DEGREE PROJECT IN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2017

Design and evaluation of an interface prototype for content selection for a game that supports user-generated content

ZEHUA SHAN

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND COMMUNICATION English title Design and evaluation of an interface prototype for content selection for a game that supports user-generated content

Swedish title Design och utvärdering av en gränssnittsprototyp för innehållsval för ett spel som stödjer användargenererat innehåll

Zehua Shan [email protected]

DA223X Degree Project in Computer Science and Communication, Second Cycle, 30 credits Degree Programme in Information and Communication Technology, 300 credits Master’s Programme, Interactive Media Technology, 120 credits KTH Royal Institute of Technology School of Computer Science and Communication (CSC) Supervisor at CSC was Helena Tobiasson Examiner at CSC was Jan Gulliksen 2017­06­19

ABSTRACT Games that support a high level of customization is few, and their success varies, but it is an apparent trend that more and more games strive to offer players more highly customizable gaming experience. One huge part of the customizable experience beyond creating and sharing user’s creations is experiencing experiences created by others. Designing such an interface that support the user to do so poses many challenges. What do the users need? How should the content be displayed? What do users look for when trying to find something interesting? Those are just a few of the questions that need to be answered when creating a solution for such an interface. The question this paper tries to answer is:

What are the main elements for a content selection interface that fulfill the needs of it’s users and meets their expectation for a game that supports vastly different gameplay experiences?

A survey was sent out to get a grasp on what the users needs, with the results from survey and knowledge gained from the background study, an interface prototype design was developed. To get a reality check from potential users, the prototype was evaluated with user testing, and feedback from users was gained from semi­structured interviews. Result suggests that the proposed set of function and information available are sufficient for most user, and the structure was clear. However, there are some features that the users wish to see, which could prove useful in helping users find interesting content. The knowledge gained from the study resulted in a prototype and some suggestions for future work regarding similar projects.

SAMMANFATTNING Spel som stödjer en hög grad av anpassning är få, och deras framgång varierar, men det är en tydlig trend att fler och fler spel strävar efter att erbjuda spelare mer anpassningsbar spelupplevelse. En stor del av den anpassningsbara upplevelsen utöver att skapa och dela användarens skapelser är att uppleva upplevelser som skapats av andra. Att utforma ett sådant gränssnitt som stödjer användaren att göra det ställer många utmaningar. Vad behöver användarna? Hur ska innehållet visas? Vad letar användare efter när man försöker hitta något intressant? Det är bara några av de frågor som behöver besvaras när man skapar en lösning för ett sådant gränssnitt. Frågan som den här studien försöker svara är:

Vilka är huvudelementen för ett innehållsvalgränssnitt som uppfyller användarnas behov och uppfyller förväntningarna för ett spel som stöder väldigt olika spelupplevelser?

En undersökning skickades ut för att få tag på vad användarna behöver, med resultaten från undersökningen och kunskapen från bakgrundsstudien utvecklades en gränssnittsprototypdesign. För att få en verklighetskontroll från potentiella användare utvärderades prototypen med användartestning, och feedback från användarna samlades genom halvstrukturerade intervjuer. Resultatet tyder på att den föreslagna uppsättningen funktions­ och information tillgänglig är tillräcklig för de flesta användare, och strukturen var tydlig. Det finns dock vissa funktioner som användarna vill se, vilket kan vara användbart för att hjälpa användare att hitta intressant innehåll. Kunskapen från studien resulterade i en prototyp och några förslag till framtida arbete avseende liknande projekt.

Design and evaluation of an interface prototype for content selection for a game that supports user-generated content Zehua Shan KTH Royal Institute of Technology [email protected]

ABSTRACT singular experiences, as several journals describes[2][27][28]. Games that support a high level of customization is few, and One model of achieving this is through delivering their success varies, but it is an apparent trend that more and Downloadable Content(DLC), and the other model is building more games strive to offer players more highly customizable game with great customization support, delivering more content gaming experience. One huge part of the customizable through community participation. There are some cases of this experience beyond creating and sharing user’s creations is approach in the industry[21], as some described[29][30], experiencing experiences created by others. Designing such an Minecraft is a great example of this. Those games that do interface that support the user to do so poses many challenges. support the high level of customization, however, mostly relies What do the users need? How should the content be displayed? on community solutions for sharing of customized gameplay What do users look for when trying to find something content via forum or websites. Browsing for community interesting? Those are just a few of the questions that need to be websites requires spending time on finding interesting custom answered when creating a solution for such an interface. The game modes on other platforms which might not be known to question this paper tries to answer is: the user, thus creating a gap between users and the content. For a more convenient experience with higher usability, it is in the What are the main elements for a content selection interface industry’s interest to integrate content sharing solutions into the that fulfill the needs of it’s users and meets their expectation for game itself. a game that supports vastly different gameplay experiences? Seeing this trend, a game development company where the A survey was sent out to get a grasp on what the users needs, author conducted this study, started a project which set out to with the results from survey and knowledge gained from the explore the possibilities for creating an environment for background study, an interface prototype design was personalized gaming experience with a focus on first person developed. To get a reality check from potential users, the games, whether it is a first­person shooter or a first­person prototype was evaluated with user testing, and feedback from sports game. The project revolves around creating a game, with users was gained from semi­structured interviews. Result the goal that the game content could be adapted by the user in a suggests that the proposed set of function and information simple way, also that the user's personalized experiences could available are sufficient for most user, and the structure was be shared easily with players using the same game. clear. However, there are some features that the users wish to see, which could prove useful in helping users find interesting Another part of sharing the experience is for others to find and content. The knowledge gained from the study resulted in a enjoy the experience shared. With the tools that the game will prototype and some suggestions for future work regarding provide to its users, the users could create everything from a similar projects. puzzle game to a Massively Multiplayer Online Role­Playing Game(MMORPG); the user has to be able to find game content according to their need. Creating an interface that supports the Categories and Subject Descriptors user to do so poses many challenges, what do the users need? I.2.1 [Computing Methodologies] Application and How should the content be sorted? What do users look for Expert Systems – Games when trying to find something interesting? Those are just a few of the questions that need to be answered when creating a General Terms solution for such an interface.

