Edited by author 09-24-2007 09:30 PM
The following graph shows our user's quadrant location over time
http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c226/_ym/MyPicture.jpg

Daniel Novak
Yaxha Mancillas
Yong Chen
Rosina Guerra-Lunceford
Ruth Maas

As our graph shows, the game causes periodic fluctuations amongst quadrants 1,2, and 4. This implies periodic un-pleasure intersperesed with pleasure, and periodic un-arousal interspersed with arousal.

Based on the ARCS model:

A - The game's colors and motion and action, as well as the rapidity of the problem solving issues causes motivational engagement. Dependent on skill and luck, so it keeps you playing.

R - The game is not directly relevant to physical reality, but it has rules and problem solving strategies that can lead to success within the game's internal world, and according to the game's internal logic.

C - The game's varying difficulties and problem sets allows the user to feel alternating confidence and unconfidence. This keeps the player interested and motivated but also challenged. Elements of personal control play into the game, as well as playing within a 'safe space.'

S - The game's periodic rewards keep the user satisfied and allows them to continue.

Edited by author 09-24-2007 09:27 PM
Dope Wars: Koreen, Serena, James, Erikheath

0 - Engaged. Hugh has no confidence, he's clicking around aimlessly. Player seems a bit confused.
2 - "Confused" Uncertain: Player was incapable of achieving goals. He meandered around the screen uncertain of what to do or how the interface operated relative to the control he wanted to exert. Hugh said, "Oh wait, it doesn't make sense!" The relevance seemed low.
4 - "Confused" Uncertain: Still incapable of achieving goals. Still in exploratory mode - curious
6 - Pleased: Just achieved challenge of buying gun. Player is enjoying game more because he understands it more. Player seems to be intrigued with the experience of buying drugs, a experience that is not ordinary to the player. Exertion of control via understanding how to operate the interface.
8 - "Good" Pleased, Engaged: Player was able to meet the challenge of making a profit. The elements of control, challenge, and fantasy were evident at this moment.
10 - "Good" Excited, Engaged: The player reported he figured out the game, yet he didn't seem to know what the overall goal was, but didn't seem to care. He was making money and that was good enough satisfaction for him.
12 - Same as above: Now more engaged into the fantasy aspect of the game with mentions of strategy. The relevance seemed high in his behavior. He paid off his loan and sold all of his drugs. Exclaimed that he was no longer a drug dealer. Relevant to his own values?
14 - Same as above: Found out new dimension (loan shark) which added new challenge.
16 - Engaged: Player expresses control of most of game mechanics and now is focused on learning more to do better next time. The wow factor has seemed to have worn off and the player is just focused on making money, not the actual drugs anymore.
18 - Engaged, Pleased: Player knows more and is exhibiting more focused play
20 - "Focused" Excited, Engaged.

Snood
27 Year Old Male
0 Uncertain - not sure what to expect
2 Uncertain - trying to figure it out
4 Uncertain - doing things more by chance, trial and error
6 Engaged - found some things that work and applying those theories
8 Engaged - having success
10 Annoyed - misinterpreted a techinique and hindered progress
12 Engaged - back to some success
14 Pleased - more success
16 Pleased - more success
18 Angry - made a foolish move
20 Engaged - wanted to play more and master it

ARCS
Attention - the icons and images, the breaking of matches, interesting character graphics
Relevance - no real relevance except for entertainment and fun, the "what's in it for me?" question seems to answered with obtaining a high score and mastering levels, personal satisfaction
Confidence - confidence was built once the rules were figured out and patterns were determined so the lines would break on matches
Satisfaction - breaking lines, finding success

Edited by author 10-11-2006 12:43 PM
Motivational Analysis Exercise: Snoods

Player was a thirty nine year-old female that enjoys video games with her children.

0 Uncertain -
2 Uncertain - Experimenting
4 Uncertain - still trying to learn game
6 Annoyed - Guessing, but unsuccessfully
8 Annoyed – Still unsuccessful wants to quit
10 Pleased - some success
12 Annoyed - hard to make sense of rules
14 Annoyed – losing interest
16 Engaged – seems to be figuring things out
18 Engaged – high score
20 Engaged
22 Engaged –
24 Engaged – another high score wanted to continue

Player spent nearly equal amounts of time between the Aroused/Unpleasant and Pleasant/Aroused quadrants of the matrix.

Csikszentmihalyi and Flow:

The initial difficulty of the game caused by the uncertainty of the rules created anxiety which prevented flow from happening. Once the rules were figured out and the player developed some strategies that were successful, she began to relax and enjoy the game. Player reached flow at about the 16 minute mark and remained there for the duration of the time.

Ye Xu
Cynthia Paloma
Fenimore Johnson
Michael Pedersen

0 Engaged
2 Astonished (Confused by bomb symbol)
4 Engaged (Confidence up, happy with popping, relevance unclear)
6 Engaged (Uncertain by rules/symbols, not interested entering high score-Recognition?!)
8 Uncertain (checked tutorial to clarify confusion)
10 Alarm (Still unclear about symbols)
12 Team uncertain about adj.
14 Engaged(new graphics and preview of next shape appealing, clearer on rules, having fun)
16 Engaged (Increased confidence)
18 Annoyed/excited (Yah)
20 Excited (Bombs are the bomb)

ARCS:
A.Interesting graphics and animation, explosions, and happy about popping.
R. Lack of clear rules made the relevance of certain items/game elements unclear
C. Shortness of games made for increased confidence. First bomb decreased confidence due to unclear rules about symbols (bombs).
S. Up when popping (feedback), high score (in artificial environment not used but would have been). Celebratory arm motion when level completed coupled with sharp "YAH!!!!!"

Malone/Lepper:
Challenge: Increasing levels of difficulty helped engage the player. Clear goals. More speed and shape options added to challenge. Self Esteem increased as each series of connections "popped"

Curiosity:
Unclear on what symbols did. Decreased enjoyment until it became clear.
Control:
Significant control over placement however incorrect/suboptimal choices or environmental changes limited the control of placement.
Fantasy:
Emotional happiness when popping series of bubbles
Recognition: Not interested in posting name due to the artificial nature of the environment.

FLOW:
The progressive level of difficulty is closely matched with the increasing skill level of the player. The game is designed to be engaging and retain the interest of the player. It is difficult to determine if the player would have noticed the passage of time since she was made aware of the time every two minutes. She assumes she would not have noticed the passage of time. Although she was frustrated by small points, she still stayed engaged and gained more skill and confidence as the game went on. Most of her time was spent in the engaged, excited and pleased.

Grace, Suzanne, Nelly and Mary

Game was Snood

0 - engaged, curious
2 - engaged
4 - content, interest went down due to lack of success
6 -content, no longer completely engaged, better understanding of the goal
8 - engaged, went to an easier level (child)
10 - engaged, pleased due to success
12 - engaged, at next level of difficulty, more confident
14 - engaged, better at strategy
16 - excited, found new backgrounds and began modifying game
18 - engaged, not motivated by competition of game
20 - content, could play for hours

Grace/John: As the confidence increased she felt more confident to have more challenge. Satisfaction was back after small success and increased the satisfaction.

Suzanne/Mark: Not cooperative, was initially curious, not involved with fantasy or identify with icons, control was important and fit in with skill level, the more hand eye coordination and strategy improved so as hand eye stuff became more automatic left more room for strategy. Recognition could be important, once skill level became worth bragging about.

Nelly/Mike: Started out curious, never had anxiety, having small successes encouraged continuous playing as level of difficulty increased. (Possible endless game playing opportunity.) Meshed well with player’s personality because she likes games like this and plays them often.

