Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

A Framework and Taxonomy of Videogame Playing Preferences (CHI PLAY 17)

391 visualizaciones

Publicado el

We propose a conceptual framework of player preferences based on two dimensions: game elements and game playing styles. To investigate these two concepts, we conducted an online survey of player preferences, which allowed us to create a taxonomy of nine groups of game elements and five groups of game playing styles. These two concepts are foundational to games, which means that our model can be used by designers to create games that are tailored to their target audience.

Publicado en: Ciencias
  • Inicia sesión para ver los comentarios

A Framework and Taxonomy of Videogame Playing Preferences (CHI PLAY 17)

  1. 1. A Framework and Taxonomy of Videogame Playing Preferences Gustavo F. Tondello, Rina R. Wehbe, Rita Orji, Giovanni Ribeiro, Lennart E. Nacke
  2. 2. Goal Investigate player preferences for different game design elements and game playing styles 2 Game design elements What players do in a game: • resource harvesting • unit production • puzzles • role-playing • collection • shooting • exploration • etc. Game playing styles How players interact with a game: • soloing • raiding • 1st / 3rd person view • streaming • watching • casual play • etc.
  3. 3. Methods 1. List of 66 game design elements and 20 game playing styles Based on brainstorming and a survey of game design literature 2. Data collection “Please rate how much the following elements motivate you when you play a game” (5-point Likert scale from “not at all” to “very much”) 3. Data analysis Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) Correlational analysis 3 196participants aged 15-71 (M = 26.7, SD = 9.7) 124 men, 53 women, 4 transgender, 3 non-binary
  4. 4. Groups of Game Design Elements Strategic resource management •resource management, construction, strategic play Puzzle •diverse types of puzzles Artistic movement •music, painting, drawing, and body movement Sports and cards •sports, cards, and gambling Role-playing •fantasy, science fiction, avatars, and exploration Virtual goods •acquisition, collection, and use of virtual goods or resources Simulation •simulation of scenarios inspired by real life Action •shooting, detonation, fighting, combat, racing, etc. Progression •skill trees, character progression 4Icons are CC-BY 3.0 by
  5. 5. Groups of Game Playing Styles Multiplayer •teams, raids, chatting, voice-over, MOBAs, MMOs Abstract Interaction •top-down, isometric, and third- person views Solo play •player vs environment (PvE), free movement, third-person view Competitive community •eSports, streaming, watching, first- person view, player vs player (PvP) Casual play •casual, occasional playing 5Icons are CC-BY 3.0 by
  6. 6. The complete Framework Multiplayer Abstract Interaction Solo play Competitive community Casual play 6Icons are CC-BY 3.0 by Puzzle Strategic resource management Sports and cards Artistic movement Virtual goods Role-playing Simulation Action Progression .359 .360 –.318 .367 .349 .368 .301 .478
  7. 7. Correlation with Age 7 Role-playing Action Solo play Competitive community Younger Older Casual play
  8. 8. Preferences by Gender 8 Men Women Strategic resource management Sports and cards Action Puzzle Artistic movement Virtual goods Casual playMultiplayer Competitive community
  9. 9. Implications 9 Design • Appealing to specific audiences • Designers can choose elements with similar player preferences • Personalizing the player experience • Tailoring the game with the preferred elements for each player Research • Considering player preferences to better understand player experience • What is enjoyable to one player might not be so to others
  10. 10. Link to full paper: A Framework and Taxonomy of Videogame Playing Preferences CONTACT Gustavo F. Tondello @GustavoTondello 10