Isbister, K., & Schaffer, N. (2008). Game Usability. New York: Morgan Kaufman. Chapters 6 – 9
Chapter 6
Heuristic Evaluation of Games
Noah Shaffer
Shaffer talks about heuristics as an alternative to user testing; it’s the “discount method” (79). This is good for game studios with little time and money.
Heuristic evaluation is basically guideline-based methods, or shortcuts, for usability evaluation. This method is not so useful for academics, but very useful for getting feedback on specific interfaces.
Nielsen’s 10 Heuristics are mentioned (80) that include good categories but don’t help game developers find the problems with usability. Nielsen’s heuristics are also not specifically about games. A number of other heuristic list developers are mentioned who have heuristics that suffer mostly from lack of specificity. Shaffer himself created a list of heuristics for evaluation of game usability that included points like, “use natural control mappings,” and “don’t make it easy for players to get stuck or lost” (82). But even his list cannot be applied to all games.
Heuristics help when they are implemented early and often, to avoid having to redesign or recode later (after finding out that the game isn’t usable). However, it’s good to keep in mind that, even with heuristics, it’s impossible to anticipate all user problems (there is still room for user testing!).
How to do heuristic evaluation?
1. Three to five evaluators (at least one usability expert) look for violations of the heuristics in the game INDIVIDUALLY.
2. They combine their findings into a master list.
3. They organize the problems in order of severity, and give recommendations.
Remember: don’t confuse heuristics with usability testing or with standards. They are simply guidelines for evaluation, not rules for design, and they don’t represent the reactions of all players.
—
Chapter 7
Usability and Playability Expert Evaluation
Sauli Laitinen
Expert evaluators look for problems, create reports, and suggest solutions. Their work is meant to aid game developers. In expert evaluation, this is what’s being evaluated:
-Game Usability – is the game easy to learn? does it support user interactions?
-Gamplay – the user interface is ignored and the game itself is focused on. The goal is to remove unintended challenges, and increase fun.
-Platform and game type – the platform should support the gameplay.
All three of the above aspects are related and need evaluating.
How evaluation is done:
-Two or three evaluators review the game, for different experts find different problems. More than three experts is too many.
-Double experts are experts in both usability and gaming.
-Evaluators should be external, not the same people as the designers.
When to evaluate:
-Early, with design documents and paper prototypes. This allows evaluation of basic usability and gameplay.
-Working prototypes, you can evaluate parts of the game independently.
-Nearly complete game, study all the aspect of the game – it’s bad to wait until this point to evaluate because it takes time to fix problems.
-The expert evaluation should be done BEFORE playtesting sessions.
-The process of evaluation should be iterative.
The process:
-Plan the work: developers introduce the game to evaluators and inform them about bugs, missing pieces, or places to pay attention to.
-Evaluators review the game, maybe with cheats/short cuts to reduce time.
-Evaluators create a list of problems and possible solutions. This usually takes one-three days.
-Evaluators create a report of the findings, in order of severity, rating, description, solution, etc. And often with a summary of key findings.
-Evaluators report the finds to developers. The whole process takes one – one and a half weeks.
Heuristics:
Here are two long lists of heuristics.
Usability Heuristics (103 – 105):
-consistency – no unnecessary exceptions
-provide feedback – after each action taken within the game
-easy to use/understand terminology
-minimize player’s memory load -(this is like gee’s on-demand, just-in-time information)
-avoid errors- prevent the player from making mistakes
-provide help – learning how to play
-simple and clear menus
-avoid mixing user interface and game interface
-screen layout is efficient and visually pleasing
-audiovisuals support the game
-game controls are flexible and convinient – and players can configure their own controls
Gameplay Heuristics (106 – 108):
(This list uses abbreviated language)
-clear goals provided
-player sees the progress in the game
-rewards are meaningful
-player is in control
-balance of challenge, strategy and pace
-encouraging first impression
-story supports gameplay
-no repetitive or boring tasks
-game supports different playing styles
-the game progresses (not stagnate)
-the game is consistent
-use of orthogonal unit differentiation – different objects have different purposes
-player doesn’t lose hard-won possessions
-players can express themselves
—
Chapter 8
Interview with Eric Schaffer, Ph.D., CEO of Human Factors International
Interviewer: Noah Schaffer
This interview focuses on usability standards.
Usability standards increase the speed and cost of development about 10%. They are:
design principles: like “use short words, write in the active voice”
design standards: so the game meets players’ expectations
methodological standards: systematic processes to help usability professional, not the design of the game
Design standards should be reusable templates or examples. This includes details like colors, fonts, and positioning.