Group Members: Antonia, Dilek, Kristina

Game: Avernum

0 Uncertain (didn't know rules of game)
  Felt challenged to figure out what to do first
2 Engaged (trying to figure out game)
  Fantasy because involved in fantasy world
4 Engaged (still trying to figure out game, not yet frustrated)
  Challenged because trying to figure out game
6 Engaged (learned how to do something new)
  Control because the player felt like she knew what to do
8 Pleased (learned how to get items)
  Control because the player felt like she knew what to do
10 Bored (didn't know what else to do at that point and achieving nothing with what the player was doing)
   Control because the player could do things in the game
12 Turned off (achieving nothing in the game)
   None of Lepper's motivational categories because the player didn't want to play the game anymore
14 Frustrated (didn't know how to fight and kept losing life)
   Control because the player knew how to do things in the game
16 Uncertain (didn't know how to get back inside)
   Control because the player knew how to do things in the game
18 Died because stole something
   Curiosity because still trying to figure out point of game

Most of the time at the beginning of the game was spent in the Pleasant, Arousal quadrant, while later in the game most time was spent in Unpleasant , Arousal. This was due to the fact that the player didn't know what to do and couldn't figure out the purpose of the game. If the player had known the rules of the game better, it may have been easier to figure out what to do and therefore, more time would have been spent in the Pleasant, Arousal state.

Keller's ARCS model would have said that the player had confidence and attention, but there was lack of relevance and satisfaction because nothing was accomplished.

According to the flow graph, the player remained varied between anxiety and boredom, but was seldom in flow because the player did not understand the goals of the game.

Lepper would have said that most of the game was spent in the challenge and control categories. The player figured out how to move the character and knew some of the other controls, but did not figure out how to fight correctly. The challenge arose from not understanding the purpose of the game and then continued when she did not know how to progress in the game.

Motivational Analysis Exercise: Orbital Trader

Player was a twenty nine year-old male that likes most types of games. Began the game uncertain of how to play.

0 Uncertain -
2 Turned Off - still trying to learn game
4 Uncertain - Experimenting with game
6 Annoyed - Guessing, but unsuccessfully
8 Engaged - Beginning of understanding
10 Engaged - Increased understanding
12 Turned Off - Short attention span, hard to make sense of rules
14 Annoyed -
16 Miserable - No longer interested in accomplishing anything
18 Bored -
20 Pleased - Saw some success
22 Excited - Figured out how to play game successfully

Player spent most of the time in the Aroused/Unpleasant quadrant of the matrix.

ARCS:
Attention - Graphics
Relevance - Little to none
Confidence - Came with flow point
Satisfaction - Cash money...

Csikszentmihalyi:
Spent the majority of the time in the Anxiety range. Player reached flow at about the 20 minute mark. Boredom occured at about the 25 minute mark.

Lepper:
Curiosity lead to Challenge (how to play game) which was too great. Control was difficult, negatively affected motivation. Recognition was not valued recognition (i.e. didn't care). Fantasy positively affected motivation.

Angela, Dawn, Marcie, Bernadette

Marcie played the game while we recorded observations.

Overall, Marcie seemed very engaged but frustrated at times. She was also excited during the game.

She seemed to spend most of her time in the pleased and aroused quadrant. However, she seemed to fluctuate along the entire x-axis.

Throughout the activity, Marcie bounced back and forth between excited and uncertain. She was quite curious and challenged. In the middle of the game, she seemed to begin to take control of the situation.

Keller would not be very happy. There's not much confidence and there were no rewards/directions.

Malone would happy. She reached all the 7 levels at various times throughout the game. The game included challenge, fantasy, control, cooperation, etc.

Csikszentmihalyi would think overall she stayed in the flow. She never dropped down into the boredom section. If anything, she went up into the anxiety area. However, she did not seem to stay in the area for long. She played along with curiosity and was very involved. In fact, during the 2 minute marks, we had to tell her repeatedly to describe her feelings. This shows she was lost in what she was doing and wanted to continue.

Edited by author 10-23-2005 02:47 PM
Motivational Analysis Exercise: Snood (Csikszentmihalyi Flow)

The player was a twenty-five year old male that is interested in all types of games, but especially video games. With that in mind, he was already accustomed to general principles regarding software games and not afraid to try it out.

We reviewed the different responses on the matrix and made sure that he had a chance to ask questions on any of them. His initial response before starting the game was “uncertain” as this was a game that was new to him and did not know the basic goal behind the game. The following are the rest of the responses:

0 Uncertain (not sure what game is going to be like)
2 Uncertain (determined a couple of “rules” for play)
4 Content (rules seem to be working)
6 Annoyed (some unexpected things happened)
8 Frustrated (can’t figure out what brings wall down)
10 Engaged (starting to figure out combinations)
12 Excited (got to within 2 rows of monsters at the top)
14 Pleased (figured out how to drop multiple monsters by connecting above them in pattern)
16 Engaged (ready to play next round and beat last score)
18 Excited (beat last score)
20 Excited (beat last score by a bunch)

After debriefing with the player, I referred to the Csikszentmihalyi article (my assigned theorist) for analysis of the process and responses. The player was uncertain for the first few rounds what the object of the game was. He identified that you were supposed to shoot things and that combinations of 3 eliminated all of them, however, the objectives were not clear from just playing around with the game. It was frustrating as an observer to not be able to go to the help menu to find out more about the game. The player did not seem to be interested in getting “help” even though he voiced frustration and annoyance at least one time each.

The player did seem to reach flow about 12 minutes into the process. When I asked him to stop and respond at the 12-minute mark, it took a couple of times before he actually heard me and could comment. It seemed that at this point, the level of difficulty and the information he knew thus far about the strategy matched perfectly and put him into the “flow.” He did tend to come in and out of flow as there were occasional kinks in the “rules” that he had determined that threw him for a loop. At those moments, he experienced annoyance or frustration and the difficulty level threw him into the A3 section outside of the flow channel. It didn’t last for long, though and he was back in the flow or approaching it. He moved in and out of the flow more frequently at the beginning and then less so towards the end of the 20 minute session.

After the 20 minutes were completed, he continued to play for another half hour and became “addicted” as he put it. He is ready to move on to the next level of challenge.

I observed my 17 year old son, Mike, as he played Snood. I'll include some choice comments made by him at certain parts of the game as they further illuminate the GRAM.

Minute Adjective Comment

 0 engaged
 2 engaged Oh, this is sort of like Tetris
 4 uncertain Crap. What the heck!?
 6 content (humming the success sound w/computer)
 8 engaged/ Crap. Crap.
         uncertain
10 content no noises
12 content no noises
14 annoyed It's being retarded
16 pleased Because I'm winning
18 content Crap. Uh, oh.
20 content no noises

After a quick initial arousal (Attention) from the new graphics and motion, Mike quickly established Relevance through the association of familiar aspects of the game with his own gaming experience (like Tetris). He was quick to pick up on a motivating goal orientation (avoiding the collapse of the brick wall). Confidence was a big factor for Mike. As he has finely honed, quick reflexes, this game was set at an appropriate level of difficulty, giving him a meaningful level of challenge. Finally, some Satisfaction was seen in the limited positive consequences he noticed - especially in playing a section successfully for a longer period of time than before.

I tested my son as he played Snood. Before the game started, he described himself as bored. He then described himself at the 2 minute intervals as follows:

1. uncertain
2. bored
3. frustrated
4. pleased
5. excited
6. excited
7. excited
8. excited
9. excited
10. excited
After the test was done, he was engaged enough in the game to finish playing through the level.

Here are some thoughts based on Keller's work with the ARCS model.

Attention.
The game caught Eric's attention, probably with its novelty. You can shoot things with the cannon, and the faces are amusing and animated.

Relevance.
I fail to see much in this connection to keep a player in the game. There simply isn't much to tie in with any real-life goals. And as far as game goals are concerned, the object is to clear the level, but this seems hard to accomplish. Maybe you clear out the last Snood, but this seems underwhelming as a feature that would keep people coming back to the game.

Confidence.
As you can see from the list, the subject showed boredom and frustration at the 2nd and 3rd measuring periods. This reflects a key component of the ARCS model. If a person lacks confidence in his or her ability to deal with a situation, this will diminish both the pleasure of being in that situation, as well as the capability of dealing with that situation. I believe that the subject was frustrated because at this point he was unfamiliar with the strategy of the game.

Satisfaction.
As the game went on, more and more the subject showed excitement with the game. I believe the subject was learning more about how to place the Snoods to get more to fall down. He found more satisfaction with the game as he became more familiar with it.

However, the subject lost interest in Snood after he finished the level he was playing when the test finished. I believe this indicated that the satisfaction level of the game, or at least his experience with the game, was not high enough to bring back repeat play. My subject did not ask me to load Snood on his computer.

