• Save
IC3BREAKER
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

IC3BREAKER

on

  • 1,120 views

Presentation of the Processing game with its revised requirements, design, implementation and evaluation.

Presentation of the Processing game with its revised requirements, design, implementation and evaluation.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,120
Views on SlideShare
1,120
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

IC3BREAKER Presentation Transcript

  • 1. IC3BREAKER GAME DESIGN
    Prototype: Presentation & Evaluation
    Arundhati, Yusuf, Patience, Bashir
  • 2. OBJECTIVES
    Revised Requirement specifications
    Designing of the Game
    Prototype Implementation
    Evaluation of the Prototype
    Recommendations for Changes
    Research
  • 3. PURPOSE OF THE GAME
    1. Designing for ‘edu’tainment- teaching aid
    2. Interaction through Tangible Objects
    3. ‘Fun’ along with Functional
    4. Developing logical thinking
  • 4. REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION
    Audience Analysis:
    • Age Group 3-5 years
    • 5. Gender Both
    • 6. Gamer type: Beginner
    • 7. Must understand English
    • 8. Preliminary education (alphabets. numbers)
    • 9. No Computer Literacy required
    • 10. Aiding learning disabled
    Instructional Goals:
    • Counting & logical foresight
    • 11. Spatial thinking
    _____________________________
    Instructional Objectives:
    Constructivist Theory
    behavior to be measured – efficiency/ speed/ logic
    conditions under which the behavior will be measured –
    no preset conditions/barriers
    (3) a minimum level of achievement needed to master the objectives
  • 12. FOUR FUN KEYS
    HARD FUN
    Accomplishment
    PEOPLE FUNSocialize
    • Tangibility of objects
    • 13. Musical aid to engage
    • 14. Auditory Feedback
    • 15. Exploration as well as Foresight required
    SERIOUS FUN
    Creating Value
    EASY FUN
    Imagination
  • 16. Game Design
    Game Concept:
    Game Description: Mathematical trivia to build on spatial as well as logical foresight .
    Genre: Strategy, Puzzle <teaching aid>
    Platform: Table top Interface – fiducial based
    Game Mechanics:
    Core Gameplay:
    Hitting the hammer on the right side/color
    2) Movement of objects across the screen to travel
    3) Placement of right objects to proceed
    Mode of play: Two
    1- Colour – count game
    2- Treasure- trivia game
    Game Flow: Completion of each task
  • 17. FIDUCIAL MOVEMENTS USED
  • 18. Concrete Representation
    HEXAGON FIDUCIAL HAMMER FOR COLOUR DETECTION
  • 19. Abstract Representation
    OBJECTS USED FOR FIDUCIAL MOVEMENTS AND ANSWER DETECTION
  • 20. PROTOTYPING
  • 21. FUNCTIONALITY
    CODING (IMPLEMENTATION)
    CONSTRAINTS
    PROTOTYPING
  • 22. COLOR STRATEGY GAME
    DEMO
  • 23. TREASURE GAME
    DEMO
  • 24. EVALUATION METHODS
    FIELD STUDY
    (Observation)
    USER TESTING (Cognitive Walkthrough)
    EXPERT EVALUATION(Heuristics evaluation)
    http://research.edm.uhasselt.be/~craymaekers/deng-ve/papers/Bernhaupt.pdf
  • 25. HEURISTICS EVALUATION
    Construction of the setup should be comfortable to use/no awkward position
    Adapted to the possibilities of tabletop/ adequate and appropriate
    Gameplay /setup should be supportive
    Player should be able to execute all actions relevant by himself
    Interaction should satisfy the expectations &have game logic
    Should meet the player’s needs in terms of the setup (eg: seating pos)
    Game play should not be hinder the examinability area
    Reach of players should be adapted to the requirements of game play
    Designed to suit/satisfy the preconditions of a tabletop setup
    Player shouldn’t be overburdened to a negative influence point
  • 26. USABILITY TESTING
  • 27.
  • 28. FIELD STUDY
    WORD CLOUD
  • 29. CONCLUSION: RECOMMENDATIONS
  • 30. Regina Bernhaupt, Nicholas Kinard. User Experience Evaluation for Multimodal Interaction in Games
    Based on a classification of user experience evaluation methods for games, this contribution shows how to adopt user experience evaluation for the area of multi-modal interaction in games.
    Christina Köffel , Michael Haller. Heuristics for the Evaluation of Tabletop Games
    Identification of ten heuristics, all of which have been evaluated with experts playing with four different tabletop games. The heuristics contain all facets offered by tabletop games, such as game play and game story, virtual interface, and the special properties of augmented tabletop games.
    RESEARCH
    Cangemi, Sam. 50 Tactile and Visual Perception Games for Under $10: A Guide to Reading Readiness Games for Pre-School Teachers, Head Start Teachers, and First Grade Teachers
    Describes perceptual games for preschool children which makes use of tactile and virtual perception to give opportunities to children to make choices and discriminate, provides reading and readiness experiences.
    Lori L Scarlatos. Tangible Math
    This paper describes how math games with tangible user interfaces can address the need of enhancing the understanding and retention of difficult concepts. It discusses pedagogical principles and an approach to designing and developing game that utilize tangible technologies.
  • 31. Javier Marco, Eva Cerezo, Sandra Baldasarri, EmannuelaMazzone, Janet C Read. User-Oriented Design and Tangible Interaction for Kindergarten Children.(June 2009).
    Describes a tabletop prototype that allows kindergarten children to take the benefits of the new pedagogical possibilities that tangible interaction and tabletop technologies offer to manipulative learning.
    Michael S. Horn, Orit Shaer, Audrey Girouard, Leanne M. Hirshfield Erin TreacySolovey, Jamie Zigelbaum, Robert J.K. Jacob. Putting Tangible User Interfaces in Context: A Unifying Framework for Next Generation HCI.
    Reality Based Interaction proposed as a basis for understanding the role of tangible user interfaces within the broader context of emerging human-computer interaction styles.
    RESEARCH
    GeorgiosChristou, Frank E.Ritter, Robert J.K. Jacob. Knowledge-Based Usability Evaluation For Reality-Based Interaction “Challenges in the Evaluation of Usability and User Experience in Reality-Based Interaction”. (CHI 2009).
    Proposal of a new evaluation method for Post-WIMP interaction styles called the KBUE (Knowledge Based Usability Evaluation) that is based on similar ideas to those that drive cognitive architectures.
    Robert J.K. Jacob, Audrey Glrouard, Leanne M.Hirshfield, Michael S.Horn, Orit Shaer, Erin Tracey Solovey, Jamie Zigelbaum. Reality-Based Interaction: Unifying theNew Generation of Interaction Styles. CHI 2007
    Proposal of the notion of concept that ties (RBI) as a unifying Interaction together a large subset of these emerging interaction styles