Theory This paper focuses on investigating what features or functions,

that are helpful for users for finding interesting game content, Keywords and what information do users base their decision about Game, HCI, User Experience, User­Generated Content, whether to try a new game or not. Lastly, to investigate whether Game Interface Design. the proposed structure of these features and information is intuitive for users, in the form of evaluation of a design prototype. The investigation is mostly conducted from a content 1. INTRODUCTION consumer point of view, not from a content creator point of In author's experience, most first­person PC games on the view. market today has predetermined conditions, generating streamlined and monotonous gameplay[1]. The nature of those games means that the content selection is simple since the game 1.1 Game Modification could only play in a certain way. For different gameplay or Game modification, or "mod" for short, is the alteration of the experience, players would simply have to choose another game content of a video game. Mods are made by the game's end that suits their needs better or modify the game(mods). users or sometimes even game developers, and could range from simple assets to entirely new games, including new maps, To keep gamers around, it is becoming a trend for game units, textures, weapons, items, sound, story line and so on. In development companies to develop game as platform or this project, the mods are considered as whole new games, and services with more to experience for its users, rather than the focus lies on how to present the mods to other users in the

best way. Also, sales aspect of user creations is not taken into popularity cycle of videos on YouTube and other similar UGC consideration during this study. video services. In this study, the authors made distinctions between UGC and non­UGC videos and their implications. 2. BACKGROUND Comparing NetFlix and YouTube or similar services, there are In the following section, we will first explore motivation for clear differences in the contents production cycle and how play and motivation for contributions, since players and content videos are found by its users. Similarly, user­generated game creators or modders are the key user groups of this interface. content could also be differentiated from the full titles released Afterward, we will look into related studies regarding by game production companies. user­generated content and usability design guidelines. Lastly, a few of the related work will be presented, to get a grip of the Ghosh and Hummel [9] analyzed two mechanisms that use state in the game industry.. viewer ratings to rank content, to explore which of those two mechanisms incentivizes for higher quality contribution and generates better viewer welfare. One of which is the rank­order 2.1 Motivations based mechanism, where contributions with higher rating are Like any product, for the product to be successful, it is placed on the top of the page, and lower rating contributions on important that designers understand the need of its users. the lower side of the page in falling order. The other mechanism Although the studies regarding player's motivations are mostly is a proportional mechanism, which places contribution around gameplay experience and are more related to game depending their proportion of positive rating. The result design rather than interface design at first glance, the interface suggests that the rank­order mechanism almost always designer must understand the player's psychological needs incentivizes higher quality contribution, and thus contributes to while designing interface, to better support player's goals. better viewer welfare. Similarly, understanding contributor's motivation is also necessary, for the designer to support contributor's need Borghol et al [10] studied on factors that impact YouTube video through interface design. popularity, by collecting and analyzing data regarding video statistics, historical view data, and influential events. When In an attempt to understand the motivation for computer controlling for video content, they found that the total view gameplay, Ryan et al. [3] conducted four studies with online count is the biggest factor contributing to video popularity, multiplayer gaming communities applying self­determination observing a strong "rich­get­richer" behavior, except for newly theories. A total of 927 participants were recruited for those uploaded videos. For newly uploaded videos, they found that studies, and the methods were mostly based on questionnaires, uploader brand and number of keywords or tags to be the although play tests in laboratories were also conducted in biggest factor impacting video popularity. combination in the first three studies. Results suggest that motivation of play rests on the game's ability to satisfies the Zhou et al [11] conducted a measurement study on a large player's basic psychological needs, namely Autonomy, dataset of YouTube videos, to explore the recommendation Competence, Relatedness[4]. Furthermore, Yee conducted a system's impact on video views. They crawled the YouTube study regarding motivation for playing online games [5]. Data website to study how videos were discovered by users and was collected through questionnaires, which was sent out to what the major sources of the drive are for a video to get views. 3000 Massively Multiplayer Online Role­Playing Game They found that the most views are generated through YouTube (MMORPG) players. The results indicate that the player's Search, and the second major source of views comes from motivation for play could be categorized into three main Related Videos. Related Videos is the source of 30% of all the categories; Achievement, Social, and Immersion. The three generated views, only second to YouTube Search by a small main categories consist of 10 subcomponents in total, for percentage. Also, the evaluation shows that the existence of example, advancement, mechanics, and competition are Related Video recommendation helps to increase the diversity subcomponents of Achievement. of video views by helping viewers discover videos of their interest, rather than only showing the popular videos. Sotamaa [6] studied the modder community around a First­Person Shooter game called Operation Flashpoint, about the modders motivation, potential commercialization of their 2.3 Design work and their notion of ownership. He suggests that the five As the study is about designing is a graphical interface for a main motivations of modding are Playing, Hacking, game, general usability aspects, and game­related design Researching, Artistic expression and Co­operation. Postigo [7], aspects should be taken into consideration. Lu Hsi­Peng and whom also studied the modder community, identified three Hsu Chin­Lung conducted a study applying technology central motivations for modding PC games. Firstly, hobbyists acceptance model [12] incorporating social influences and flow that consider modding as a way to creatively and artistically experience [13] as parameters, to predict users’ acceptance of express themselves. Secondly, modders that want to increase online games. The model they suggested was evaluated using their enjoyment of the game and lastly, modders that see data collected from surveys, which was sent out to 233 users. modding games as a way of showing off their skills, seeing it Some findings from the study indicate that flow experience is as a channel to potentially acquire a job in the game industry. important since users intend to play online games to be fully immersed, thus increasing usability through social interaction, good navigation easy access is essential for successfully 2.2 User­Generated Content(UGC) manage an online game community. Furthermore, Wiles and To handle the user generated gaming experiences, a content Johnson [14] conducted a study about whether computer games selection system that can handle a vast variety of content is design comes in conflict with the widely accepted interface needed. A connection could be found between the game's design heuristics [15]. One example of which, when game content selection process in this study and currently available menus generally have an attractive appearance with fancy online Video On Demand(VOD) services, in the sense that animations and eye­catching colors, sometimes, this comes at those services also are built with handling the vast variety of the expense of readability and functionality. Anytime the user is content in mind. Cha et al. [8] conducted a study regarding the

forced to interact with the menu with such characteristics; it 2.5 Research Question may cause frustration and thus break the flow experience. The goal of this master thesis project is to to find out the important aspects of designing an interface that supports UGC, Nielsen et al. [16] conducted a study about user’s reading through design and evaluation of an content selection interface pattern on web solutions using eye tracking. They recorded prototype. With knowledge from the motivation of gamers and how 232 users scanned the content of thousands of website. modders alike, user­generated content, the use of interaction Results reveal a dominant reading pattern that resembles an “F,” design methods and related work try to answer the research and the pattern contains three components. They noticed that question: most of the users would first read in a horizontal movement along the top of the screen, afterward, users will move lower What are the main elements for a content selection interface down the screen and scan horizontally again. Finally, users will that fulfill the needs of it’s users and meets their expectation for usually scan the left side of the screen vertically; this is the last a game that supports vastly different gameplay experiences? element of the “F” pattern.

