Evaluating the PX and serious outcomes
5 important questions on Evaluating the PX and serious outcomes
Playtesting(≈ usability testing)
Emphasis on the game: finding bugs / flow breakers, ensuring everything is technically in order (usability). Different from games user research (GUR), which focuses more on the players (user experience). Also known as quality assurance (QA) when the testers are professionals, ‘regular’ playtesting can also be done with (potential) players.
Visualization: biometric storyboards
PXI (Vanden Abeele et al.)
Many of the questionnaires out there focus on engagement. Link between actions performed by the player and the resulting experience is often lost. Functional consequences: directly measurable, result of design and game elements. Psychological consequences: less direct, emotional consequences.
- Higher grades + faster learning
- Never study anything twice
- 100% sure, 100% understanding
Logging, metrics, analytics
Often built into released game. Least invasive: can be controlled during normal gameplay, on your device, in your context. Requires access to the source code of the game, and a clear idea of what it is you want to log. Large quantities of data (can be considered a pro and a con). What (behavior), not why (attitude, emotion).
Examples:
- Locations of objects in the game world
- Interactions (player1 jumped onto player2’s head)
- Certain key events: winning, dying, leveling up
Serious Game Design Assessment (SGDA)
The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:
- A unique study and practice tool
- Never study anything twice again
- Get the grades you hope for
- 100% sure, 100% understanding