Paul / John / Miranda / Mercedes

Mercedes Played Snood, as she went down the following stages in the control points:
1)tranquil
2)uncertain and engaged
3)bored and content
4)bored and turned off
5)turned off
6)frustrated
7)pleased
8)excited
9))droopy
10)engaged
11)engaged

Mercedes was mostly in the yellow quadrant of the "Game Response Adjective Matrix." She was mostly pleased and aroused. She had four adjectives in the yellow quadrant, two in the red, two in the green, and three in the blue.

Mikes (Paul):
She started the game in flow. She then moved from anxiety back into flow. She then moved out of flow into boredom. She then moved back into flow because she was content. Then she remained in boredom for two states and then moved into anxiety because she was frustrated. Next she moved back to flow for two states because she was pleased and excited. She then went back to boredom, and then she ended the game in flow because she was engaged.

Lepper (John):
The cooperation doesn't figure in because it is a one player game. Midway through the stages, however, Mercedes grew more competitive and progressed to higher levels of the game. Maybe this was because she recognized to a larger degree what was involved in playing the game.

John (Miranda):
The game caught Mercede's attention, but it was not sustained because she kept moving back and forth from boredom to engagement. The game was not relevant to Mercede's background experience nor her future goals so therefore, it did not hold significance to her. At the beginning, she was unsure how to play the game accurately so her confidence level was low, but after gaining more knowledge and experience, she became more confident. As a result of her gained confidence, she earned more points. The higher scores she received toward the latter end of playing the game gave her satisfaction because it was an extrinsic reward.

Our player, Emily, has a great deal of patience, and rarely wavered from "Uncertain." Only toward the end did she move to astonished, and pleased. Most of the time, Emily found herself in the upper left quadrant. This is understandable. We had forgotten the name of the game (Orbital Trader), and without that, it was very hard to figure what the game was about, or its goal. Had we remembered this, a quicker understanding would have ensued.

But as Csikszentmihalyi (flow) would have predicted, as she became more skilled, her enjoyment increased, and her self-report moved from Uncertain, gradually to Pleased. However, she never felt, nor did she appear to enter a state of flow. The challenge was too high for her skill level. Regarding the ARCS model (Keller), none of us, including Emily found the topic relevant to our lives (either trading, or astronomy) and this may help explain the very long learning curve.

As an observer, I found myself starting in the Uncertain quadrant, and quickly moved to Frustrated and Annoyed. Had I been the one playing, I would have searched early on for the instructions, or the Help button (none of which existed.) The challenge was a bit too high for my total lack of skill or understanding. There was no possiblity of flow to occur for me personally with this game (and as an artist, I experience flow frequently). Had I stumbled upon, and played this game on my own, I would have abandoned it early on. Emily agrees.

Team members: Diana Osborn - John Keller, Don Dean - Mark Lepper, Reggie Johnson - Mike Csikszentmihalyi, Cyndi Chie - Hugh the gameplayer.

The subject spent most of her time in the yellow and red zones. Travelling from yellow to red range and back to yellow seemed to be the source of subject's enjoyment. When subject drifted into red it challenged her to master the game, which in turn caused her to spend more time in the yellow area, increasing her enjoyment. Was especially stimulated by the discover of bombs that quickly cleared obstacles.

The model of all three theorists acurately described what she was experiencing -- making the game very successful by all three measures. Of the three the Keller ARCS model seemed to apply the least, but still applied to some extent. This is perhaps because that model is so linked with classroom learning. If we choose the most applicable it would be Csikszentmihalyi's Flow model. After mastering the game she became so engaged she didn't want to stop when instructed to. She was definitely concentrated on the task at hand so much she lost self-consciousness and literally lost track of time (to the frustration of some other team members). A major measure of her loss of self-consciousness was the disco dance move she did at the end along with a satisfying exclamation of, "YES!"

Jim, Susie, Carolina, Kimberly

Keller's ARCS Model.
Attention: The initial screen is interesting and it did grab Jim's attention but after a while the game did not do a good job of maintaining his attention because he landed on the same spots most of the time.
Relevance: Jim had heard about Zimbabwe on the news today so it was kind of relevant.
Confidence: Low level, uncertain most of the time as to how to play the game, no specific goals stated.
Satisfaction: Jim was not satisfied with this game. He felt good figuring out how to play it but the content was not satisfactory.

Lepper & Malone-
Challenge- we were challenged to figure out what was going on.
Curious- 6-8 minutes engaged or curious about the game, most of the time spent was uncertain
Control- felt less in control with more players
Fantasy- the game involved a lot of fantasy and Jim felt bad thinking of actually doing these things
The recognition was there during the game we did know what place he was in and there was a place to record winners.


"In the Flow"
While playing the game, there were some moments of being in the flow, where there was not a sense of boredom or anxiety. At first, when the game was being learned, the game was keeping "Evil Jim" engaged and learning the process, also seeing what was possible, and testing out all of the aspects of the game. However, we soon got out of "the flow" when it was decided that the goal of the game was a negative situation. The game's design was to put us in the place of an "evil" person and to try to take money and property from others (reverse Monopoly). This was somewhat of a turn off, that moved us over into the annoyed and turned off part of the matrix. There was not really a sense of anxiety as far as feeling that peril in the game (of losing life, points, or money) was keeping us engaged.

Snood Exercise with Keller and the ARCS model

I tried this exercise on a friend at work and was very pleased with the results. I gave Mario, my friend, the directions beforehand so that he could have an understanding of the game. Before Mario started, he was in a relaxed state.

During play, he made a lot of noises that gave me an idea of his state of mind. I heard a lot of things like, “You suck!” “Yeah!” and, “They’re laughing at me!” At this point it was just the beginning of the game and he said he was engaged because he was trying to figure out the strategy.

At the four-minute mark, Mario declared that he was annoyed. He felt that there was no way to win. I asked him if he would have continued to play had he been on his own. I thought his answer would be “no” since he was losing confidence and satisfaction. He surprised me by saying that yes, he would have continued to play as he wanted to figure out how to beat the Snood. Did I mention he is very competitive? Even though there wasn’t much relevance outside of his doing me a favor, the game kept his attention and was feeding his ego. Attention is the first level of the ARCS model.

As Mario continued to play, he figured out the game and went into excitement mode. He figured out that he could win. His ability to win gave him confidence and satisfaction, important items for achieving flow. There was only one point in the last twelve minutes of play that he got out of the excitement zone and went into alarm. He had made a bad choice in the game and thought his strategy had failed. He thought he was going to lose. Oh no!

He continued to play, reaching the level of excitement again. He was winning. He told me, “It’s us against the Snoods, Nancy. We have to win.” Mario was getting really into it. Throughout the game, he continued to make noises of pleasure and frustration. Most of his comments I can’t post as he got a bit vulgar. The one comment Mario made when the exercise was all done was that there was nothing to learn in it. Relevance was certainly missing in this exercise. Aside from that, it followed the ARCS model of motivation pretty well.

Blobs 4.01 Motivational Analysis Notes
Being a Keller ARCS zealot, I prepared my fiancée for a test with Bloobs. Snoods were not used, because she became fairly effective Snoods players with evolving strategies that addressed the rising levels of difficulty (don’t use the Armageddon level on your fiancée for evaluating motivation – you’ll never hear the end of it) (I tried it – don’t go there).

Since Bloobs isn’t a shooting game, I had to give basic rules and hint at an objective.

Attention –
Before the first blob was dropped, W (fiancée) described that she was feeling uncertain in the upper left quadrant of the Adjective Matrix (AM). She also described that the game interface was somewhat mysterious and that interested her – increased her curiosity. At the 2 minute mark, she had cleared a group of read blobs, and she commented that she felt engaged on the AM, and she said that she was paying close attention to where the blobs were placed and what there numbers were – arousal with increased attention. Through out the 20 minute evaluation time, other than the initial uncertain description, W stayed in the upper right quadrant of the AM. She reached the level of excited four times, and she associated that with exploding large groups of blobs and finishing a level. W loved the colors of the blobs, the dropping and exploding sound effects, and the soothing music of Blobs 4.01. This was a far better evaluation than using the Armageddon level in Snoods.

Relevance –
I did not see any direct relevance to the real world, but M said that it indirectly reminded her of problem solving at work. The game reminded her that she needs to be creative in her problem solving. I agreed with her that when problems at work were solved that they should explode and your score would increase.