2.4 Related Work 3. METHODS A process similar to a User­Centered Design(UCD)[19] There are some games or platforms that supports process was used during the development of this project ( see user­generated content currently in use. In the following figure 4) . section, a few of those systems will be presented.

Dota 2 Arcade is a hub for community made maps in the game of Dota 2 [17]. Players are presented with the most played custom maps and can create their own lobby using those maps. Beyond most popular maps, players could also see the open lobbies that others have been created by others, or browse maps in a timeline, for example, most popular custom maps in the last month, or the last week. ( see figure 1) .

Figure 1, Dota 2 Arcade main page. Figure 3, a user­centered design process

3.1 Context of Use The first step in a UCD process is to identify whom the system will be used by, what they will use it for and under what kind of conditions. This was specified together with the team at the company.

3.2 User Requirements The second step in the UCD process was to define the user requirements; this was done by sending out a survey to Figure 2, Starcraft 2 Arcade main page potential end users[32] and meetings with project manager and development team at the company. The survey was created to Like Dota 2 Arcade, Starcraft 2 Arcade[18] is a hub for find out what the user’s value in a graphical interface in games, community made maps. With a large variety of custom made their earlier experience with other game interfaces, and to maps, some of the custom maps fundamentally changes the determine the usefulness of certain functions to be introduced in gameplay experience. It offers similar functions as Dota 2 this project. A pilot test for the survey was conducted to ensure Arcade, allowing players to browse popular custom maps, the survey generates enough variation of answers. Meeting create an own lobby with the custom maps, or join open lobbies with the project manager and development team was carried out created by others. (see figure 2). to discuss the technical limitations and possibilities with such system if it would be deployed. Services like Dota 2 Arcade and Starcraft 2 Arcade are all signs that the players want more out of their game, they like to try out 3.3 Design Solution new gaming experiences. To maintain the longevity of a gaming The next step in the UCD process was to design the prototype. community, a major part of it is to be able to deliver new First. A low­fidelity mockup was designed, and was discussed gaming experience, and user­generated content could be the internally with the development team. Based on the feedback, a answer. high­fidelity prototype was constructed with InVision prototyping tool. The prototype includes all of the function and information that are intended to be included in the final product.

However, functions are not fully functioning, for example, the In the first section, questions were asked regarding search function is not available in the InVision prototype, due recommendations of games and what kind of information users to the limitations of the prototyping tool. Using such a look for while deciding to play a new game. Results show that prototype for testing in early development stage could discover 60% of the participants are interested in games that are similar the obvious usability problems, and show test users a good to the games they already play, and only 5% of participants are preview of how the system should work. This could also not, rest of the participants (35%) answers that it depends. potentially prevent problems that would prove costly to correct When asked whether they often check top recommended list of later in the development phase. games on platforms like Steam, 45% of the participants answered no, with 26.7% of users answering “Yes”, and the 3.4 Evaluation rest answered “Sometimes”(28.3%). Regarding what kind of The last step in the UCD process was user evaluation of the information users generally look for when deciding to play a design. A round of user evaluation was conducted with a total new game, the following main source of information was of 10 test participants to reach a balance between time identified: “Gameplay videos” (83.3%), “Friend’s reviews” consumed and coverage of result [20]. The user evaluation was (78.3%), “How many or which of your friends are based on a set of tasks that the user had to carry out with the playing”(68.3%) and “User reviews” (55%), as seen in diagram interface[31]. Also, think­aloud was encouraged, to potentially 1. Finally, when asked whether the participants would try a be able to capture what the users were thinking or feeling [33]. new game without knowing anything about the game, 11.7% A pilot test for the user evaluation was carried out to see answered “Yes”, and 65% answered “Yes, if it is free”, with the whether the evaluation was sufficiently designed. In addition to remaining 23.3% answering “No.” this, the test session was recorded with screen capture software, and a semi­structured interview was carried out after the test In the second section, participants were asked regarding their session, which was recorded and transcripted later on. view on “mods”. Less than half of the participants have played “mods”(48.3%). When asked how they find the “mods”, most participants answered “community website” or through Google 4. REQUIREMENTS Search. In this section, result from the survey and takeaways from the meeting with development team will be presented, as a basis for In the final section, questions regarding user­interface the design. experiences participants were presented. Participants were to rate how important the fluidness of user interface in games are 4.1 Survey versus aesthetics, on a scale of 1­5, where one is not important A survey was created with the purpose to find out what the at all and five is very important. Most of the participants rated 4 user’s value in a graphical interface in games, their earlier or higher in fluidness(81.6%), in comparison, aesthetics experience with other game interfaces, and finally, to see how received 63.3% ratings of 4 or higher. Finally, participants were users want to find new gaming content. The survey was pilot asked to give examples of any inconvenience in user­interface tested, to see whether the designed questions would collect in games; the results can be categorized as following: interesting data. A few questions were edited, and a couple of questions was later added. The survey was sent out via ● Interface do not utilize screen real­estate or mouse Facebook and Discord, and a total of 60 answers was received. and keyboard (console ports). The survey was divided into three sections; What information ● Poor performance in menus (too much or heavy users want when looking for new games, “mods” related animations, lag, delay). questions and finally, user experience related questions and ● Too much clutter. comments. ● Too many levels of the interface (functions buried deep in menus). ● Incomprehensible structure.

new interesting contents. Recommendations should help users by suggesting content based on genres they have recently 4.2 Development Team Meeting played, and trending should base its suggestions on amount of From the perspective of the company, the requirements that players currently playing the game. Seen from a survey were stated were loosely defined. The interface should be easy conducted by YouTube[22], Users from different regions may to use for the end user, without a specified user group, since have different trending games, therefore filtering by region they want the product to appeal to as big as a crowd as could also be helpful in enriching user's experience. To further possible. Also, the interface should support handling of a large sort the results after the users have selected a genre or category, amount of varying content. As for technical limitations, the sort by date of creation, the rating of the content and player team was very confident in their abilities; Therefore no specific count could also be helpful tools. technical limitations regarding the functions within the scope were stated. 5.1.3 Similar games As seen from the survey, most users are interested in similar 5. DESIGN games that they already play. It is logical to have a section With knowledge gained from background study and survey, a which offers user suggestions of similar games in the content prototype was designed, as the next step of the UCD design selection interface, which not only will be able to generate a process. In the following section, the design decisions made in broader range of experiences for the user, also could potentially different parts of the prototype are presented. create more exposure for the content created by other content creators.

