Evaluating User Experience in Games: Concepts and Methods - Lirmm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

54 E.H. Calvillo-Gámez et al. results in qualitative data. We call this one-to-one relationship between player and video-game, the gaming experience. The section is divided as follows: First, we present an overview of the qualitative method that we used. Second, we present our analysis to formulate the grounded theory. Last, we present an overview of the theory. 4.4.1 A Grounded Theory Approach The question driving this analysis is what are the necessary conditions to procure a positive gaming experience? The nature of the question suggests that the route to finding the answer should be bounded by qualitative methodologies (Green and Thorogood 2004). In particular, we used Grounded Theory (Strauss and Corbin 1998) to propose a theory for the gaming experience. The interest is to grasp a better understanding of the process of the experience that emerges from the data itself. The method to develop Grounded Theory is composed of a series of coding procedures. First, the data are openly coded, in which quotes or words are selected and labelled; this process produces a set of labels, or codes, which can be related to each other producing a set of meta-codes or axial codes. These axial codes are the axis on which the forming theory stands. This process is done iteratively until no new codes emerge from the data. The codes are then selectively coded where each category is fully developed in order to produce the theory. The data that formulate the theory are different quotations presented throughout the discussion. The data used for this analysis are game reviews. Game reviews are aimed at telling the general player the reasons that certain games should be played. They do not tell the ending of the game, but just try to describe what it is like to be playing. Game reviews, in some sense, convey the experience of playing video-games. Four over-the-counter magazines from the month of August 2006 and three websites, all of them with a focus on video-games, were used as source data; see Table 4.1 for details of the sources. Besides game reviews, interviews and articles within the magazines were also used on a smaller scale. The fact that the four magazines are from the same month and year should not hinder the results of the study. One reason is that Grounded Theory is robust enough to overcome the variances that are innate to commercial influences. The second reason is that the interest is in the common parts of the experience. The experience of playing the same video-game described by different magazines should still have the same common elements. Also, the use of websites adds some variance to the types of games reviewed, as well as the fact that two magazines specialised in console games and two in PC games. Since it has been suggested that using only magazines could bias the results of the study, five interviews were conducted once the Grounded Theory study was finished. One game designer, two game reviewers and two players took part in this process. The interviews were semi-structured, transcribed and then analysed. The interviews asked the participants to explain what they focus on while
4 Assessing the Core Elements of the Gaming Experience 55 Table 4.1 Sources of data for the qualitative study. The abbreviation within brackets is how that source is referred within the document. Magazines are quoted, providing the page number from where the quotation was taken; websites are quoted, providing the name of the game from where the quotation was taken, as it is more manageable than providing the complete URL Source Material PC-Gamer. 64, August 2006 – {PCG} 24 Reviews and 2 articles PlayStation 2 Official magazine, 75, August 2006 – {PSO} 11 Interviews and 1 editorial Edge. 165 August 2006 – {Edge} 31 Reviews, 3 interviews and 7 articles PC-Zone. 171, August 2006 – {PCZ} 20 Reviews and 3 articles GameSpot – {GS} http://www.gamespot.com 3Reviewsandratingsystem GameFaqs – {GF} http://www.gamefaqs.com 3Reviews ReviewsGameSpy – {GP} http://www.gamespy.com 3Reviewsandratingsystem Designer 1 {d1} Interview Reviewer 1{r1} Interview Reviewer 2 {r2} Interview Player 1 {p1} Interview Player 2 {p2} Interview playing/designing/reviewing a video-game, what makes a game enjoyable and what factors made them stay playing a game. As the interviews were semi-structured, the questions that followed aimed at deepening the answers that the participants gave to the previous questions. The objective of this study is to find the core elements of the process of the experience. Core elements are those necessary but not sufficient to ensure a positive experience; they can also be understood as hygienic factors (Herzberg 1968). Herzberg argues that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but no satisfaction; satisfaction and dissatisfaction are then two different concepts that are not necessarily related to each other. He argues that motivator factors are those that lead to satisfaction, and the lack of hygienic factors lead to dissatisfaction. With a similar concept in mind, this study looks for those elements that if missing they would mar the experience, but that their presence would not necessarily imply an optimal experience. 4.4.2 Defining the Core Elements The Core Elements of the Gaming Experience (CEGE) incorporate the video-game itself and the interaction between it and the user, which we labelled “puppetry”; a full discussion of the selection of this label can be found elsewhere (Calvillo-Gámez and Cairns 2008).
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 77 and 78: Chapter 4 Assessing the Core Elemen
Page 79 and 80: 4 Assessing the Core Elements of th
Page 83: 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 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 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:
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?