Confidence –
At the onset of the game, W felt low in her confidence toward the game. However, as the game progressed, she gained positive experiences in manipulating the game and its interactions. She quickly was able to develop strategies that worked on existing blobs and on blobs on different levels of difficulty. In our closing discussion, she talked about using her strategies to increase her confidence when a large group of blobs were lost or boxed in. The strategies help her predict the outcome of future moves and mental actions. I saw that her confidence and her enjoyability of the game increased when she had a working mental model of that game.

Satisfaction –
Just after the onset of the game until the end, W showed increasing satisfaction with the game play. She was impressed with her ability to develop strategies and with the changing information – how she would then adapt those strategies. W liked how fast she was thinking in the game environment. Up to the end, W kept control of her focus within the game. In the end, W felt that she was highly motivated.

Amy (Lepper):
For the first half of the session, the user felt significantly challenged by the game. Even when the game became unpleasant, the user remained aroused and alert. The user also remained pretty curious during this first half. She expressed a high level of interest in the game and in perfecting her understaning of the rules. However, her sense of control fluctuated during the beginning portion of the session. At first, she felt confident, then she became alarmed and certain that she was "..about to die."

At around the 16 minute mark, the user's level of engagement and sense of feeling challenged by the game dropped significantly. The game remained a pleasant experience for the remainder of the session, but she not express feelings of arousal. Her sense of control remained high and consistent, but her sense of curiosity tapered off, and did not rise again.

Csikszentmihalyi: Conditions of Flow (Molly)
Prior to the start of the game, the user was excited. The user was in flow at the early levels of the game between the 2-minute marker and the 6-minute marker. When the game became more challenging (more color balloons and more blocks that prevent the user from placing the balloons), the users was out of flow--the user was feeling alarmed and annoyed between the 8-minute marker and the 12-marker. The user was in flow again when she restarted the game. By the 18-minute makrer, the user was moving out of flow--feeling unchallenged and bored.

Keller's ARCS model (Pei-shan)
The player was very excited to play the game in the first place. She was very motivated in the first 6 minutes, she felt excited, engaged, and pleased for doing well. At this period, her attention level was very high and through the "doing well" feeling, I can tell a sense of confidence was also occuring.
After the minute 8, the game got more challenging. The player began to express annoyed and alarmed. Her sense of satisfaction was impaired. Confidence level was also getting lower at this point.
The game started again in the 14 minute. The attention drived by excitment was back and the feeling of content/confidence came back. However, the player got bored and sleepy quickly as she has learned the necessary strategies. Therefore, although she had confidence, she was not satisfied. She stopped playing quickly.
Relevance factors did not exist in this game.

Matt, Tony, Polly, Andrea, and Kat:

Our game was Snood. It's a shooting gallery, strategy, pattern game.

From the Csikszentmihalyi perpsective, there was never a level of engagement. There was never a clear goal, adn the subject (game player) did not feel that he had control over his own success because the feedback was inconsistent with his inputs. The subject stated that there was no clear pattern to the progression of difficulties.

The subject experienced erratic swings between boredom and anxiety, and at no time did the game balance those two elements to achieve flow.

From Lepper's perspective, the fantasy's purpose and structure was unclear, but simple enough that he could immerse himself in it. The challenge was varied but not graduated properly. He had inconsistent control of his aim and the eventual destination of the projectiles. Cooperation, competition, and recognition were irrelevent elements. The curiostiy consisted of figuring the game out.

Using the ARCS model, attention was high at first out of pure curiousity, but petered off as the game became more familiar and more frustrating. The game initially had relevance because it fit into a paradigm similar to Tetris, but this relevance was limited. The subject's confidence level fluctuated. It was low at first because the subject did not know the rules of the game. As he played and figured out how to play, his confidence grew. But then his confidence left him when the difficulty level shot up unexpectedly and tremendously. He can't get no satisfaction.

The subject was all over the game response adjective matrix. He spent the most time, however, closest to the center of the grid suggesting that the game didn't really provoke any strong emotion. There was greater variation in pleasure and displeasure than in arousal and non-arousal.

Team3: and Monica
Started in the Uncertain quadrant and moved progressively to the frustrated. The game was difficult to figure-out which increased movement in the left quadrant.

Regarding The Flow Channel Matrix, the player began in the upper section with anxiety due to the task's difficulty and lack of knowledge and skills. A the player gained familiarity with the game, the player moved downward towards the flow channel.

Regarding the Lepper and Malone's model, it lacked the control element as well as cooperation, competition and recognition.

Keller's ARCS Model: Although it contained the attention element, it lacked relevance. The player did not feel confident and did not gain satisfaction from playing.

For Keller's ARC model, the first letter stands for Attention, but since I had seen the game and been exposed to it prior to today, it didn't hold my attention the way it might have otherwise. This led to the initial rating of Tranquil, no Super-Excited. I could have been more aroused if this had been the first time I had seen it. From Lepper's point of view, it was interesting because i had played this game before and remarked that it was more fun with competition to play against. From Mike C's point of view, as I increased the activity to the point that it made as much of a challenge as possible for my skills, I became more involved in the game, sort of in the flow, but not as much as if it were more complicated and really required me to stretch my talents. It seemed as if the game didn't increase in difficulty level to compensate for my increase in skill. Malone: the game didn't arouse my curiosity, taking the game to a more difficult level didn't do much except increase the speed of the game. According to Mike C, in order to really get into the flow, it would have had to force me to focus so much on it that I would have just been concentrating on the game, not on others around me or possibly even my own self. Instead, I was forced to increase the challenge of the game myself to stay somewhat in the flow. It was interesting that when my confidence increased, my motivation increased, my pleasure and arousal increased, I was getting bored with it, but then I saw my own score (which was quite high) and the next rating I gave was engaged (and trying to challenge myself further with what the game could offer.

Edited by author 10-26-2003 09:59 PM
I recruited my wife to play Snoodle which I knew would produce some interesting results given that she really doesn't play video games and that Snoodle would provide some challenges for her--even at the easiest setting.

She played the game for approximately 20 minutes starting off "annoyed" and "uncertain" in the first 2 session before spending the rest of the session in the lower left quadrant vacillating between "bored" (4 times) "turned off" (2) and eventually "miserable (1). She did creep into the "sleepy" square for one session but I suspect she made that selection just to spice up the results a little. Obviously the game wasn't interesting for her at all.

Applying the Lepper/Malone Taxonomy to the feedback session provided a solid explanation for her lack of interest.

First off, the instructions didn't provide her much helpful information about what she was supposed to do once she started playing even though she said that she read each of the instructions carefully. She said that the directions were very poorly presented (my experience as well) so when she first started playing she was uncertain about the basic goals of the game and especially what she needed to do to win. While she did figure out the basics of the game she was not successful at winning any of the 5 games that she played. The game was too challenging in her opinion. She never really mastered the aiming of the cannon and as a result felt no control of the game. She did get better at not losing as quickly but there was never any uncertainty about the outcome which contributed to her boredom the more she lost. Her lack of success didn't do much for her self-esteem or cognitive curiosity either. As for sensory curiosity, the addition of feedback sounds after the first session provided no added appeal for her either---I had turned off the sound during my last session of playing the game. Even her minor successes, as evidenced by the audio feedback, didn't do much to increase her curiosity and helping with the challenge issue.

The crux of the problem, I believe, was revealed by her negative comments about the fantasy aspect of the game and her inability to identify with the characters. She was very vocal about the incrogruity between the stated goal of the game to "save the Snoods" and their scary, demented personas. She also didn't understand why she was shooting heads out of a cannon in order to save them. She suggest that making the characters more lovable or cuddly may have helped with the identification process. I'm not so sure though since the basic challenge of the game and her inability to control the game mechanism were beyond her desire to develop any cognitive or sensory curiosity.

Edited by author 10-26-2003 08:48 PM
Keller's ARCS Model of Motivation as seen while playing Snood

My 10 year old son, Samuel, was very motivated to play Snood. This was at least partly due to extrinsic motivation, since he got to take a break from his homework to help me with mine. However, he was very excited to play anything that involved the computer, and funny robot-like faces, and he seemed pretty intrigued with the game name.