5.1.4 Review and rating Being able to give a review or read a review for contents are important and are a common practice on digital platforms, ditto for games[23] since many choices made when looking for new games are either based on gameplay videos or reviews. A simple rating based thumbs up and thumbs down are also added into the design; this allows the user to get an idea of the quality of the content quickly. Although it is up to the content creators for which kind of video they upload to promote their mods, it should be suggested to have a gameplay video uploaded as a user guideline.

Figure 4, design prototype of the content selection interface Furthermore, a more dedicated review page where users could read and write more detailed reviews were created in the design. 5.1 Core Functionalities In this page, a friend’s review will have priority, positioned on As the main goal of this interface serves to help users find the top of the list. This is done according to the survey, as a interesting gaming content in a game that supports vastly friends review seems to have higher importance than a regular different gaming experiences, many aspects should be taken user review. Top rated reviews are to be displayed after friends into consideration. review since they are most likely to be interesting for users beyond the reviews from friends. To counteract biased or 5.1.1 Friends reviews without proper experience with the content in mind, time spent on the content is shown alongside with the review. Socializing is a big part of gamer’s motivation of Also, other users could rate the review, which should eliminate play[3][5][21], this is confirmed by results from the survey. To most of the unserious reviews. help users socialize, users can see what their friends are playing. While browsing for new gaming content, users could In the sense that content creators are responsible for correctly see if any of their friends are playing or have played the game categorizing their content, content that does not meet they are looking for. expectation due to low quality or abuse of categorization system would quickly fall off the top list due to poor rating. 5.1.2 Categorization and sorting One of the most important aspects is how the content could be 5.1.5 Handling legal issues accessed. With a massive pool of user­generated content in Delivering UGC comes with other challenges. Since the end mind, the content must be sorted in a sensible way, so that the user is the main source of content contributions, and it is likely users could find the content they need, without the need of that they would not have the same production regulation or scrolling through a giant everlasting list. Categorizing content quality control, unlike game development company. In contrast, by genre is one of many ways to combat this, by dividing most game development companies need to get their products content into different genres, it is easier for the users to find the regulated for inappropriate content, before the products could appropriate content which could suit their motivation or needs. reach the market. Another aspect of this is the potential use of Also, by allowing users to combine different genres, this might copyrighted material. As an example given by a pc game increase the likelihood of users getting the content they are journal[24], where a game developer broke the geneva looking for, As a content creator, the content creator is convention. This could be solved with employees working with responsible for correctly categorizing their content. Also helpful handling the contents that are affected by those issues, but due is a search bar, so that the users could search for things they to the potentially large amount of content, a combination of might be interested in straight away. internal handling and community­based solution for handling this type of problems is more suitable. Therefore, a report Beyond filtering by genre, having recommendations, recently function built into the content selection interface could created and trending as categories could also help users find potentially help manage the issue.

5.1.6 Random content Although the scanning pattern is described as a reading pattern Finally, a function that randomly selects content for the user is for web content, it is however applicable on other type of user added, after a user has played the content, the user will be interface as well. prompted to rate the content. This serves to give the user a way to find content when users do not know what to look for, but 5.3.2 Menu depth vs. breadth just want to try out something new. Also, by prompting users In a study regarding menu structure, where researchers to rate the content, it contributes to the general user welfare. compared the different depth and breadth configurations of the same content, the result suggests that the best result regarding 5.2 Information accuracy and speed was achieved with broader and fewer levels The most important information a user needs when looking for of depth[25]. For example, eight choices at each of two levels a new game were placed into the design, with the goal of design were far more superior in comparison to two choices at showing enough information that the user needs to get each six level design. This was taken into consideration while interested in a game content. This includes rating, review, designing the prototype. In this design, for example, a user similar games, review from friends and friends that are playing. wanting to find a game content would have to navigate through Name of the creator of a certain game content is placed two levels of menus with 5 or more choices at each level. alongside with the name of the content and rating, to give users a quick look at the essential information. (see figure 5) Also, 5.3.3 Nielsen's heuristics showing the creator’s name up front could also help the creator Details in design were done with Nielsen’s heuristics taken into to get recognition. In the case, that creators wants to acquire a account. For example, with flexibility in mind, some of the job in the game industry, or that other user could recognize the interactions could be executed in different ways, achieving the name and know whether it is a game worth trying or not. same result. With consistency in mind, menu and submenus are designed to follow the same structure,

5.3.4 Prioritizing As seen from the survey, users responds differently to the suggested functions, some are more important for them, some are less. This is reflected in the placement of functions, how they are displayed, and if they are displayed at all. For example, gameplay video, friend’s review and whom and which of their friends are playing, are the most important source of information for users, those are displayed upfront in the interface, while other suggestions mentioned in the survey are not.

Figure 5, a “card” which shows the most important information of the game content. In this interface, every “card” 5.4 Vision and Readability represents a game content. One of the reasons to design an interface with black and white aesthetics is to help users with color vision deficiency to Total voter count is shown alongside the rating in the detailed navigate through the interface. As the interface in this design is view, giving users a sense of the validity of the rating. supposed to act as an overlay, and game or other content could be running in the background, a convenient way to ensure good 5.3 General Layout readability is to use a black semi­transparent background with white text on top, as seen in figure 7. When the interface is Like any graphical user interface, having a good structure ready to be implemented, there should be settings in place in the ensures good interaction. Making sure that the menu system is system to turn off the transparency, in case for performance consistent, sensible and meets the user's expectation is issues or readability issues. important for the user experience.

5.3.1 The "F" scanning pattern For providing a convenient browsing experience, the headings and content are placed according to the most common user eye­scanning pattern. Placement of those roughly resembles the "F" scanning pattern, as seen in figure 6.

Figure 6, the rough resemblance of the "F" scanning pattern

6. USER­INVOLVEMENT most users play many different games, with only one The research question concerns two problem areas. Firstly, if participant being active gaming console user(PlayStation 4). the structure of the information and functions meets the user’s There are differences in how much they play. Some participants expectation. Secondly, Are these information and functions only play a few hours a week, whereas one participant works adequate for users to find interesting games? as a professional gamer, and plays 5 to 8 hours every day.