The creation of these standards is collaborative, made by a committee. This committee designs example screens, makes a game with those screens, evaluates the game, and iterates to create the standards. Finally, the usability committee enforces these standards on the designers.
—
Chapter 9
The Science Behind the Art of Game Design
Chris Swain
This chapter lists 8 metric-based game design techniques. Metrics help the game designer’s revision process, for they are something that can be measured, adding the scientific method to game design.
Techniques:
1. Feature Design: Metacritic
Metacritic is a website the compiles reviews on games from many sources into one score. High scoring games on metacritic usually have 20+ hours of content, choice for the player, replayability, quality audiovisual, easy controls, a storyline, interactive world (AI), and a responsive camera. Low scoring games are not unique, too linear, and too difficult. These are important points, but the author cautions “don’t be a slave to metracritic data” and “know the rules so you can break them” (124).
2. Feature Design: Morphological Analysis = Analytical Creation
(from Michael Michalko’s Thinkertoys)
An idea box is when you define a set of parameters for the topic, list as many elements under each parameter as possible, and then select and combine listed parameters. Here, examples are given for character design (125), parameters being head, eyes, ears, etc., and elements being round, egg-shaped, hero chin, etc. This process helps generate a ton of ideas quickly, provides an analytical approach to creativity, and is repeatable.
3. Mechanics Design: Quantifying Emotions
Nicole Lazzaro defines four types of emotion in player experience:
fiero (personal triumph)- ex. puzzles
curiosity – ex. role-playing
amusement – ex. cooperation
relaxation/excitement – ex. repetition/rhythm
Games that evoke three or more of these emotions do better in the marketplace. These games offer more ways for the player to feel.
4. Level Design: Heat Maps
A heat map shows where events happen in the game level, like where a player dies. Heat maps are more convincing than written reports, because
they are so precise and are unbiased analyses.
5. Level Design: “Time Spent” Reports
Here the in-game behavior of playtesters is tracked by instrumentation software. The software looks at relationships of time spent doing different activities in the level. Playtester perception may be skewed by cool features or by a frustrating event. Designer perception can be skewed by their own infatuation with their design. Numbers are useful to help negotiate when team members have different opinions.
“One measurement is worth fifty expert opinions” Howard Sutherland (133).
6. Level Design: Track Engagement with Bio-sensors
Sensors can measure brain waves, temperature, breath, heart rate, physical motion, and eye movement. They can track adrenaline, thought, and positive emotions. This gains more precise data than simply asking players. Studies have shown that a balance of high and low engagement (in 5 minute intervals) creates player satisfaction (134-135).
7. Control Design: Simplifying Controls
A good control scheme is integral to a game’s design. This includes both hardware and on-screen controls. The rule of thumb is “as few controls as possible.” Activision developed a system called Control Dimensionality that scores games based on their control schemes. A game with really simple controls has a lower score. Activision rates its own games against games in the same genre to see if the control schemes are similar.
8. Experience Design: Playcentric Design
The player experience should be the central focus when designing a game. So playtesters should be integrated in the design process form the very beginning. Applying metrics to the playtest sessions can help make informed creative decisions.
—
Article of Choice:
Resetting Accessibility in Games
by Dennis Scimeca
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6239/resetting_accessibility_in_games.php
This article talks about improving usability in games for disabled populations, and how that actually improves games for everyone. Difficult user interfaces are most often deal-breakers, especially for newer gamers (and there are more new gamers than experts).
Some control schemes are difficult for motion impaired users who can’t hold down two buttons at a time (they are also difficult for non-gamers in general). However, a control scheme that requires single keystrokes, not only helps disabled gamers, but lets everyone remember the control scheme easier.
The article continues to talk about the importance of pacing, scaffolding users into harder gameplay, and allowing them to pause or slow down the game. Valve’s Left for Dead was acclaimed by the disabled gaming community for many features, including its pause button. Using drills to practice within the game is also beneficial for all players – practicing attacks, for example, could be an early level in the game.
An accessable game company in MA explained that they talk to parents, therapists, and teachers before they even begin designing the game. They need to hit their mark before they start designing because backtracking is very expensive, and it’s difficult to simplify a complex game.
The take-home point is that designing games for disables populations, older gamers, younger gamers, and newer gamers, can actually benefit many hardcore gamers as well.
Read Full Post »
Katya's Educational Technology Experience 