Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

228 M. Brown et al. feedback. Thus, we may infer that for the game and devices studied, the game controller was working at 100%. However, the devices differed in the way the user interacted with them in the game. This study shows that the method of user interaction is actually an important aspect of game play, and how one may be able to assess its impact in a simple and direct laboratory evaluation. With experienced facilitators, a study such as this need not take more than two elapsed days. In terms of game controller user experience, several issues were highlighted that appear to be important for all of the controllers evaluated. These include: Sensitivity, Ease of use, Realism, and Comfort. This information represents an initial baseline of game controller user experience, which can be further explored with future research. 12.5 Discussion Much of on-going game play testing that is performed as a regular part of the development process is accomplished using informal techniques. Such informal evaluation could also be complemented by more a structured evaluation of controller support, as outlined in the user study. It is relatively quick and easy to perform and could be especially useful during the early stages of development to benchmark controller support. 12.5.1 Implications and Recommendations Between discussion and the case study presented here, the advantages and disadvantages of a multi-method evaluation have been highlighted. The main advantage shown is the ability to identify the root cause of the issues discovered in any of the evaluations. The main disadvantage is that when performing a range of evaluations simultaneously, compromises such as the use of a laboratory setting must be made. In terms of practical implications, these findings suggest that a multi-component model such as this could be useful within a game development process, where it is important not only to highlight issues, but also to discover their root causes and fix them. However, the compromises that must made in the evaluation process means that focused user experience evaluations may be more appropriate in academic setting, where understanding of the intricacies of an issue is more important. 12.5.2 Future Research In terms of user experience, the case study presented has laid the ground work for exploring how game controller affects user experience. Having discovered some of the key issues in this area, the next step is to explore these issues in more detail with more in-depth data collection and analysis, such as interview and grounded theory.
12 Beyond the Gamepad 229 This user study was deliberately constrained in that it only explored the initial stages of game play for each of the controllers in a single game. However, with extended game play, the players will become more familiar with both the game and the controllers. As a result, longitudinal studies would be required to explore the issues that arise in the context of longer game play durations over an extended period of time. The same techniques applied in this user study could also be applied in the context of longitudinal studies, and the data then analyzed to explore change over time. The data collected in the study consist of both data collected during game play (with logging software) and data collected afterward as subjects complete questionnaires. The data collected during game play in the study were limited to the reports generated by the game controllers. It would be useful to complement this in-game data with biometric and video capture data (with emphasis on facial expressions and body movement). This could perhaps allow better interpretation of the in-game reports and complement the information collected postgame play in the questionnaires. Future studies should seek to elaborate on the effects of functionality on usability and experience. For instance, where possible, to observe the effects on game players in setups where the game controls, controllers, and support devices offer different levels of functionality as defined in this chapter. References Adams E (2005) Bad game designer, no twinkie! VI. Gamasutra designer’s notebook. http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20050603/adams_01.shtml Accessed 23rd August 2008. Albinsson P, Zhai S (2003) High precision touch screen interaction. In: Proceedings of SIGCHI on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, New York, pp. 105–112. Arnold A (1999) Mental effort and evaluation of user interfaces: A questionnaire approach. In: Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interact, ACM, New York, pp. 1003–1007. Atari Stunt Cycle {computer software} (1977). Atari Inc. Bevan N, Mcleod M (1993) Usability measurement in context. Behaviour & Information Technology 13: 132–145. Brewster S, Faraz C, Brown L (2007) Tactile feedback for mobile interactions. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 2007, ACM, New York, pp. 159–162. Brown M (2008) Evaluating computer game usability: Developing heuristics based on user experience. In: Proceedings of IHCI conference 2008, University College Cork, Ireland, pp. 16–21. Card S, English W, Burr BJ (1978) Evaluation of mouse, rate-controlled isometric joystick, step keys, and text keys for text selection on a CRT. Ergonomics 21: 601–613. Colin McRae: Dirt {computer software} (2007) Codemasters. Csikszentmihalyi M (1975) Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey-Bass Publishers, London. Cummings A (2007) The evolution of game controllers and control schemes and their effect on their games. In: Proceedings of 17th Annual University of Southampton Multimedia Systems Conference. Dennerlein J, Martin D, Hasser C (2000) Force-feedback improves performance for steering and combined steering-targeting tasks. In: CHI Letters, ACM, New York, 2 (1), pp. 423–429.
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 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
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: 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 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 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?