skip to main content
10.1145/2336727.2336728acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesieConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

GameFlow heuristics for designing and evaluating real-time strategy games

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 July 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

The GameFlow model strives to be a general model of player enjoyment, applicable to all game genres and platforms. Derived from a general set of heuristics for creating enjoyable player experiences, the GameFlow model has been widely used in evaluating many types of games, as well as non-game applications. However, we recognize that more specific, low-level, and implementable criteria are potentially more useful for designing and evaluating video games. Consequently, the research reported in this paper aims to provide detailed heuristics for designing and evaluating one specific game genre, real-time strategy games. In order to develop these heuristics, we conducted a grounded theoretical analysis on a set of professional game reviews and structured the resulting heuristics using the GameFlow model. The resulting 165 heuristics for designing and evaluating real-time strategy games are presented and discussed in this paper.

References

  1. Bond, M. and Beale, R. 2009. What makes a good game?: using reviews to inform design. Proceedings of the 23rd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Celebrating People and Technology (Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2009), 418--422. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bleumers, L., Jacobs, A. and Lier, T. V. 2010. Criminal cities and enchanted forests: a user-centred assessment of the applicability of the Pervasive GameFlow model. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fun and Games (Leuven, Belgium, 2010), 38--47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Brand, J. 2012. Digital Australia 12. Interactive Games and Entertainment Association. Bond University: Gold Coast.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, A., Ceccarini, P. and Eisenhower, C. 2007. Muckrakers: engaging students in the research process through an online game. Sailing into the future: Charting our destiny, proceedings of the thirteenth national conference of the association of college and research libraries (Baltimore, USA, 2007), 226--236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Calvillo-gámez, E. H., Cairns, P. and Cox, A. L. (2010). Evaluating User Experience in Games. (R. Bernhaupt, Ed.) Human-Computer Interaction. London: Springer London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper Perennial, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. De Kort, Y. A. W. and Ijsselsteijn, W. A. 2008. People, places, and play: player experience in a socio-spatial context. Computers in Entertainment. 6, 2 (2008), 18. DOI=10.1145/1371216.1371221 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ding, S., Tang, N., Lin, T. and Zhao, S. 2009. RTS-GameFlow: A New Evaluation Framework for RTS Games. 2009 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Software Engineering. (Dec. 2009), 1--4. DOI= 10.1109/CISE.2009.5363526Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Faber, J. P. and van den Hoven, E. 2011. MARBOWL: increasing the fun experience of shooting marbles. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. (Jun. 2011). DOI=10.1007/s00779-011-0405-1 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Fu, F.-L., Su, R.-C. and Yu, S.-C. 2009. EGameFlow: A scale to measure learners' enjoyment of e-learning games. Comput. Educ. 52, 1 (2009), 101--112. DOI= 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.004 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Finkelstein, S., Nickel, A., Lipps, Z., Barnes, T., Wartell, Z. and Suma, E. A. 2011. Astrojumper: Motivating exercise with an immersive virtual reality exergame. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. 20, 1 (2011), 78--92. DOI= 10.1162/pres_a_00036 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Gamespot UK, 2011. Gamespot UK. http://www.gamespot.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gilberg, F. P. 2006. Can Network Security be Fun? An agent-based Simulation Model and Game proposal. Masters dissertation. Gjøvik University College, Norway.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Jegers, K. 2007. Pervasive game flow: understanding player enjoyment in pervasive gaming. Computers in Entertainment. 5, 1 (2007), 9. DOI=10.1145/1236224.1236238 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Khoo, E. T., Cheok, A. D., Nguyen, T. H. D. and Pan, Z. 2008. Age invaders: social and physical inter-generational mixed reality family entertainment. Virtual Reality. 12, 1 (Mar. 2008), 3--16. DOI= 10.1007/s10055-008-0083-0 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Kliem, A. and Wiemeyer, J. 2010. Comparison of a Traditional and a Video Game Based Balance Training Program. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport. 9, 2 (2010), 80--91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Metacritic, 2011. Metacritic. http://www.metacritic.comGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Morrison, A., Mulloni, A., Lemmelä, S., Oulasvirta, A., Jacucci, G., Peltonen, P., Schmalstieg, D. and Regenbrecht, H. 2011. Collaborative use of mobile augmented reality with paper maps. Computers & Graphics. 35, 4 (Aug. 2011), 789--799. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Omar, A. and Ali, N. M. 2011. Measuring flow in gaming platforms. Information Retrieval. June (2011), 302--305. DOI= 10.1109/STAIR.2011.5995806Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Paavilainen, J., Kultima, A., Kuittinen, J., Mäyrä, F., Saarenpää, H. and Niemelä, J. 2009. GameSpace: Methods for Design and Evaluation for Casual Mobile Multiplayer Games. University of Tampere, Finland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Sweetser, P. and Wyeth, P. 2005. GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertainment. 3, 3 (2005), 3. DOI= 10.1145/1077246.1077253 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Tijs, T. J. W. 2006. Quantifying immersion in games by analyzing eye movements. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Yee, S. L. C. Y., Duh, H. B.-L. and Quek, F. 2010. Investigating narrative in mobile games for seniors. Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Human factors in computing systems. (2010), 669--672. DOI= 10.1145/1753326.1753424 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. GameFlow heuristics for designing and evaluating real-time strategy games

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          IE '12: Proceedings of The 8th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment: Playing the System
          July 2012
          182 pages
          ISBN:9781450314107
          DOI:10.1145/2336727

          Copyright © 2012 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 21 July 2012

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate64of148submissions,43%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader