008) Justin cassell: Research. http://www.soc.northwestern.edu/justine/jc_research.htm. Accessed 8 May 2008. Cornelius RR (1996) The Science of Emotion: Research and Tradition in the Psychology of Emotions. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
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:
Page 135:
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 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
120 G. McAllister and G.R. White 7.
Page 152 and 153:
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 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 209: 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?