6.1 User Testing 6.2.1 Experiences with the design Participants were asked to describe their experience with the In this section, findings from the user testing will be presented, to answer whether the structure is logical and meets the user's interface, to which 8 of the participants had positive feedback regarding the design of the interface. Most users thought the expectations. design was simple and intuitive; this is exemplified by a comment received from Participant #5 and Participant #9: Test participants recruited were all male, between age of 19 and 27. A set of 15 tasks was given to all 10 test participants(here on referred as participant #1­10), and the users were “I like the layout of it. The structure is logical and easy to follow, I also like the design in a sense that it was very easy to encouraged to think­aloud. User testing was conducted with a MacBook Pro 13 inch version with Retina screen. When the see what belongs to which category. It's very easy to get an overview quick go to different categories or where you can click participants had issue completing the task, starting to drift far away from the intended navigation route and wasn’t actively and so I would say that it's good. I like the layout and the thinking­aloud, test participants were asked to explain what navigation is intuitive.“ difficulties they experienced after the test session, which rarely happened. “Everything looked smooth and everything feels nice. Goes quick when you browse through different menus

The result of the user testing was positive, of the 10 which is nice.” participants, 5 participants had issue completing all 15 tasks, all Participant #3 was the only one providing only negative 5 of those participants only missing one task at most. Participant #1 and #5 couldn’t locate the “select random feedback, which he answered as following: content” function, to which both participant later explained: “ I wouldn't say complicated but. As a new user, it was “I didn’t understand the question, but it made sense that it different, it wasn't it wasn't too obvious. And that's why I think it like small information popping up could be used at least for should be placed under Explore” me for the first time. “

Participant #8 had difficulty finding the link to the gameplay video of the specific game, to which he replied: Participant #10 also had some negative feedback regarding the design of the menu system, illustrated by the following

statement: “I did not see the gameplay video icon clear enough.”

“I think it was extremely easy to use, since i found everything i Participant #2 had difficulty locating the report function, which users could use in case of usage of inappropriate materials or needed very fast. I think the pictures are too big, I’m not a person that are really into pictures, I only need the text so I can copyrighted materials in a certain game, to which he commented see who is playing what and so on. It feels like the big pictures after the testing session: are limiting me from getting what I need. I don’t like the design, it feels like it is made for kids. I think everything takes so much “I have never reported a game, but I realized that it made sense being it was buried in a sub menu, it is not a function place, I would like it to be more compact.”

that you would use very often.” Participant #1 had similar views regarding the size of the

Lastly, Participant #3 had difficulty finding the “other similar” pictures: games section, which is displayed on the same page when user selects a game, to which he later commented: “Friends page pictures are very large. It's quite large for just show which friends are playing the game right now. I guess

maybe only have a one row list would be better.” “I thought it would be found under the “Explore” page.”

Other participants had some issues with the size of the text. Other than the before mentioned occasions, there were no other instances where the users were unable to interpret the menu When asked about what the participants disliked, 5 participants had nothing particular in mind, other 5 participants disliked the system, or unable to locate the functions as given in the tasks. text sizes, for example, participant #8 commented: More on whether the menu systems meets the user’s expectations will be explored in the interview section. “ The text is kind of small, like the "By Valve" and "90% players

liked this is” text are a bit too small “ 6.2 Interviews In this section, findings from the semi­structured interview will Participant #1 had similar thoughts regarding the text size. be presented. Firstly, what the user's experiences are with the Also, he mentioned about the rating indicator: prototype. Next, what the users think regarding the information and functions that are available in this prototype, to answer “It's just an inconvenience for me to read, it is nice to have the whether that information and functions are adequate for users to name of the game big and obvious so I don't have to kind of find interesting games or not. look close to see what it is. For me like this rating indicator, I don't really know if this is this really good or bad, maybe using As earlier mentioned, the participants are between 19 and 27 an indicator like stars would be clearer for me.” years old. Most of the participants are active PC users, where

Lastly, participant #10 would like to see reviews from their Participant #2 disliked the placement of the Explore menu, to favorite YouTuber or review websites like IGN, exemplified by which he elaborated: the following statement of participant #10:

“I think overall it's overall it's good, But. I thought about the “I would like to see review from people I know, like my friends Explore button. That I would have probably been easier to find or favorite YouTubers, I trust their reviews more.” it if it was closer to favorites because they are more related than friends if it was closer to.” As the result suggests, beyond these before mentioned information like player count and review from favorite Also, he struggled a bit finding the report function, to which he YouTubers, there is no more information that the participants explained: wish to see in such an interface.

“I did struggle a bit to find the report but I guess that people When participants were asked about whether “related game” don't often report things, it makes sense that it's would be helpful for them to find new interesting gaming under more and not shown of by default. Overall I didn't feel content, the feedback was generally positive, with 7 participants like there was any problems navigating.” replying that it would be useful for them in exploring for new interesting games to play, exemplified by the statement from To summarize, the user experience with the menu system is participant #5: generally positive, with 8 participants stating that they could easily find all the function. Positive feedbacks could be “ I think it is. Interesting just to see like some suggestions of summarized as; The users could clearly understand the structure games and I like that you can watch like a quick gameplay of the interface, The interface was easy and intuitive to navigate video whatever just to see how it plays, if it looks good i would through, and the design was clean and tidy. give it a try.”

On the downside, some participants did not find the navigation Participant #1, #2 and #3 did not think that they would use such structure too obvious. The size of pictures and text was also an a function, as illustrated by the comment given by participant issue some participants experienced. Some participants think #1: that the pictures were too big, taking much space without showing too much information, and the text was in some cases “I don't know really for me. Similar games or related games too small for the participants to comfortably read through. for me it's not something I would look into that much. Because for me it's more important to see what my friends are playing. 6.2.2 Feedback regarding information and I know some people like it playing some small games and just tests as many games as possible, but it is not really what I functions enjoy.” Regarding the amount of information given to the users, most participants think the amount of information are sufficient for Another function in the design is a function that selects a them to decide whether they want to try the game itself or not. random game for the user, where participants gave mixed Out of 10 participants, 4 participants expressed that they would feedback. Out of the 10 participants, 7 participants expressed like to see more information regarding the game contents before that they think it could be helpful, exemplified by answers from they decided to try it. Participant #7 and participant #9 participant #9 and #5: expressed that being able to see player count would be nice, exemplified by the following statement by participant #9: “If I have a LAN party with my mates and we're really bored

and we are like let's try out some games and see if we can find “Player count can be nice on certain games I mean if I want to something to play and then we just click it.” get into a multiplayer game I would like to know how many

people are playing it actively so I don't go into a dead game.” “Yeah I think this could be good to have, I would probably not use it often but it could be interesting to try out when I want to He noticed that there is gameplay video embedded in the try something new.” interface. However, he expresses his concern regarding the gameplay video; One suggestion received regarding the random function is to be able to randomly select a game with regards to genre, “The first video that comes up it's often like announcement exemplified by the following comment by participant #7: video or it's like a cool highlight trailer or it's like animated. I

want to see a gameplay video, I don't want to see “Yes, it could definitely be helpful, but after my preferences, so advertisements. I want to see how it looks like when I play and based on genres or what I have played earlier.” maybe I read like a review from the game.” Three participants could not see themselves using this function How long time it takes for a user to experience the full game is at all because they want to play the same games as their friends also information that some users want to see, which participant do and are concerned with the quality of the games, explained #8 stated: with the following statement by participant #2:

