Usability: A Critical Requirement

During my ongoing literature review I often discover interesting facts about things I’ve never thought about. Sometimes I can connect these facts with my own observations: The result is mostly a completely new idea why things are as they are. Maybe these ideas are new to you, too. Therefore I’ll share my new science based knowledge with you!

This week: This time, I think about the importance of a good usability as it helps to keep players immersed and affects the general entertainment of a computer game.

A good usability is an important goal in software development and game design as it allows users to operate a system with a high efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction. Furthermore, the usability of a feature increases in importance the more frequently this feature is used. While a bad usability of a rare used feature can be annoying, a bad usability of a periodically required element can drastically reduce a user’s satisfaction with a product. In addition, it can result in a user’s impression that the development team has not put a lot of effort into the development of their product thus reducing the team’s reputation.

In the case of a computer game, usability also is critical for the purpose of keeping users immersed in the gameplay. When a feature is too difficult and complicated to use, it can break the immersion as it completely distracts players from the actual gameplay. Moreover, a bad system or interface design might cause some playability issues thus resulting in a high degree of frustration of the players.

The tolerance for usability issues, however, depends on the development team and the status of the game. While usability issues of an early access indy game are often accepted as the game is still in development and hence the usability will potentially be improved over time, it can cause a strong hit to a team’s reputation in the case of a professional game studio that released a fullprice title.

As usability is a well known and common concept, it all the time surprises me that many development teams seem to forget to do some playtesting in order to discover and solve those issues. Recently, I discussed the issues of Transport Fever which puts the player into the role of a transport company’s manager. In this management game, the player often can merely guess how the underlying principles work as they are not communicated properly. Recently, I got quite annoyed by the bad structure of DiRT 4’s menus.

During the gameplay of DiRT 4, players not only compete in virtual rally events, but also manage their team and upgrade their cars. Unfortunately, the team management section is not well designed and results in an overcomplicated gameplay. For instance, players can unlock new facilities that provide a particular bonus, such as a larger garage or the ability to improve a car’s performance. Unfortunately, instead of allowing a player to directly install upgrades on a car from the garage menu that displays all purchased cars, players first have to start a new rally event. Once they are in the event’s service area, they can choose an option that allows them to upgrade the car used in this event. As a result of this, players need to start an event for each of their cars when they want to upgrade them simultaneously which causes a high degree of annoyance.

In sum, it is not only important to have well thought-out game mechanics, but also to connect them with a good user interface and to communicate all relevant information properly.

Management Computer Games

During my ongoing literature review I often discover interesting facts about things I’ve never thought about. Sometimes I can connect these facts with my own observations: The result is mostly a completely new idea why things are as they are. Maybe these ideas are new to you, too. Therefore I’ll share my new science based knowledge with you!

This week: This time, I think about management games that mostly require decision-making and hence, instead of demanding correct sensomotoric inputs, demand and train a player’s cognitive abilities.

Management computer games rarely provide a player with direct control game mechanics that allow for a manipulation of the gameplay in a direct way. Instead, players can only influence the progression of the game with high-level decision making that subsequently alters variables affecting the simulated activity’s outcome.

That way, management games represent the counterpart to direct control computer games that require correct sensomotoric inputs from the players to be played successfully. While players still interact with the game using regular sensomotoric input devices, such as keyboard and mouse, the game’s challenge mainly is created on a cognitive level demanding a player’s problem-solving and decision-making abilities.

Motorsport Manager – Strategy and Setup

For instance, the computer game Motorsport Manager puts players into the role of a racing team’s teamchef who is in charge of hiring drivers as well as staff, developing and improving parts for the team’s race cars, finding sponsors, developing infrastructure and setting up the cars before a race. Furthermore, during a race event, the player can make additional high-level decisions by planning a pitstop and instructing the drivers to push or drive more carefully thus reducing tyre wear and fuel consumption. However, the player can not control the cars in a direct way and achieve great results due to good driving skills as it is possible in racing simulations, such as Assetto Corsa and DiRT 4. Hence, the sum and results of all the decisions made determines the race cars‘ performance during a race and the amount of money the player’s team makes or loses per race.

In the end, despite the differences between the two game type extremes, both genres induce game-flow thus motivating players to continue playing the game and, due to the periodical demand to apply the game’s knowledge, i.e., the sensomotoric driving skills and the cognitive race and technical knowledge, achieve a training effect.

Immersion: Responding to a player’s actions

During my ongoing literature review I often discover interesting facts about things I’ve never thought about. Sometimes I can connect these facts with my own observations: The result is mostly a completely new idea why things are as they are. Maybe these ideas are new to you, too. Therefore I’ll share my new science based knowledge with you!

This week: This time, I think about how DiRT 4 achieves a higher immersion by embedding the main part of the gameplay in an engaging context and making the game more responsive to a player’s actions.

DiRT 4, the successor of DiRT Rally, got released about a month ago and successfully increased the immersiveness and believability of the rally simulation by tweaking a few game mechanics and adding new gameplay elements to the game. Achieving a believable world not only requires a realistic simulation and presentation of the gameplay, but also demands a responsiveness to a player’s action. Furthermore, to avoid breaking the immersion, it is also important to implement good transitions between the main gameplay and the screens presenting a player’s results.

The latter requirement still is not completely fullfilled but successfully got improved in DiRT 4. In DiRT Rally, after switching to simulation mode, players get immediately placed behind the rally car’s wheel which already stands ready at the start of a stage. This only is different at the start of a new event which begins with a short scene presenting how the player’s car is brought to the start. From this point on, players get no further information until they start the stage. In addition, as soon as they cross the finish line, the simulation immediately ends and a screen displaying the results is shown. That way, the game completely ignores the phases before and after the race which slightly reduces the overall immersion.

This was changed in DiRT 4 which begins with a quick introduction from the co-driver who informs the players about potential damaged cars on the stage and also tries to motivate them to push hard in order to win the rally event. While this still lacks some interaction with the game, it already provides the players with a better feeling of actually getting ready for a race. Moreover, in DiRT 4, a stage does not immediately end when the player crosses the finish line. Instead, the player is required to continue driving until the marshal who informs the player about the stage time is reached. Ultimately, those two additional gameplay elements frame the actual racing thus providing a more immersive presentation of the simulation.

DiRT 4 – Stopping at the marshal

These two new elements also implement a responsiveness to the player’s action. Before the start of a stage, the co-driver also gives a brief summary of the car’s condition and hence addresses problems that might have occured due to a player’s reckless driving. Similarily, the co-driver also comments on the player’s time at the end of the stage and, depending on the result, is cheering or trying to motivate the player to push harder on the next stage. Lastly, when the player gets closer to the marshal at the end of a stage, the marshal gives a hand signal when the player should come to a stop thus reacting to the player’s actions.

In the end, by embedding the simulation in an engaging context and increasing the game’s responsiveness to a player’s actions, DiRT 4 achieves an immersive effect that goes beyond the immersion due to game-flow caused by the challenge of driving the virtual race cars as fast as possible.