Game usability : advice from the experts for advancing the player experience
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I. What is usability and why should I care? A. Overview chapter Isbister and Schaffer (Editors) Introduces key concepts and positions book for primary audiences: game developers and students aspiring to work in game development. Addresses key concerns that developers may have about adopting usability, and sets a broad road map of what is to come in the book. B. Interview with Tobi Saulnier of 1st Playable A discussion with the CEO of a small game studio about why and how she uses usability techniques in her development. C. Interview with Don Norman of Nielsen Norman group A discussion with one of the preeiminent HCI practitioners of usability in design practice, about how game developers may benefit from usability techniques, and about trends in usability. II. Usability techniques 101 A. Use of Classic usability techniques at Microsoft Games Wixon (Microsoft) An overview of the tactics in use to improve games usability at one of the earliest adopters of usability techniques. B. Expert evaluation Laitinen (Adage, Helsinki) Overview of how to conduct expert evaluations and when they can be of value in game usability. C. Heuristic evaluation Schaffer (RPI) Overview of the use of heuristics in game evaluation. D. Selling usability in the organization Noergaard (Copenhagen U.) & Rau (IO Interactive) Overview of challenges and process for convincing your company to adopt usability practices. E. Think-aloud evaluation and other interview techniques Hounhoot (Philips Research) Interview techniques including think-aloud and retrospective think-aloud as they apply to game usability. F. Interview with Eric Schaffer, CEO and Founder of Human Factors International On the use of standards and their application to game usability and development. G. (seeking another interview with a game company person about bringing usability to their organization) III. Focus on types of players A. The four fun keys Lazarro (Xeo) Overview of the her taxonomy of fun that is a result of player observation, and how this applies to game usability. B. Game usability for children Lieberman (UC Santa Barbara) Overview of usability topics of special interest to developers of children's games. C. Interview with Tsurumi of Sony Japan about cultural issues in usability, by Kenji Ono D. (seeking another interview with one of Nicole's clients about use of fun keys?) IV. Focus on special contexts A. Mobile games usability Mayra (U. Tampere, Finland) B. Casual games usability Fortugno (Rebel Monkey, NYC) C. Alternate reality games usability Thompson (Georgia IT) D. RPG usability Tychsen (ITU) E. Educational games usability Hounhoot and Verhaegh (Philips) F. (still seeking someone to write about MMOs in particular) V. Advanced tactics A. Rigorous prototyping Swink (Flashbang Studios) The role of rapid, iterative prototyping in games usability. B. Instrumenting games Pagulayan (Microsoft) How this was done in Halo 3, and lessons/advice for others interested in this method. C. Social psychology and usability Isbister (ITU) Using social psychological research findings to benchmark designs in usability. D. Physiological approaches (1) Hazlett (Johns Hopkins) Use of small muscle movement in the face to detect emotion when playing games. E. Physiological approaches (2) Mandryk (U. Saskatchewan) Use of integrated suite of physiological measures to detect emotion when playing games. F. Interview with Jenova Chen about prototyping fl0w and contributions to its usability. G. Interview with Will Wright about rapid prototyping and usability in his design process. VI. Putting it all together A. At-a-glance matrix of issues and tools Isbister and Schaffer (Editors) To help guide readers with particular issues to particular chapters. B. Interview with Saito of Ritsumeikan of the role of game technologies in driving innovation in other product areas in Japan (by Kenji Ono)
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle