Jonathan Barone-University of Washington
20
Dollars as Points Marrying Real and In-Game Progress Jonathan Barone Center for Game Science University of Washington
-
Upload
seriousgamesassoc -
Category
Education
-
view
766 -
download
0
description
“Dollars as Points: Marrying Real and In-Game Progress” Serious game creators want good play to create measurable real-world benefit. Players want games to provide positive feedback for good play. Learn strategies to satisfy both of these requirements in a harmonious, efficient way, and how to identify warning signs that your game may be missing the mark.
Transcript of Jonathan Barone-University of Washington
- 1. Dollars as Points Marrying Real and In-Game Progress Jonathan Barone Center for Game Science University of Washington
- 2. What stakeholders want: Users playing because they enjoy the game Measurable benefit
- 3. Reality: Users playing because they have to ???
- 4. About CGS We make scientific discovery and math education games then use those games for research. Ultimate goal: expert-level knowledge from games centerforgamescience.org Foldit Treefrog Treasure
- 5. Intro: DNA
- 6. Overview What reality-anchored scoring systems can do for serious games How to design and implement such a system
- 7. Whats in a score? Super Hexagon score formula: t Civilization 4 score formula:
- 8. Serious games and score How do serious games use score? Engagement Performance Evaluation
- 9. Serious games and score How do serious games use score? Engagement AND performance evaluation
- 10. Inaccurate/arbitrary scoring You scored 6,230 points! B - No. Okay. Days? Days? Days? Weeks? Days? So, weeks or months later:
- 11. Well-correlated scoring Instant (Little later) Work
- 12. Designing a scoring system Is a score that reflects real metrics feasible and practical? How much flexibility do we have? Prototype/iterate. Does it work for the players? Does it work for the partners?
- 13. Should we bother? 66% 33% yep
- 14. Acceptable abstraction Scientists Players 100% 66% B-
- 15. Prototype, iterate You know the drill. One catveat: involve a domain expert from the start.
- 16. Does it work for players? Qualitative, non-leading questions: Do they understand the concepts? Is it motivating them? A/B test if possible Hopefully:
- 17. Does it work for partners? Quantitative, statistically significant data: Compare to control group. Show transfer to real life. Compare to value of non-game methods. Hopefully:
- 18. Outro: DNA
- 19. Conclusion Scoring needs to suit the players. For use as a real metric, it needs to suit the partners, too. Its critical for the designer to understand the field and constraints. Qualitative evidence from players, quantitative evidence to partners.
- 20. Acknowledgements The DNA team: Brian Britigan, Matt Burns, Seth Cooper, Rowan Copley, Barbara Krug, Sundipta Rao, Zoran Popovic, Georg Seelig, and Eric Winfree Screenshots credited to: Terry Cavanagh, Firaxis, Green-Eye Visualization Centerforgamescience.org [email protected]
