Visual Assessment Tool

Developing an assessment tool for path games

Typically, path games make use of dice or a spinner to navigate the player through the game board. I constructed this week’s assessment tool to look like path game. The player scores each criteria I have chosen to include from 1-6 (this is done visually using a dice). The player then advances the play token forward based on the score given on the game board below. The closer the token gets to the end of the game board, the better overall rating the game scored.

According to Jane McGonigal in Reality is Broken chapter 2, the second fix for reality is emotional activation: “compared with games, reality is depressing. Games focus our energy, with relentless optimism, on something we’re good at and enjoy” (p. 38). While we may consider our real lives depressing (or at least, not always exciting), path games have the potential to make your life more exciting. For that reason, I included How exciting was this game to play? to my assessment criteria.

Similarly, in chapter 3 of her book, McGonigal argues that games offer people clearer missions and more satisfying, hands-on work (p. 55), which translates into more satisfying work. McGonigal states that more satisfying work includes two criteria: first, a clear goal, and second, actionable next steps toward achieving that goal (p.55). I have decided to incorporate this into my assessment of my path game because I think that good games provide a number of goals to complete throughout the game, while the player is on their way to the final goal. How satisfying was it to play this game? According to Trepte & Reinecke (2010), “the player’s identification with the avatar seems to be crucial for experiencing entertainment, but is not necessarily tied to similarity” (p. 180). I thought that this was an interesting statement and the growth of the player's “character”. After reading the Trepte & Reinecke article I began wondering how my satisfaction of the game was influenced by my identification with the character I was playing, even if it wasn’t necessarily tied to similarities. For that reason, I wanted to include this aspect in my assessment criteria.

I always like to include rules as one of the criteria when I assess the games that I play since I would suggest that rules are one of the most fundamental aspect of games. According to Kapp (2012), rules set out the number of players, how to score points, and outline what is allowed. Several authors cite rules as a core feature of games, including Kapp (2012), Michael & Chen (2005), and McGonigal (2011). For this reason, including rules as an area of assessment was important. I want to ensure game rules are written in a way that does not leave the player guessing or interpreting rules.

I have included aesthetics as one of my assessment criteria in the exploration of this week’s path game. According to Kapp (2012), visual elements are present in all games and are an important element. Without effective visual cues, the game runs a serious risk of reducing the overall experience of the player. Similarly, Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, Robert Zubek (2004) argue that the definition of aesthetics should not be limited to just to visual cues, but should also include: sensation, fantasy, narrative, challenge, social, discovery, expression and time investment (p. 2). The Game of Life used excellent visual elements throughout the game. The cards are well illustrated, the board includes 3D buildings that pop up off the board, there are hills that add additional visual elements, but one of the most aesthetically pleasing features, and one that really immerses the player in the game, is the token that you advance around the board. The game token is a car that you can add family members too as you get married and have children. It’s a great feature. The game also incorporates a mix of sensations (pleasure), fantasy (at least when I play I love to roleplay my character jokingly), and narrative (story) as Hunicke, LeBlanc, Zubek describe.

I also wanted to include the assessment of the game’s level of difficulty, or challenge. According to McGonigal (2011), creating a perfect balance between a hard challenge and achievability is the key to effectively providing the user with the feedback to know their skills within a game are progressing and that they are getting better (p. 24). Path games are traditionally not be very challenging, since most of the decisions being made are completely random and up to chance, by spinning the wheel or rolling dice. I would argue that most traditional path games suffer from this issue, especially games like The Game of Life, Candy Land, and Snakes & Ladders.

In the end, my game assessment includes the following criteria:

• How exciting was this game to play?
• How satisfying was the game to play?
• How clearly written were the rules?
• How aesthetically pleasing is the game?
• How challenging is the game?

References

Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Workshops/2004/WS-04-04/WS04-04-001.pdf

Kapp, K.M. (2012). The Gamification of learning and instruction: game-based method and strategies for training and education. Retrieved from http://discover.sjlibrary.org/iii/encore_sjsu/record/C__Rb5018864

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. NY: Penguin Press.

Michael, D. R., and Chen, S.L. (2005). Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform. Boston: Course Technology.

Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2010). Avatar creation and video game enjoyment: Effects of life-satisfaction, game competitiveness, and identification with the avatar. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(4), 171-184. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000022