“I think it is enough. But it may be nice to also see how long “It seems like if it is totally random then it's a high chance that time it takes to play a game like if it's like a quick join game and you'll get games you would never play. I don't know this for a you play for five minutes or if it's like World of Warcraft where fact but I can assume that since there are so many games, let’s you have to spend many hours to get the full experience. “ say for example in Steam, the majority of games are probably bad, so the likelihood of getting a bad game by pressing a random button is big, if that's avoided then yes.“

display, and the prototype was then tested on a 13­inch laptop 6.2.3 Other comments screen. One issue, however, mentioned by a participant, that it Participants were asked to give examples of things that they was somewhat difficult to get an overview of the quality of the particularly liked or disliked, 4 participants expressed that they content fast, because it was hard to tell the difference with a liked being able to combine category tags, as participant #4 progress­bar­like rating indicator, in combination with the described: rating text being small. This should be addressed in the before moving on into the development phase of this project. “I like that you're able to combine categories because oftentimes that one category doesn't describe what you're Total played count or active player count is a feature that some looking for enough. For example, survival horror or survival participant expressed their interest in, which was not included explorer are two very different kind of games, in this case you in this design. This is a reasonable demand since if the game in can combine them to find exactly what you want.“ question is a multiplayer game, nobody would like to play alone[3][4][5]. The reason behind not including the player Another suggestion was given by participant #1 regarding count in this design is mainly based on two assumptions. information around friends: Firstly, using a such a player count would not do some games justice, for example, single player games versus multiplayer “It could be nice to see games my friends have played recently. games. Secondly, showing a player count could help the Because it's also a part for me while exploring new games. I popular games get more popular, embracing a rich­get­richer want to play games that my friends plays.“ behavior[10]. However, it could potentially hurt some less popular games severely regarding popularity. In a purely user Like the comment about what user disliked particularly, the governed content delivery platform, this might also severely answers were mostly regarding the design aspect of the prevent new up and coming content to become popular. interface, which was summarized in section 6.2.1. Some other features that participants have expressed interest in Beyond those comments mentioned before, users were asked to are the possibility of looking into what their friends have played give suggestions about more ways to find new interesting and being able to get random game with genre preferences, games; most participants replied that the functions and which could be helpful in providing users with more choices. information in this design are enough, and they do not feel like anything else is needed. A few participants replied in the interview that they wish to see reviews from favorite YouTubers and well­known review websites like IGN or Metacritic. A way to implement this could 7. DISCUSSION be prompting users to enter their favorite YouTubers when the To answer the question, what are the important aspects of user starts the game for the first time, and the system would designing a prototype of an interface that will help users find then crawl through YouTube and locate those videos, interesting content in a game that supports vastly different displaying them in the detailed view. Well­known review gameplay experiences, concerns many areas. What do the users websites, however, should be kept out from the design. With need? What do users look for when trying to find interesting knowledge gained from the survey and interview, it is one of games? Answers to these questions are the cornerstone to the least used ways to find out information regarding games. designing such a system, and these are the question that this Including this in the design may result in most users study seeks to answer. experiencing unnecessary clutter.

As there are not many studies done in relation to the topic, most A balance between aesthetics vs functionality is important. of the discussion will be revolved around the result of this Relating to the systems which were presented in related study. Result of this study consists of a survey, a prototype work[17][18], they seem to be designed around the aesthetics design and a round of user­testing. A survey was sent out to of the game and therefore have limited functionality, to maintain get a grasp on what the users needs, with the results from a consistent graphical profile. These system lacks the ability for survey and knowledge gained from background study, an categorizing content by genre, neither are there a review system interface prototype design was developed. To get a reality check in place. This presents several problems for platform longevity from real potential users, the prototype was evaluated via user and user welfare. Display of content is purely based on user testing, and feedback from users was gained from rating, meaning the newly uploaded content have no way of semi­structured interviews. Result suggests that the proposed gaining popularity quickly. Since the front page of the content set of function and information available are sufficient for most selection page is always occupied by highest rated content and user, and the structure was clear. most played, which might give content creator less incentive to create new content, and less refreshing content would, in turn, 7.1 Design Solution be delivered to users. It was a relief to see that the design was well received. As the result reflects, participants had no problem navigating through A suggestion made by the development team was to include a the menu and the structure was well understood by the Facebook wall style of social page, where users could choose participants. to post their experiences or what they are currently enjoying. However, there are couple of arguments to be made for not Regarding the aesthetics of the prototype, most participants including similar services; Firstly, for the initial stage of the expressed that they liked the way the prototype looked, but project, it is beneficial to have users share their experience on some concerns were raised by the size of content pictures and other social platforms instead of an embedded one, which could the size of content labels. Certainly, issues that should be lead to more exposure. Secondly, assumptions were made that looked more into, it could, however, be affected by the test such platforms are rarely used, implementing such solution setup which was used during the user evaluation. During the could result in unnecessary clutter in the interface. design phase, the prototype was developed using a 24­inch

