Task breakdown for week 3

  • build prototype (all together)
  • user feedback on first prototype (Oliver)
  • integrate user feedback on prototype (all together)
Advertisements

List of changes

The user feedback brought us some good ideas not only how to improve our prototype but also already some useful functions which we will implement in our software in the next steps.

List of changes we made to our design subsequent to the user test

  • every frame has a symbol of interactive part of body
  • score in the middle (it´s a cooperative mode)
  • clock, which shows time elapsed

Summary of the observations and user feedback

After finishing the first version of our prototype we showed them to some of our flatmates to test the reactions and get some recommendation of refining the functions and design of our game.

In the following we´ll give you an overview on the encountered problems and suggestions they gave us.

Encountered problems:

  • User need some intuitive introduction to the game
  • movements/gestures sometimes not clearly understandable

Suggestions:

  • Put the games on full screen mode (at least at the beginning) in order to get a good/intuitive interaction setting
  • Animation graphics and introduction before starting the game
  • Putting a countdown between testing/training phase and start of game
  • before starting the game, the user should at least one time succesfully complete a game in the training phase
  • to get the game more attractive, various games should be offered
  • since more and more games are offered over time, it would be useful to show the particular games subsequently; so the user can get familiar with the different modes
  • There should also exist a “skip” button to skip the introduction/training part
  • if the system recognizes inattentiveness of the user, a visual warning-cue can pop up
  • coloured frames (players) should change from time to time
  • on the mental arithmetic game:
  1. 3 x 3 Matrix with hand as cursor
  2. affirmation with a simple forward motion of hand or
  3. through timer which activates a field after certain time without moving the hand from one field (disadvantage –> user has to wait to confirm)

 

Photos of the paper prototype prior to user testing

1. Starting screen: detect bypassing people and animate them to interact through kicking the football

DSCF1076

2. Change from starting screen to several game frames

start

3. Two player game with first task description

first task

4. After description, the actual interactive game frame appears

DSCF1079

5. Further tasks (description) come after a while

further tasks

6. Again, after the description the actual interactive game follows

second task interaction frame

7. Further tasks appear – here also some cognitive demanding tasks

DSCF1082 all frames all frames - changed

Interview – Questions

We used a semistructured interview guideline to combine the most flexible and standardized way of getting useful answers.

These were the questions (in german):

Vorstellung

  • Kurzweiliges Unterhaltungsangebot, nicht die konkrete Anwendung vorstellen
  • Öffentlicher Raum
  • Wartezeitüberbrückung, bzw. Abwechslung im Alltag

Standard-Fragen

  • Wie alt bist du? (Männlich/Weiblich?)
  • Was machst du beruflich?

Wartezeit

  • Wie häufig bist du in einer Situation in der du auf etwas warten musst?
  • Was machst du in solchen Situationen?
  • Wie findest du diese Wartezeit-Aktivitäten?
  • Folgefrage: Hast du Ideen, wie/was man verändern könnte?

Fittness

  • Treibst du Sport? Wenn Ja, Welchen?
  • Wie regelmäßig machst du das?
  • Würdest du dich als fit bzw. gut in Form bezeichnen?

Technik und Spiele

  • Was machst du so in deiner Freizeit?
  • Welche Technik/Unterhaltungselektronik besitzt du?
  • Weiteres:
  • Folgefrage: Wie viel Zeit verwendest du dafür?
  • Spielst du in deiner Freizeit
  • Was spielst du?
  • Spiele welchen Typs spielst du gerne?
  • Spielst du lieber gegeneinander oder miteinander?
  • Spielst du manchmal Geschicklichkeitsspiele?
  • Welche?
  • Wie häufig?
  • Stell dir einen Rummel/Freizeitparkt/Weihnachtsmarkt vor, bei dem Unterhaltungsangebote (Spielautomaten, Entenschießen, Dosen-Werfen, …) angeboten werden und du siehst jemanden spielen – wie findest du das?
  • Hast du in der Vergangenheit solche Angebote angenommen? Welche?
  • Wenn in der Öffentlichkeit (Bahnhof, Kaufhaus, Flughafen, Shopping-Meile, Fußgängerzone) kostenlose Unterhaltungselektronik/-angebote (Spielautomaten, Spielekonsolen, Torwand-Schießen) angeboten würden und du siehst jemanden spielen – wie fändest du das?
  • Hast du in der Vergangenheit solche Angebote angenommen? Welche?
  • Würdest du das Angebot annehmen/es ausprobieren?

Spielen und Wartezeit

  • Wie findest du Spielen als Zeitvertreib?
  • Würdest du Spiele spielen, um Wartezeit zu überbrücken? Wie oft? Ist das abhängig von der Länge der Wartezeit

Interview conclusions – Summary

By interviewing people we could find out new hints on refining our application/game

Multiplayer mode

We concluded that we can attract people better to our game by offering a multiplayer mode. The reason for that is because single players could be ashamed playing the game alone in public spaces and with that being watched by other people.

To make the user feel more comfortable while playing our game we focus on the multiplayer mode where social interaction (playing in a group) goes hand in hand with human-machine interaction.

In the beginning we thought that two players play in parallel or together. Now that could be extended to a competition-mode where various players could play subsequently and the winner is found out at the end (highest score). Also, to increase difficulty and dynamic, the positions of certain tasks/mini games on the screen could be changed in the course of the game. There could also be one cooperative modus where gestures of each player should be best possible adjusted to the other player in order to get the highest score. An example would be, that both players have to make a certain gestures synchronously.

Offering variation

to prevent of getting bored, the game should offer various types of tasks and combinations of them.

Situation

We found out, that our application would fit better to railway stations and airports than to what we first thought to shopping centres. This is based on the fact that people are confronted with a waiting situation in railway stations as well as in airports but not in shopping centres. People tend to distract themselves in shopping centres in other ways like for example have a break in a restaurant or the like.

Period of time

The amount of time, waiting in a place is also crucial to the acceptance of the game. If people have to wait more than 5 minutes it is more probable that they search for some activities to bridge the time. With shorter waiting periods people tend to make other, less demanding activities (like reading emails, Facebook etc). To confront that, gaming time should kept as short as possible (or at least variable).

First encounter

We found out that our entertainment offering is also interesting for non-gamers. Especially in a waiting situation even this group of people could think about trying out our offering.