The novelty effect and curiosity were high at the beginning, which are both part of the “A” in ARCS, for attention. Samuel reported being “excited” before starting the game.
Throughout the game his attention was engaged by the graphics and sounds, as well as the game play. I am not sure he figured out the cause and effect of the different angles and icons (I know I didn’t!).

He also liked exploring the different levels of the game. He started with “child” then went for “evil”. He enjoyed the challenge of evil, even though it was more difficult. Then he cycled through several other levels but ended up on difficult. Using various problems to solve on the different levels and varying the elements fits into the ARCS model for keeping Attention. When he switched between the different levels he asked questions out loud like “I wonder if it has the creepy multiplier thing—that was cool!” This shows that inquiry arousal was happening throughout the game. He wondered who drew the Snoods, which shows an interest in the graphics and creativity of the game.

It may be that the audio got a little overwhelming, even though he liked the “ta da” sound after a successful move, at one point he commented “pay no attention to the beeping noise behind the screen”.

The “R” in ARCS, for Relevance, was a little less closely matched with Snood. My son remarked that he had played games similar to this one, so that relates to “Familiarity”. The Goal Orientation was a little fuzzy for me, since it seemed like the goal was a bit fuzzy for my son (at least on the cause and effect relationships). I think the score card was motivating, which tied in with why Keller and Suzuki say games can give a “heightened sense of relevance”.

There was very little role playing or fantasy, other than getting to shoot snoods at other snoods, so I didn’t think that element of relevance was used.

C is for Confidence, and my son had it playing Snood. He didn’t mind trying hard levels and not doing as well. He was not overly concerned when he lost a round. He started with the easier mode, which fits in with ARCS model by presenting opportunities for early success as a motivational factor. I think he would have liked to have been able to reach the toolbar and switch levels or start a game over, but he didn’t seem unmotivated about having to finish out a game before getting that access.

Satisfaction was high for Samuel while playing Snood. He enjoyed it. He especially liked the music that played for good moves and commented on it several times. This is a form of positive reinforcement recommended in the ARCS model. The graphics were also very well matched to my son’s interests. Samuel put himself in the “engaged” category throughout the game, and also “relaxed”. When I stopped him at the two minute intervals he was eager to resume the game. His comments indicated that he was figuring out how to control the Snoods, such as “Looks like some snoods are more aerodynamic”.

I think I can safely conclude that Snood is very motivating for a 10 year old boy in all four aspects of the ARCS model.

The Game of Snood as viewed by Lepper and Malone and interpreted by Marino

Lauren played Snood for about 25 minutes. She played without sound so there was no motivation from any of the fantasy that sounds would have created. She picked up the mode of play quickly but for the first part of the game (6 of the first 8 minutes0 she stated she was annoyed. This was because she was learning the rules and strategy and was unable to understand how to “win” the game. She was obviously challenged beyond her ability to perform well. In terms of uncertainty, the outcome seemed less than 50% that she would do well in the game. Her first game score was 220, which was low in comparison to other scores.

She continued to learn the game, and started to become pleased when she started scoring higher. She was obviously curious, asking questions about how the canon worked and which piece was coming out next. After about 10 minutes of playing she moved from being annoyed to being engaged in the game and pleased. She was more in control, scoring higher and getting feedback for doing well. Once or twice she stated she was frustrated because even though she was scoring high and floating the snoods, she did not understand why she was doing well; In addition, when the cannon didn’t shoot where she wanted it to, she became frustrated. I interpreted this to mean that she did not feel in control because she did not think she could produce the effects under her own power but it was caused more by random chance or accident.

Her last game lasted over 10 minutes and she had mastered the technique and strategy of how to score high. Except for one short period when she was frustrated (lack of control) she was either pleased or engaged the entire time. When she won the final game and made her highest score she was excited and also astonished (much as she described how she would feel if she had gotten an A on a tough exam.) She had been challenged the entire game and uncertain of the outcome. She was getting more and more positive feedback as she continued to succeed and she felt more and greater control of the situation. Her final act was to obtain the recognition of the highest score as she registered her game.

One observation of her play the entire time was that she was always above the half way point on the X-axis of the Game Response Adjective Matrix. The game was thus stimulating enough for her to be responsive and energetic.

Judy played the game Blobs 4.01 by Lars Gafvert for 20 minutes and stayed engaged and motivated for most of the game. She described herself as staying in the positively pleased and excited quadrant of the Game Response Matrix. When she could use the bomb to blow portions of the game up, her excitement level soared. When the game became more difficult (after she switched to a higher level) her frustration level also rose.

Malone: The initial motivation was self esteem as she questioned her ability to learn the game with others watching. She moved on to sensory curiosity as she noticed she had passed a level and was aware of the game enviornment changing and she adapted to the new elements. She became more excited with mastery of these elements.

Lepper: The recognition factor was apparent to all viewing the game and added to Judy's motivation to succeed. She segmented the activity into different parts.

Keller and Suzuki:
Attention: The colors and sounds presented sufficient motivation to keep her attention. There was no Relevance in the game to her life. She expected her Confidence level to be high as she anticipated succeeding. The game was simple to learn which boosted her confidence yet she lost confidence as the difficulty level rose. Her Satisfaction level was high especially as she mastered the higher levels which had previously lowered her confidence. Overall her motivation was high to try the game again and beat her previously high level.

Mr. C:
Judy's motivation was influenced by and relative to her success in the game. Her motivation dropped to boredom when the game wasn't moving fast enough. She also felt hopeless when the game was too difficult or she thought she could not succeed. She described the band of FLOW as very narrow between boredom and anxiety at these points in the game.

Hugh played Epsilon Tahari and was mostly excited throughout the game play.

Keller ARCS
Attention: for the most part, the game had Hugh's attention. She was excited during game play. Uncertainty and lower arousal/pleasant levels came about when going through set up and training modules.

Relevance: Hugh is actually a trained pilot, but that did not fully play into the relevance of the game. She mentioned that the mechanics were fun to figure out and how to reach the goal, in a similar way with piloting (except for the obvious fact that there is no trial and error in regular piloting).

Confidence: confidence was built in the game with each subsequent trial. Even though Hugh did not reach teh ultimate goal of the game, each attempt at it gave her more and more confidence upon which to build for the next try. This is to say that each trial had a learning component.

Satisfaction: satisfaction is tied in with the comment on confidence wherein Hugh was able to learn from each trial. Each trial gave her confidence and therefore satisfaction with the game in being able to progress in the game toward the goal by building skills.

Examining the game from the perspective of Malone and Lepper:

Of the 7 catagories in the Taxonomy we were concerned with 4: Challenge, Curiosity, Fantasy, and Control.

Curiosity:
Much of the players engagement in the game was driven by Curiosity. The game has a number of complex keyborard mappings that must be mastered to operate the simulated aircraft. The majority of the game play period was spent learning these features in "Training" mode, and then going back to the set-up page that described the controls. Also the game provides the player with a 3-D landscape with targets that must be seeked-out. It was not always obvious where to go or how to get there. Curiousity as to how to fly, where to fly, and what to do was a source of motivation.

Fantasy:
The fantasy of flying an aircraft through a 3-D world drove was another source of the player's motivation and engagement. The game's explicit storyline was not a compellling ingredient in the player's involvement in this game.

Control:
The games control was a mixed bag. It was satisfaction in undestanding and utilizing that understanding to pilot the aircraft. The complexity and steep learning curve. of the controls hindered a true sense of "control" for the player.

Challenge:
The games goals were not something the player worked with, so the explcit challenge of the game was not something that motivated or engaged the player.

The Conditions of Flow -
From the perspective of a 'narrow ribbon' where a game-player travels between boredom and excitement, it was clear that our 'Hugh' was engaged throughout the course of the simulation. There really was never a point when she could have been described as 'bored'; rather, there were some frustrating moments while she tried to familiarize herself with the complex controls and the object of the game, but was still stimulated by the game itself and engaged in it's usage.

One aspect that helped keep the player engaged was the immediate feedback provided by the game; during both training missions and actual game play, she could experiment with the controls and obtain feedback right away to let her know when she was using them correctly or incorrectly.