To summarize, results suggest that the proposed set of function could interact with digital artifacts in general. For example, and information available are sufficient for most user. voice over software are one of the means to help blind users to Introducing more functions could potentially lead to interact with a computer, reading what’s happening on screen. unnecessarily complex and cluttered interface, thus leads to But if the user requires additional aids to interpret the menu, worse usability. Introducing less functions however, could there is certainly no way for the user to interpret the content, possibly prevent users from finding the content they need which this interface is designed to deliver. conveniently. The results are applicable for future work regarding user experience in game related studies. 7.3 Method 7.2 Social Sustainability Using focus groups with online forums as media is another There is a limited dimension of ecological or economical way of finding user requirements. However, to be able to get sustainability in this study, since this study mostly focuses on insightful results from this, it requires a clearly defined and usability of an interface, if there would be any impact on niched user group, under a longer period of time. As this ecological or economical sustainability, it would mostly depend project is aimed at a very broad user base, in combination with on how the system itself would be implemented. For example, the time constraints of this project, survey was chosen as the there are a lot of pictures in this prototype design. One could methods to find out about user requirements. argue that using a lot of pictures requires a huge amount of data to be sent constantly, meaning it requires great amount of An ethnographic study could have been conducted, and used in logistics, which stresses the server infrastructure of the conjunction with survey or other methods, to better understand company to the internet connection of the end users, and users needs. However, as the author is an experienced gamer everything inbetween. This would have ecological and with 20 years experience of PC gaming, past experiences of the economical impact, however, this is aspect of the system is author was used in combination with the survey, to define the mostly depended upon how the technological implementations user requirements. One could question the objectivity of this are made. Techniques such as caching or compression could approach, however, the results of the survey were mostly in reduce its impact, but is not the focus of this study. Therefore, line with the author’s past experience. It is difficult to say what social sustainability was chosen to be the domain of discussion. effect this might have had in the result of this study, but it certainly impacted the result one way or another. Like any tech company, there is always a possibility that the company would abuse its position. Advertisement in the form With the results in mind, it might be beneficial to get a more of product placement could always steer its users into certain varied result from the survey and the interview. The survey was social ideals, which in term could lead to promotion of used to find out what users think about the features to which unhealthy behaviors. were to be included in this design, also what features the user want in this type of usage scenarios, and interviews were used Also, due to the position the company is in, it is possible for the to get more detailed feedback regarding those features. The company to gather and store information from its’ users, result mostly confirmed the learnings from background study eroding users privacy. This also puts a great emphasis on and the assumptions made while designing the prototype. With security aspects of the platform, where security breach might this in mind, one could questions the coverage of the user lead to severe consequences. Security breach is one problem population. regarding the gathering of user information, selling or sharing user information to a third party is also an issue that has been The participants were also very homogenous in that they were the center of discussion in recent years, Since the popularity of all in their twenties and it could be argued that they be all very game content is solely dictated by its user base, the most used to gaming since they had no problem navigating the menu popular content could also result in some social ideals be system. As motivation for gaming are many[3][4][5], it may pushed upon other users. This might hurt the diversity of have outweighed the inconveniences users might encounter, content and user base, but trying to prevent this would conflict which could have influenced the results of this study. with rights of the users. For example, by choice, the users contributed to that the most popular games are violent shooter Number of participants and lack of gender variation is also an games. By trying to promote other themes of games than area which could be improved since only 10 participants were shooter games, the users who want to play the most popular recruited for the testing phase and none of which were female. games would not be able to know what the most popular game Therefore, results of this study may not be able to be is. generalized towards the entire audience of gaming interested users. Being that the platform depends on user­generated content, the company also bears the responsibility to make sure the content Another thing that could be improved is the lack of feedback is suitable for all its users, adults and minors alike. Especially from experienced modder since no experienced modder were for minors, there should be a age restriction system in place, to recruited as test participant, which could have left out some prevent minors from finding inappropriate content. If the interesting feedback regarding how to better encourage more company does not take active duty in regulating the content user participation and supporting creators motivations[6][7] in being shared among its users, it may have various negative creating new game mods. social consequences to its society and the company itself. As earlier mentioned, the prototype was designed using a It is important to design for everyone. Trying to make the 24­inch desktop display, whereas testing of the prototype was design usable for most is essential for the well­being of all the performed on a 13­inch laptop screen. This could have lead to users. As a precaution taken for users with disabilities, the somewhat skewed results. More consideration regarding the design in this study was designed with high visibility in mind, testing setup and methodology is an area that certainly could be to include users with color deficiency. As for other disabilities, improved. it is less relevant in this study, but more relevant in how users

According to the definition of UCD[19] process, the design the prototype was evaluated via user testing, and feedback from process is defined as an iterative process. With iteration, it users was gained from semi­structured interviews. means that the design process is repeated until the desired outcome is achieved. During this project, however, only one Results suggest that the proposed set of function and iteration of the design and evaluation was conducted, due to information available are sufficient for most user, and the unforeseen issues. This does not completely comply with the design was easy to navigate through with clear structure. definition of UCD, even if the desired outcome was achieved. Questions regarding whether the desired outcome was really However, there are some features that the users wish to see, achieved could be raised, conducting another iteration of design which could prove useful in helping users find interesting and evaluation and obtaining the same result could have content, namely viewing recently played by friends and random ensured that the desired outcome was achieved. game selection with genre preferences. Player count and coverage of well­known review sites are also suggested but are Usability was chosen as the focus of the user evaluation. not as important or helpful for most of the participants. Although in the context of a game, user experience is mentioned more often, but being that the study concerns an Further development and research of this project would be interface that helps users to find the experience the users seeks needed to give users more tools in finding what they need, and for, it is more important that the interface can help users achieve some adjustment regarding text and picture sizes are required to their goal effectively and efficiently. In the end, the interface prevent inconveniences in some cases. To fully understand how itself is a tool to find the games that users want. Gamers play well the interface serves its purpose, more studies are suggested games, not interfaces. to be done with fully deployed live versions under longer period of usage. 7.4 Future Work The result from this study is based on survey, interview, and 9. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS brief user testing. To get more in­depth feedback regarding the I would like to thank the development team at the company usability problems of such system, a group of user giving where I conducted this master thesis study, for their feedback feedback during longer period of usage of a live version of the and help. Name of the company could not be presented in this system is needed. Similarly, performance of such system may paper, due to a confidentiality agreement. Due to some vary depending on the user’s internet connection or unforeseen issues at the company which this thesis study was performance available on user’s PC, which could directly conducted, the design of the prototype which was used in this impact user satisfaction of such system[26], which also study has only gone through one iteration, which affected the requires much wider test sample under longer periods of result of this study. live­version usage. Also, future research in the form of survey may be needed. With focus on missing features, better ranking I would also like to thank my supervisor Helena Tobiasson and strategies or display structures, to ensure the best possible user the supervision group for invaluable feedback and help during experience and user welfare. my master thesis.

