MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224996065 · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517685

Press A to Jump: Design Strategies for Video Game Learnability

2022· article· en· W4224996065 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearnabilityComputer scienceVideo gameUsabilityMultimediaHuman–computer interactionGame design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learnability is a core aspect of software usability. Video games are not an exception, as game designers need to teach players how to play their creations. We analyzed 40 contemporary video games to identify how video games approach learning experiences. We found that games have advanced far beyond using simple tutorials or demonstration screens and adopt a range of repeatable and reusable design strategies using visual cues to facilitate learning. We provide a detailed descriptive framework of these design strategies, elucidating how and when they can be used, and describing how the visual cues are used to build them. Our research can be useful for both general HCI researchers and practitioners seeking to tap into the rich ideas from video game learnability design looking for practical solutions for their work.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.252
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it