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

1. IC3BREAKER GAME DESIGN Prototype: Presentation & Evaluation Arundhati, Yusuf, Patience, Bashir

2. OBJECTIVES Revised Requirement specifications Designing of the Game Prototype Implementation Evaluation of the Prototype Recommendations for Changes Research

3. PURPOSE OF THE GAME 1. Designing for ‘edu’tainment- teaching aid 2. Interaction through Tangible Objects 3. ‘Fun’ along with Functional 4. Developing logical thinking

5. Gender Both

6. Gamer type: Beginner

7. Must understand English

8. Preliminary education (alphabets. numbers)

9. No Computer Literacy required

11. Spatial thinking _____________________________ Instructional Objectives: Constructivist Theory behavior to be measured – efficiency/ speed/ logic conditions under which the behavior will be measured – no preset conditions/barriers (3) a minimum level of achievement needed to master the objectives

13. Musical aid to engage

14. Auditory Feedback

15. Exploration as well as Foresight required SERIOUS FUN Creating Value EASY FUN Imagination

16. Game Design Game Concept: Game Description: Mathematical trivia to build on spatial as well as logical foresight . Genre: Strategy, Puzzle <teaching aid> Platform: Table top Interface – fiducial based Game Mechanics: Core Gameplay: Hitting the hammer on the right side/color 2) Movement of objects across the screen to travel 3) Placement of right objects to proceed Mode of play: Two 1- Colour – count game 2- Treasure- trivia game Game Flow: Completion of each task

17. FIDUCIAL MOVEMENTS USED

18. Concrete Representation HEXAGON FIDUCIAL HAMMER FOR COLOUR DETECTION

19. Abstract Representation OBJECTS USED FOR FIDUCIAL MOVEMENTS AND ANSWER DETECTION

20. PROTOTYPING

21. FUNCTIONALITY CODING (IMPLEMENTATION) CONSTRAINTS PROTOTYPING

22. COLOR STRATEGY GAME DEMO

23. TREASURE GAME DEMO

24. EVALUATION METHODS FIELD STUDY (Observation) USER TESTING (Cognitive Walkthrough) EXPERT EVALUATION(Heuristics evaluation) http://research.edm.uhasselt.be/~craymaekers/deng-ve/papers/Bernhaupt.pdf

25. HEURISTICS EVALUATION Construction of the setup should be comfortable to use/no awkward position Adapted to the possibilities of tabletop/ adequate and appropriate Gameplay /setup should be supportive Player should be able to execute all actions relevant by himself Interaction should satisfy the expectations &have game logic Should meet the player’s needs in terms of the setup (eg: seating pos) Game play should not be hinder the examinability area Reach of players should be adapted to the requirements of game play Designed to suit/satisfy the preconditions of a tabletop setup Player shouldn’t be overburdened to a negative influence point

26. USABILITY TESTING

28. FIELD STUDY WORD CLOUD

29. CONCLUSION: RECOMMENDATIONS

30. Regina Bernhaupt, Nicholas Kinard. User Experience Evaluation for Multimodal Interaction in Games Based on a classification of user experience evaluation methods for games, this contribution shows how to adopt user experience evaluation for the area of multi-modal interaction in games. Christina Köffel , Michael Haller. Heuristics for the Evaluation of Tabletop Games Identification of ten heuristics, all of which have been evaluated with experts playing with four different tabletop games. The heuristics contain all facets offered by tabletop games, such as game play and game story, virtual interface, and the special properties of augmented tabletop games. RESEARCH Cangemi, Sam. 50 Tactile and Visual Perception Games for Under $10: A Guide to Reading Readiness Games for Pre-School Teachers, Head Start Teachers, and First Grade Teachers Describes perceptual games for preschool children which makes use of tactile and virtual perception to give opportunities to children to make choices and discriminate, provides reading and readiness experiences. Lori L Scarlatos. Tangible Math This paper describes how math games with tangible user interfaces can address the need of enhancing the understanding and retention of difficult concepts. It discusses pedagogical principles and an approach to designing and developing game that utilize tangible technologies.

31. Javier Marco, Eva Cerezo, Sandra Baldasarri, EmannuelaMazzone, Janet C Read. User-Oriented Design and Tangible Interaction for Kindergarten Children.(June 2009). Describes a tabletop prototype that allows kindergarten children to take the benefits of the new pedagogical possibilities that tangible interaction and tabletop technologies offer to manipulative learning. Michael S. Horn, Orit Shaer, Audrey Girouard, Leanne M. Hirshfield Erin TreacySolovey, Jamie Zigelbaum, Robert J.K. Jacob. Putting Tangible User Interfaces in Context: A Unifying Framework for Next Generation HCI. Reality Based Interaction proposed as a basis for understanding the role of tangible user interfaces within the broader context of emerging human-computer interaction styles. RESEARCH GeorgiosChristou, Frank E.Ritter, Robert J.K. Jacob. Knowledge-Based Usability Evaluation For Reality-Based Interaction “Challenges in the Evaluation of Usability and User Experience in Reality-Based Interaction”. (CHI 2009). Proposal of a new evaluation method for Post-WIMP interaction styles called the KBUE (Knowledge Based Usability Evaluation) that is based on similar ideas to those that drive cognitive architectures. Robert J.K. Jacob, Audrey Glrouard, Leanne M.Hirshfield, Michael S.Horn, Orit Shaer, Erin Tracey Solovey, Jamie Zigelbaum. Reality-Based Interaction: Unifying theNew Generation of Interaction Styles. CHI 2007 Proposal of the notion of concept that ties (RBI) as a unifying Interaction together a large subset of these emerging interaction styles