However, one of our team members pointed out that there was *not* clear negative or positive feedback acting as a 'guide' to the player as to what they were doing right or wrong. In essence, the player was left to herself to work out how to use things correctly, and it was mostly her own resolve and innate curiousity that pushed her to continue and learn how to successfully navigate through the game. This member said that she would have become far too frustrated very quickly with the lack of useful feedback as to how to play the game successfully. The only feedback provided as that of trial and error on the player's part.

The game was Snood. The rules were clear and the outcome obvious. The object of the game, to link 3 or more objects in a row before they are automatically deleted.

Lepper & Malone

Challenge: A game of skills and definitely challenging. The simplicity of the game allowed you to master it after time. It is not about intelligence but reaction and recognition. Eye hand coordination and use of mouse presented difficulty.

Curiosity: Object emerged- still uncertain of the purpose but remained a part of the game. Curiosity was not a motivating factor of the game.

Control: At a certain point Hugh realized the patterns and was more prepared in the next round.

Fantasy: Sound effects made it more of a micro world and became an engaging game.

Keller’s ARCS

Attention: Easily caught Hugh’s attention with color, sound and moving pieces.

Relevance: The development of eye-hand coordination.

Confidence: Was gained as Hugh continued to play, the score increased with each round of play.

Satisfaction: Obvious increase in satisfaction as game play improved.

The Russell’s Affect Grid demonstrated a heightened sense of satisfaction as game play improved. The emotional response at the beginning of the game while play was still be learned was negative and inactive. As play was in progress, Hugh was engaged and eventually displayed excitement with mastery of the game.

Robin = Hugh (the game player)
Matt = Mike and Mark (Lepper and the Flow Guy)
Peyri = John (Keller)

Robin played a gangster-style game called Payback. It was a demo so it timed out after 5 minutes. Robin played four times.

For the first 10 minutes the game reached the four criteria for motivation, according to Lepper: challenge, curiosity, control, and fantasy. For Robin the game was most motivating as he was trying to figure out how it worked and what he could and could not do.

Payback did not meet the optimal balance between anxiety and boredom. Robin seemed to stay within the lower portions of "flow," sometimes reaching boredom. He never peaked into anxiety. This was especially apparent when the game started over. Time passed quickly but Robin never lost contact with the real world.

As for the ARCS model, the game initially held Robin's attention and thus he was motivated to play. Because he is a game player, Payback held relevance. Robin was confident that he would be successful in the game. The satisfaction of trying new things and receiving instant feedback was motivating also. This led to his response of "engaged" and "pleased" for more than 50% of his play time.

No helps within the game. It was a hit and miss. She didn't understand what to do. Didn't see any learning value. Didn't know what some of the codes meant within the game. Didn't think it was fun - at all. The game was frustrating because she didn't know what to do. The prices of the drugs changed but she couldn't see the pattern. She would try and steal a car but wasn't sure if or when she got the stolen vehicle. There was too much attention to detail. If the user didn't know math very well and didn't keep track, they would lose their money very quickly.

Hugh played the game Age of Empires 2. Overall the game's complexity both frustrated and engaged him.

Lepper
The simulation/game that engaged Mike for twenty minutes, for the most part, successfully captured Lepper's criteria that determine motivation and fun.

CHALLENGE:
The goals were clear and the outcomes were certainly not predetermined.
Given the genuine difficulties in mastering this game, success would
clearly generate "self-esteem." This first criterion, however, was perhaps the one condition that could intimidate the more faint-hearted from mastering this game. The rapid development of the complexity of the game appeared to generate situations that impeded a continuously optimal or "intermediate" level of difficulty. While excited and clearly enthusiastic, Mike definitely moved into reflections of "not pleased," "annoyed," "astonished," and "frustrated" in the latter half of the game.

CURIOSITY:
This game had a robust approach to stimulating curiosity. An interesting and increasingly varied geography was only partially revealed as the player explored new areas. There was a palpable suspense in awaiting what new vistas emerged with exploration. Additionally, players cannot become complacent when dealing with the complex interplay between the many various components.

CONTROL:
This great strength of the game, the player's omnipotence over his/her
micro-world, can also be a source of frustration. Mike shared a number of times that the multitude of decisions was overwhelming some times. Game characters he controlled were frequently sent out on missions and then forgotten while the urgency or immediacy of some other activity took his attention.

FANTASY:
I think the simulation matches a broad view of the Emotional Aspect of this component. Lepper suggests that fantasies "should encourage identification with imagined characters or contexts." I doubt Mike truly empathized with the resilient villagers; they struck me as having the single-mindedness of ants despite the fact that someone may have rained insecticide on their ant colony. On the other hand, I do think that there is an aesthetic appreciation of watching one's fiefdom develop through the implementation of decisions the player has chosen.


Flow
The player was almost constantly at a state just above the "flow" line (ideal for learning.) As the game progressed the task difficulty increased along with the player's anxiety. The game offered clear goals and feedback in the form of visual cues (i.e. townpeople building homes, icons listing current states of resources, and enemy ships attacking.) If the player had set the game controls at a more moderate pace, flow would have been achieved. However, this fast paced game probably increased his skill level, so that flow will occur at a higher state next time.


ARCS
Attention
Age of Empires easily captured the players attention. It was full of audio and visual effects that were constantly changing. It also has a problem to be solved, the player must conquer the enemy. The changing scenery adds variability.

Relevance
While this game is not necessarily educational, it does have some historical relevance. There is a distinct goal that corresponds with an actual historical outcome.

Confidence
This game builds confidence by having a beginner level. It increases in difficulty as the player goes through a campaign and onto other levels. The player also has a complete control of the game, he must make decisions to attack, fortify his compound, and build armies.

Satisfaction
Ultimate satisfaction comes from defeating the enemy. However, there are consequences when the game strategy isn't successful. The player's armies can be destroyed or razed and then the player must rebuild or refortify.

Edited by author 10-16-2001 03:04 AM
Game - Boogle
Hugh was a sport. She didn't have much time to figure out the game, and the rest of us were giving her answers.

We had a really awesome write up completed, and someone erased it, so I will reconstruct as much as I can remember.

MARK - Anne
Challenge
The challenge was high because Hugh had never played a game like boogle before, and she was piloting it before us. She was never comfortable with the game. It seemed like if there had been variable levels, she would have liked it better.


Curiousity - Hugh said there was nothing about the game that made her curious. She didn't understand the directions, but she didn't stop and try to find them either. However, she wrote "fake" words to see if she could get points, and kept trying to get points for two letter words. So she seemed curious about seeing if she could cheat.


Control - When she accidently figured out how to get control of the game by stopping the game to get the score her interest was much higher....temporarily. There was no way for Hugh to figure out how many points she had and this was disconcerting to her. I think she might have made some different strategies if she had known how many points each word was worth.


Fantasy - I guess the idea that Hugh might be able to get the machine to let her input a two letter word, or give her points for a name is about as far into fantasy as this game went for Hugh. There was no character or context involvement, no analogies or metaphors presented, however the exogenous fantasy of getting the right answer was fairly lost because she didn't understand the rules.

Hugh did a great job playing the game for the first time. It is an interesting game, and once you establish patterns it is fairly simply and fun. However, like anything else, if you don't know what is expected it can be very difficult.

Re: Boggle eval w/ Anne, Lori, Kristine

Boggle eval notes according to John Keller:

Attention: Initially, Hugh was very excited to start playing Boggle. Throughout the twenty minutes of play, Hugh's attention was held during each game; she consistently reported feeling engaged. However, her attention was not at all sustained, as she said later the only reason she kept playing game after game was for the sake of the assignment.

Relevance: None could be found.

Confidence: Hugh perceived her competence to be higher initially, and as she quickly discovered the game was more difficult than she thought, her confidence dropped. As she played her confidence grew each time she rasied her score significantly.

Satisfaction: Hugh began to feel less annoyed, more confident, and somewhat more pleased each time she discovered a way in which she had control in the game. Finding out that she could re-roll or start a new game at any time and still be scored helped this, as did noticing the feedback the game provided on how many points she got for each word. Although Hugh mentioned about ten minutes into the play dissatisfaction with the scoring in that she would like to see a cumulative score, by the end of the play she reported feeling somewhat satisfied at feeling that her performance had improved with each game she played, even though it was not documented.