Age restriction and region lock is not a visible part of the Finally, I would like to thank all the people who participated in system, but are very important and useful for maintain a high this study, without your feedback and inputs, this study would level of user satisfaction and regulating content availability for have not been possible. legal or other issues. Beyond legal issues, region lock might also be used to ensure good user experience, in the case of REFERENCES multiplayer game content, where latency could be a huge problem in some cases[27]. How such a system should be 1. PC First­Person Games by user score. 2017. Retrieved May implemented or managed could also be subject for further 13, 2017 from researches. http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/genre/userscore/first­

person/pc?view=condensed. Encouraging content creators to create content with gameplay videos, well­written description, reasonable tagging and finally, 2. 16 trends that will define the future of video games. 2015. good content is essential to user welfare and the longevity of Retrieved May 13, 2017 from the platform. As the platform itself certainly can’t force its user https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/23/16­trends to create great content, a design guideline, however, could be ­that­will­change­the­games­industry. helpful for users to create coherent, high­quality content to the best of their ability. Formulating such a design guideline in the 3. Ryan, R.M., Rigby, C.S. & Przybylski, 2006. The future could also be beneficial for similar studies. Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self­Determination

Theory Approach, 8. CONCLUSION The purpose of this study has been to answer the following 4. Andrew K. Przybylski, C. Scott Rigby, Richard M Ryan. research question: 2010. A Motivational Model of Video Game Engagement. Review of General Psychology 14(2), (June 2010), 154­166. What are the main elements for a content selection interface that fulfill the needs of it’s users and meets their expectation for 5. Nick Yee. 2007.Motivation for Play in Online Games. a game that supports vastly different gameplay experiences? CyberPsychology & Behavior. (January 2007), 772­775.

To do so, A survey was sent out to get a grasp on what the 6. Olli Sotamaa. 2010. When The Game is Not Enough: users needs, with the results from survey and knowledge Motivations and Practices among Computer Game Modding gained from background study, an interface prototype design Culture. was developed. To get a reality check from real potential users,

7. Hector Postigo. 2007. Of Mods and Modders: Chasing http://ipk.nkp.cz/docs/ISFE_Consumer_Research_2008_Report Down the Value of Fan­Based Digital Game Modifications. _final.pdf Games and Culture, 2(4), 300­313. 22. Geographic Trends in Gaming: Who Plays What, Where? 8. Meeyoung Cha, Haewoon Kwak, Pablo Rodriguez, 2016. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from Yong­Yeol Ahn, and Sue Moon. 2007. I tube, you tube, http://youtube­trends.blogspot.se/2016/10/geographic­trends­in everybody tubes: analyzing the world's largest user generated ­gaming­who­plays.html content video system. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement (IMC '07). 23. Francesca Comunello and Simone Mulargia. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1­14. 2015.User­Generated Video Gaming: Little Big Planet and Participatory Cultures in Italy. 9. Arpita Ghosh and Patrick Hummel. 2011. A game­theoretic analysis of rank­order mechanisms for user­generated content. 24. How the Prison Architect developers broke the Geneva In Proceedings of the 12th ACM conference on Electronic Conventions. 2017. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from commerce (EC '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 189­198. http://www.pcgamer.com/how­the­prison­architect­developers­ broke­the­geneva­conventions/#. 10. Youmna Borghol, Sebastien Ardon, Niklas Carlsson, Derek Eager, and Anirban Mahanti. 2012. The untold story of 25. John I. Kiger. 1984. The depth/breadth trade­off in the the clones: content­agnostic factors that impact YouTube video design of menu­driven user interfaces. Int. J. Man­Mach. Stud. popularity. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD 20, 2 (March 1984), 201­213. international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining (KDD '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1186­1194. 26. Sophie Jörg, Aline Normoyle, and Alla Safonova. 2012. How responsiveness affects players' perception in digital 11. Renjie Zhou, Samamon Khemmarat, and Lixin Gao. 2010. games. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied The impact of YouTube recommendation system on video Perception (SAP '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 33­38. views. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement (IMC '10). ACM, New 27. Predictions For The Biggest Gaming Trends of 2017. York, NY, USA, 404­410. 2017. Retrieved May 16, 2017 from http://www.glixel.com/news/predictions­for­the­biggest­gamin 12. Chin­Lung Hsu, Hsi­Peng Lu. 2003. Why do people play g­trends­of­2017­w459225 on­line games? An extended TAM with social influences and flow experience. Department of Information Management, 28. 10 Trends Shaping Up Gaming Towards 2017. 2017. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Retrieved May 16, 2017 from Taiwan, ROC. https://medium.com/game­futures/10­trends­shaping­up­gamin g­for­2017­ea3c158512d2 13. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). Flow: The Psychology of Happiness. London: Random House 29. Minecraft ­ Making Interactivity. 2016. Retrieved May 16, 2017 from http://www.mibook.org/case­study/minecraft/ 14. Daniel Johnson, Janet Wiles. 2003. Effective Affective User Interface Design in Games. School of Psychology and 30. Minecraft: How A Game With No Rules Changed The School of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Rules Of The Game Forever. 2013. Retrieved May 16, 2017 University of Queensland, Australia. from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/16/minecra 15. Jakob Nielsen. 1994. Heuristic evaluation. In Usability ft­game­no­rules­changed­gaming inspection methods, Jakob Nielsen and Robert L. Mack (Eds.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY, USA 25­62. 31. Jeffrey Rubin, Dana Chisnell. 2008. Handbook of Usability Testing: How to Plan, Design, and Conduct Effective Tests, 16. Jakob Nielsen. 2006. How People Read on the Web: The 2nd Edition. Wiley Publishing, NY. Eyetracking Evidence. The Nielsen Norman Group. 32. Maria Eleni Paschali, Apostolos Ampatzoglou, Alexander 17. Dota 2 Arcade. 2017. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from Chatzigeorgiou, and Ioannis Stamelos. 2014. Non­functional http://Dota2.com requirements that influence gaming experience: a survey on gamers satisfaction factors. In Proceedings of the 18th 18. Starcraft Arcade. 2017. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from International Academic MindTrek Conference: Media http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/ Business, Management, Content & Services (AcademicMindTrek '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 19. ISO Human­centered Design for Interactive Systems: 208­215. Retrieved June 12, 2017 from: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=52075 33. Martin, Bella and Hanington Bruce. 2012. Universal Methods of Design. Rockport Publishers. 20. Pablo Moreno­Ger, Javier Torrente, Yichuan Grace Hsieh, and William T. Lester. 2012. Usability testing for serious games: making informed design decisions with user data. Adv. in Hum.­Comp. Int. 2012, Article 4 (January 2012), 1 pages.

21. Video Gamers in Europe ­ Consumer Report. 2008. Retrieved May 13, 2017 from www.kth.se