Embedded Files
Figure 15: Sample Cards from Mockup
Purpose:
The purpose of our first round was to have proxy users participate in a blind play-test to analyze sentiments about individual elements and the overall design for the card game mockup. Due to the virtual environment of this project, this testing was conducted with college students serving as proxy users, instead of children within our target age range of eight to twelve years old. Through this testing we wanted to assess two factors: (1) which gameplay elements were intuitive to proxy users, and (2) the overall level of enjoyment experienced by the proxy users while play-testing.
Test Methodology:
Two team members conducted one large testing session with the card game mockup on May 1st, during which eight Northwestern college students interacted with the card game mockup. In order to make the proxy users as similar to the direct users as possible, only students with a maximum of one year of high school chemistry were selected to test the mockup. The card game mockup included four decks of nine cards, each featuring a distinct atomic character. Each card included the type, attack profile, electron count, and special attack properties of the corresponding atom character.
The players were given a basic explanation of the rules of the game, and received a sheet that contained the following instructions for taking turns and utilizing special rules.
Taking turns: Each player lays down a card at the same time, and the player with the highest
electron number wins the round. This first place player gets three points. The player with the second highest electron count gets two points, the third highest receives one point, and the player in last receives none. If there’s a tie for the highest electron count, each person in the tie only receives one point.
General Tips and Tricks:
Be aware of what other cards your opponents have played. Try not to tie!
Don’t throw away your highest cards at the start of the game, as you will need to maximize your points throughout the entire game, not just the beginning.
Special Rule: Molecular Pairs
A player can choose to play two cards at once (a molecular pair as specified on the corresponding card) to beat any other atoms played on the table, including Nina the Neon atom.
The player then forfeits the turn immediately after playing a molecular pair, as the player will now have one less card.
If both molecular doubles are played in the same round by different players, the pair with the stronger bond (potassium and chlorine) will win the round.
Advanced Rule: Guessing Opponent’s Card
During the last round, the player with the lowest amount of points can attempt to guess the last remaining card in the lead player’s hand. If they guess correctly, the lead player is knocked down by four points. If they guess incorrectly, they lose the four points.
If the guessing player successfully guesses the card, the lead player can block the points loss by guessing the other player’s card and naming two of the atom’s traits, which are identified in red on each atomic character card.
If the guessing player guesses correctly, they can name three properties of the atom, which are identified in red on each atomic character card to automatically win the game.
Results:
The table below summarizes the user proxy results. The questions, as well as the answers to both the pre and post tests can be found below.
Pre and Post Test Questions:
Do you know what a valence electron is? Define it.
Given answer and description before the beginning of the game. Assessed for memory and accuracy during post-test.
Do you know what the octet rule is? Define it.
Given answer and description before the beginning of the game. Assessed for memory and accuracy during post-test.
Rate your ability to identify the properties of elements (specifically the amount of valence electrons they contain) on a scale of 1 to 5. (1 being most confident)
What is the maximum amount of valence electrons that an atom can contain?
Metric for assessing performance: correct answer (C) vs incorrect answer (I)
How many valence electrons does neon have?
Metric for assessing performance: correct answer (C) vs incorrect answer (I)
Classify neon as a type of atom.
Metric for assessing performance: correct answer (C) vs incorrect answer (I)
How many valence electrons does oxygen have?
Metric for assessing performance: correct answer (C) vs incorrect answer (I)
Additional Post-Test Questions:
How likely are you to play this game again on a scale of 1 to 5? (1 being most likely)
How much did you enjoy playing this game on a scale from 1 to 5? (1 being loved, 5 being hated)
Table 3: Card Game Mockup Feedback
Analysis, Conclusions, and Limitations:
Analysis of Results: The card game mockup showed strong potential for increasing the chemistry knowledge of the proxy users, and was met with a lukewarm, nearing positive reception in terms of gameplay and overall entertainment.
Chemistry Knowledge: The card game mockup showed some potential for increasing the chemistry knowledge of the users. Almost all users showed improvement in the content-based questions on the knowledge test, with eight out of eight proxy users providing correct answers for questions 4 and 5. The third question of the test also demonstrated that four of the eight proxy users believed that their general confidence in identifying the properties of atoms had improved through playing the game.
Entertainment Factor: The answers to questions 8 and 9 on the post-test indicate a mediocre to positive enjoyment and willingness to replay the mockup. From observation and interviews, the proxy users were slightly confused by the general points system, as well as the overall strategy for the game. The players very much enjoyed the aesthetic aspect of the game and thought that the fun and creative character designs were cute and engaging.
Shortcomings of the Mockup: There was one glaring issue with this mockup that emerged as a result of user testing. After playing a molecular pair as a special attack, two players found themselves with no cards during the last rounds. This resulted in the final, high-intensity guessing aspect of the game no longer being possible, which was a disappointing, anti-climatic end for the proxy users. Moving forward, one correction to this shortcoming may be to outlaw the use of molecular pairs during the seventh and eight rounds of the game.
Conclusion: The results suggest that this mockup is successful at improving the chemistry knowledge of the users, but is partially lacking in terms of user experience, specifically the ease of play and overall enjoyment of the game. The aspect of the game that was most highly praised by the proxy users was the cute, engaging aesthetic of the atomic characters. There is one design challenge that must be addressed if future iterations of this mockup are to be successful.
Limitations: The overall conclusions drawn from this mockup testing are primarily limited by the nature of the participants being proxy users. Although the participants were fitted and ensured to have limited chemistry knowledge, all of the proxy users had taken at least one chemistry class in high school. As a result, the baseline familiarity of the proxy users will be greater than that of our target age range. When extrapolating from this testing, the improvement shown in the pre and post test must be evaluated within the context of age. If this mockup is selected as the final design, testing with a more sophisticated prototype must be completed with users from the target age range.
Page updated
Report abuse