Boggle

Reminder: Bernie, we lost our info; this is it retyped. Anne and Liz will add their parts later. Thanks!


Beginning – "Hugh" was excited at first. Then she became engaged in the game and quickly became annoyed at not knowing the rules. She wanted points for people’s names.

Middle – Her feelings continued to range from engaged to annoyed. Her confidence began to grow as she earned more points in each successive game. However, she would have liked to have seen a cumulative point total as she was playing each game. The incentive to score more points may have been higher. Then she found out that she could end her current game, receive a score, and start a new game.

End – She reached a level of higher engagement. But despite the possibility of ending a game to receive a score in “times of trouble”, she still wanted to finish each game.

Overall: Had there been a more definitive end goal, she may have been more "in" to the game. The same small goal of creating words without immediate feedback of her point total was unmotivating. This dimished her flow by not allowing her to become completely immersed in or challenged by the game.


Mike (Lori): There was little flow. Her low skill level did not match the high challenge of the game. Also, she found it difficult to focus when people were watching and became self conscious. This prohibited her from becoming fully engaged.

John (Liz):

Mark (Anne):

Tracy Kreckman (Hugh), Suzanne Bacon (Mike), Bob Faust (Mark), Yiftach Levy (John)

First game begins: player Tranquil
@ 2 min.: Uncertain - nervous, score 378

A new game began just before the next mark:
@ 4 min.: Pleased, score 138
6 min: Engaged - doing well, score 1116

8 min: Pleased, score 1351

10 min: Annoyed (didn't finish level), score 1625 END GAME

12: engaged (discovered bank shot), score 241

14: frustrated (almost killed), score 573

16: Pleased (new game began), score 456

18: Uncertain, score 857

20: Excited, score 1221

22: Excited, 1471
Game ended @ 23 min., score 1581

John: Initial impression of game visuals attracted player, but Danger meter was ignored after first game (ATTN); Learning was by trial and error, low relevance to life activities (besides basic hand eye coordination) (REL); medium level of difficulty was "just right," perhaps just beyond player's level of skill, kept him interested enough to keep playing, "wanted to continue because I know I can do it." Danger Wall coming down was expected, exact timing unknown (due to ignoring of meter), feedback immediate: either snoods disappear, or they don't, and/or wall comes down.

Mark: The challenge of the game was its greatest appeal. Although the snood heads were interesting, they were not a significant fantasy element. Learning the game, the player did have significant control over what was happening. A lot of decisions had to be made as to which area to shoot to. The process of learning the game involved a high level of curiosity.

Mike: The player was in a pretty good state of flow throughout most of the game. The challenge level was just above his skill level. He knew the challenge was just within his reach, and he was excited to achieve his goal. Even after the activity was over, the player continued playing indicating a strong "flow" state.

Boggle

Overall:
The challenge was very high for Reed in the beginning. He was very frustrated and only found words reading from left to right. Later, he started to feel more comfortable with the interface. The game kept asking him to register which distrubted his concentration.

Beginning
Game was very challenging for Reed. He was very uncertain and wasn't sure if he would look stupid.

Middle
He became engaged and this is when he played the best. He was engaged at the exsystemic and sensory levels. He had curiousity that was based on things beyond the game.

End
Towards the end he became content and pleased but then got frustrated because he kept pressing the wrong button.

Analysis
Mike:
His happiness was not fulfilling in the beginning..He was distracted by outside people and very self-conscience.
He started to feel more comfortable with himself and his anxiety went down as skill became less of a factor.
The flow was interrupted from interface problems due to the registration pop-up window.

Mark
Challenge
In the beginning the activity was at a significant level of difficulty for the learner. There was uncertain outcome each time that helped him stay motivated. Self-esteem was low. He did not have a high level of confidence that he could find the words.

Curiousity
There was minimal sensory curiousity due to the low tech visual affects and lack of audio. However, there was signficant interactive exchange as he tried to find words amidst the letters

Control
The learner was determined but the activity was not very responsive. Choices were limited to the learners existing knowledge. Personalization of the activity was hard for the learner. He did not feel powerful.

Fantasy
I would go so far as to say that the game was gender baised toward women due to it being a word game. As learner was male, frustration was high.

John
Attention:
He paid close attention to the screen as time was a factor and each minute counted.

Relevance:
He was not very interested in words or word games so this game did not have much relevance to his life.

Confidence:
Reed's level of confidence increased each round as he was able to list more and more words.

Satisfaction:
Reed was not very satisfied with this game due to the interruptions of the registry pop-up window.

Snood

Overall - The game was confusing, game was fast- things changed quickly. The rules didn't seem clear enough. Didn't understand the variables. Attentions split. Animations distracting.

Beginning - Some confusion, but felt she could win if had more time.

Middle -
A. Game's not fair, rules not being followed. "I don't understand what's going on."
B. But started to get engaged. Started to learn it, but got frustrated again because what she thought she knew didn't work anymore.

End- Scores got really high, but she didn't know if the score was important. Still wasn't clear what the objective of the game was.

Mike -
Goal was clear, but the skills to obtain the goal were unclear.
She wasn't aware of what it took to get the goal. She was engaged and concentrated on the game. Didn't give up. Time went by really fast - but she would have given up on it if it wasn't necessary to continue.

Mark -
There was a challenge and curiousity in the beginning to figure out how to play, but then it got boring. Didn't feel that in control of the actual object that was being shot.

John -
Attention - The game looked interesting and therefore a little engaging. She wanted to learn how to play it. But lost attention at the end because she got frustrated with the game.

Relevance - It didn't seem relevant to anything in her life, because she's not competitave. Didn't care about her score at all.

Confidence - Low confidence in the beginning, but as the game went she started to get a hang of it and felt she could do it with more practice. Observers got too engaged and made her feel a little less confident at times too.


Satisfaction - Did feel good as she got better at it. But then the game changed and she didn't feel as satisfied because it didn't stay consistant.

Jennifer Martin
Christie Young
Doreen Clough
Paul Kerry

Game: Shapes 2

Overall Sense: The skills needed to manipulate the controls takes several rounds of practice.

Beginning: The player was highly frustrated and annoyed by the game.

Middle: Still annoyed but beginning to have moments of pleasure. Player was beginning to master the dexterity of manipulating the shapes.

 End: Player was doing very well, learned to change difficulty level. Was able to advance to new levels, very excited and motivated to play.

Mike: The flow was disjointed at the beginning, the difficulty was frustrating because she continually was losing the game. Towards the end of the game the player was in flow, especially after she advanced to new levels. She didn't want to quit when the time was up. There was a dynamic feature of the game that allowed that player to become better at manipulating the shapes.

Mark: There was a definite challenge to learn how to manipulate the spatial combinations of the shapes. Player was curious about how to play the game and how it worked at the beginning. Player felt very little sense of control at beginning of the game but as her skill level improved her feelings of control increased. The game addressed all levels of intrinsic motivation.

John: The player was highly engaged and her attention was on the game. Player was able to use her past experiences with Tetris when learning to play the game. Player felt very little confidence at beginning, but Player chose the hardest level first. She felt no locus of control, however once she discoved how to change the level of difficulty she felt much more confident in her ability. Player was only satisfied when she made rows, but especially felt satisfaction once she progressed to the higher levels.

Jerry Niehaus
Roberto Del Busto
Sara Pehrsson
Dave Comstock

Time 0 - As the game begins teh subject discribes confusion.

Time 2 - By the first two minute period he is kind of bored and frustrated that he does not "understand" the point. Game 1 has score 359.

Time 4 - By time four minutes, the subject is still bored and frustrated that there is no noise and not many rewards.

Time 6 - Likes it better because winning.

Time 8 - Likes teh game a little better. Feels that he is getting better.

Time 10 - Sound gets turned on. The subject expresses more interest becasue of the sound.

Time 12 - Teh group begins to interact with the player by pointing out good moves and strategies. Teh player expresses more interesat in teh game.

Time 14 - I like the game better.

Time 16 - I like the game better. I like all the comments.

Time 18 - I feel good. I like the game. BOOM!

Time 20 - Teh group is interacting and encouraging with more enthusiasm. Teh player says, Ya I like it, but if I was by myself I would quit now.

Time 22 - Good. I like it, I want to win now and reach teh wall.

