I got a call this morning from an "Unknown Number" that brought good news. I've been short-listsed for the summer job at Uni and have an interview on Tuesday afternoon
( Read more... )
First and foremost, I do apologise for the incoherent nature of this post. I've got a head full of study and I haven't properly ordered the structure of my writring-sorry about that :P
You're right. I have been talking about both usability and gameplay elements but muddled them altogether. Basically, I have a feeling simple consideration for usability (or a disregard of it) can make or break gameplay for a user.
For example: If a player is expected to perform a certain task then the information they require to get there needs to be available to them. In the case of a puzzle that needs solving, the answer doesn't need to be given to the player but what the system needs to do is clearly state what the riddle is (or even the fact that there is a riddle to begin with) and also show the pieces of the puzzle. If a player is at a point where they can't progress because it isn't clear they need to perform a certain task then they often get frustrated or bored and lose interest. The theory behind Mike Csikszentmihalyi's Flow is that if a balance between the difficulty of tasks and the player's ability to perfrom them is met then they are able to get into "The Zone" and get enjoyment.
It's little shortcomings or interruptions of consistency that often ruin a players flow and can either lead to feelings of anxiety or boredom.
The gameplay elements that you mentioned [and I went on a tangent about] are mainly my ponderings about risk, investment and consequence. The greater the investment the greater risks and consequence are. But when getting to grips with any new system, a user tends to take more risks - play about more - is the consequences are lessened. In PCs many users regularly do things like delete and sort music and playlists but most people would be terrified of playing around with their registry. The fact that people have a "recyling bin" makes them more willing to delete things because they can undo it. In a sense, I was likening the "rewind" in PoP to a recycle bin.
I need to see if any studies have been done but it seems to me that human beings do get an element of enjoyment out of a certain level of risk - It's why gambling is so popular.
I'm probably starting to digress again. What I really need to do is concentrate on one particular factor and develop a hypothesis. Already, Jenova Chen has succeeded in proving the benefits of letting a user define their own difficulty level. If possible, I'll see if I can follow up some work I've been doing this semester and see how "loading" times de-value content.
Spool's work says that users are willing to wait longer if they believe the content is worth it. For example: We want webistes to load instantly but ccan handle a minute or two for video. Currently findings on my unit suggest the inverse is true as well. We made a photo website and found that the slowest loading pics were the least popular. Given this, it might be that inapropriate loading times or loading screens de-value gaming content. "We'd be happy to wait a minute for a level or cinematic to load but only a few seconds for menu screens"
I could be completely barmy but I just have this feeling that games with good usability could make players happier. I definately feel that development should be more user-orientated and less marketing-driven. I know that sales are what pay the bills but I can't help but think about how to deliver a higher quality product.
You're right. I have been talking about both usability and gameplay elements but muddled them altogether. Basically, I have a feeling simple consideration for usability (or a disregard of it) can make or break gameplay for a user.
For example: If a player is expected to perform a certain task then the information they require to get there needs to be available to them. In the case of a puzzle that needs solving, the answer doesn't need to be given to the player but what the system needs to do is clearly state what the riddle is (or even the fact that there is a riddle to begin with) and also show the pieces of the puzzle.
If a player is at a point where they can't progress because it isn't clear they need to perform a certain task then they often get frustrated or bored and lose interest.
The theory behind Mike Csikszentmihalyi's Flow is that if a balance between the difficulty of tasks and the player's ability to perfrom them is met then they are able to get into "The Zone" and get enjoyment.
It's little shortcomings or interruptions of consistency that often ruin a players flow and can either lead to feelings of anxiety or boredom.
The gameplay elements that you mentioned [and I went on a tangent about] are mainly my ponderings about risk, investment and consequence. The greater the investment the greater risks and consequence are. But when getting to grips with any new system, a user tends to take more risks - play about more - is the consequences are lessened.
In PCs many users regularly do things like delete and sort music and playlists but most people would be terrified of playing around with their registry. The fact that people have a "recyling bin" makes them more willing to delete things because they can undo it.
In a sense, I was likening the "rewind" in PoP to a recycle bin.
I need to see if any studies have been done but it seems to me that human beings do get an element of enjoyment out of a certain level of risk - It's why gambling is so popular.
I'm probably starting to digress again. What I really need to do is concentrate on one particular factor and develop a hypothesis. Already, Jenova Chen has succeeded in proving the benefits of letting a user define their own difficulty level. If possible, I'll see if I can follow up some work I've been doing this semester and see how "loading" times de-value content.
Spool's work says that users are willing to wait longer if they believe the content is worth it. For example: We want webistes to load instantly but ccan handle a minute or two for video.
Currently findings on my unit suggest the inverse is true as well. We made a photo website and found that the slowest loading pics were the least popular.
Given this, it might be that inapropriate loading times or loading screens de-value gaming content.
"We'd be happy to wait a minute for a level or cinematic to load but only a few seconds for menu screens"
I could be completely barmy but I just have this feeling that games with good usability could make players happier. I definately feel that development should be more user-orientated and less marketing-driven. I know that sales are what pay the bills but I can't help but think about how to deliver a higher quality product.
Reply
Leave a comment