Time 24 - I'm into winning now.

John (Keller):
From the point of view of the ARCS model, the player's motivation increased as his confidence increased. Player score and enjoyment rose as his experience with the game increased. Also, when the sound feature was turned on, this helped focus attention and increased his motivation. However, the relevance was low... player noted that he would have stopped playing before 20 minutes if he had been on his own. The social factor of the group play helped increase the relevance for the player.

Csikszentmihalyi

At the beginning Hugh was frustated with the game. He did not undertand the game's purpose. As the game went on, he began to feel more comfortable with it. Flow was starting to take form at about 10 minutes, once sound was added to the game, and we were allowed to assist him. During the last 15 minutes of play, Hugh was very well aware of how to play the game. He also developed some strategies that allowed him to perform better.

Mark (Leper)
This game allows me to highlight several aspects of my theory of games. There are several motivators which will make learning and games more rewarding. the first of these are challenge. The subject began the game by expressing confusion. He perseved the game as too challenging because he did not have enough information. His emotional feeling over the first few minutes are low because the perceived challenge level is too high.

As the game continues, his curiosity helps to sustain him, but there is also an element of the unatural to this experiement in that the players is forced to continue to play. The very nature of "play" is removed from the eperiemnt by this element. The game stops being a toy and is more a tool.

This forced nature to the experiment also frustrates the players sense of control, another of the prime aspects of good motivation. The players feels lose of power. This is sensed in his stament that he does not get what the point is.

Game: Boogle

The purpose of the game is to find as many words as possible in a 5 by 5 grid of letters. Each game has a set amount of time. When the time is up the player receives a score.

The game had a steep learning curve. The first 6 minutes were spent figuring out how to play the game. The player was frustrated from the very beginning. The instructions were too long and detailed. It was difficult to grasp the main idea. There were visuals that were the most helpful. In the first 6 minutes the player had to refer to the instructions several times.

Once the learning curve was beat, the game never became enjoyable. Flow was never achieved. The player felt anxious throughout the entire time of play. The game did not allow the player to choose a difficulty level. Also, there was no performance feedback until after the game was over. A hint feature would have helped player feel more comfortable with the entire process. The interface was too simple. Also, it was unattractive and not intuitive at all. The player had to click buttons several times to figure out how they worked.

Analysis

The game did not offer any long term goals. A cumulative score would have helped motivate the player. The only randomness in the game was the set of letters given to the player at the start of each game. There is not feedback until the game ends. The game did not promote feelings of confidence at all. No audio nor visual stimulation was provided to the player. The player was not able to choose the level of difficult of the game, therefore the player did not promote feelings of self-determination and control. There was not intrinsic motivation provided through fantasy involvement. The game did not allow for any social interaction. The main flaw of this game is that it is taken from a popular board game that allows for competition and social interaction. This version removed all of that and therefore the fun as well.

Holly Hull, Tammy Goodwater, Mary McGibbons, Marie Doerner

Game-Absolute Stocks

Overall
The game didn't make a whole lot of sense. No control over what skills were needed to win the game-completely arbitrary. The game is very incongruent with the real stock market strategies.

Beginning
Tried to figure out game the first six minutes-working to get strategy down and understand the game. In this six minutes was when she had the most money and the highest score.

Middle
Losing interest in game, frustrated, irritated and not feeling in control at 10 minutes. Was not sure how to win game by 12 minutes. Realized that this game did not follow real life. Rapid losses between 10-12 minutes.

End
While Hugh continued playing until 22 minutes, the game was actually over for her after 12 minutes. Searching for something that works as a strategy. Game was very illogical. Tryed keeping one stock rather than diversifying which is "totally wrong" compared to the real life stock market. Insulted with simplicity and bored with the game. Inconsistent losses and gains between middle and end of time period.

Analysis

Mike
The challenge of the game was producing too much anxiety because she was unclear of the skills needed to successfully play the game. Therefore, flow was not achieved at the beginning.
However, as she began to understand the goal/rules/challenges/functionality, then she was beginning to get engaged in the flow. She was beginning to receive appropriate feedback and as her skills improved, so did the challenge. Unfortunately, about 8 minutes into the game, her experience with the real stock market was not providing "appropriate" feedback. Therefore, her skills did not seem to match the way the game was being played (lack of challenge) and she quickly entered into boredom.

Mark
Challenge
The challenge seemed out of reach from the beginning. The random nature of her performance feedback resulted in her giving up. Her high self-esteem and knowledge about the stock market led her to perceive the game as insulting and simplistic.

Curiousity
Her curiousity kept her coming up with new strategies.

Control
In the beginning, our player was trying to figure out how to gain control but she never did. Later on, feeling out of control was related to feelings of irritation.

Fantasy
While there are no real elements of fantasy in this game, for about 90 seconds in the first 2-4 minutes, our player felt a part of the game.
 
John
Attention
Confusing to look at and plain looking. Nothing on the screen, with the exception of the colors, caught my attention.

Relevance
The game itself did not appear to match the real life stock market. Therefore, the motive or goal of the game is unclear. Not enough information was provided about individual stocks. The game was almost too simplistic which may have caused a problem for our experienced player.

Confidence
The level of confidence that our player had went down as she continued to play the game because the game did not follow the real stock market. Also, Hugh was confused by keeping track of the scores.

Satisfaction
Hugh was not satisfied with this game because she was not able to keep control of this game.

We played Babel. The directions were lengthy and player said "I don't have a clue" at the start. Even with prior time to read the directions, she was still reading when the game started.

Hugh expressed frustration at 4 minutes because she wasn't accomplishing anything that seemed significant to success in the game. The computer kept responding "I don't see..." for each command she entered. At 8 minutes, she was trying to follow the game according to her understanding of the commands but the computer didn't let her do anything.

At 10 minutes, she said "Everyone else is having more fun. We have to read." There were 6 paragraphs of reading on her screen at this point. At 12 minutes, it said she was in a communication center, and she could almost see a picture. She said there was no clue as to the goal.

At 16 minutes, she figured out there were "special commands" and requested a printout. After 20 minutes, she learned that she only had achieved one out of 25 points and said she felt dejected. When instructor gave the option to stop, Hugh quit playing and a substitute Hugh got hooked into trying to understand this frustrating game.

Observers noted that game was demotivating due to the following: lots of small print to read, little extrinsic or instrinsic reward, minimal sensory input, no clear goals or directions. It inspired little arousal, it seemed irrelevant to anything in the player's experience. There was no satisfaction for the player because there was little perceived achievement, learning or understanding.

Feedback given by the computer was not encouraging, constructive, or clear. Feedback was consistent and frequent but not always helpful. Feedback was only visual.

This game is not recommended for individuals who do not tolerate ambiguity well.

 Game: Snood

Summary:
During the first run of the game. Hugh became "frustrated" and "worried about losing" during minutes 6-8. He lost the game at minute 9.


During the second run of the game at minute 14, Hugh complained that we "interrupted his flow". Although the score was the same as his frustration time, he commented that "he is intent on winning." At 16 minutes he claimed "I've got it beat."

When the skill level matched the challenge of the game Hugh seemed positive.

When the challenge was high (score and danger level were high) and Hugh's skills were low, he was frustrated.

Hugh did not favor the idea of playing the low skill levels again.


When Hugh was in flow, he was oblivious to environment and focused on the game.

Hugh would have enjoyed a time limit or more pressure.

Team 4: Harry the handsome executive -
Keller: catches attention with scenario; music, graphics get boring after awhile; lack of sufficient new elements; lack of instructional content; destroys self-confidence; no sense of direction; lack of feedback - instructions only; no satisfaction, no relevance
Czikszentmihalyi: no flow; didn't want to go on; no reason to continue; boredom; just for a moment, when I thought I had an assignment; anxiety: feeling stupid at times
Lepper & Malone: lack of clear, obvious goal; too much, too fast - player wanted to control it; scoring confusing; hated audio effects after awile; some randomness; game slow; not exciting; not competitive; multiple levels - variable difficulty levels; not stimulating after first minute - exogenous fantasy <- only depended on navigational skill, little or no instructional content

Welcome to the discussion space for our game analysis. To post your comments, click on Post a New Message... the orange rectangle at the upper right of this message.