skip to main content
10.1145/3242671.3242705acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

WORLD4: Designing Ambiguity for First-Person Exploration Games

Published:23 October 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we present the design and evaluation of a first-person walker digital game called WORLD4. Walkers are a sub-genre of 3D games that typically include minimal player interaction, slow paced game play, and ambiguous goals. Walking is the primary means of interaction in walker games, rather than prioritize 'skill-based' mechanics. However, the design of these game environments is not well understood and challenges many accepted game design conventions. We have designed WORLD4, a multi-dimensional first-person exploration game, to explore how ambiguity might support exploratory game play experiences in virtual environments. 14 participants playtest WORLD4 and analysis of the data identified three descriptive themes specific to the walker game player experience: 1) designing partial inscrutability; 2) shifting meaning; and 3) facilitating subversion of expectations. We use these themes to describe a set of prescriptive design strategies that may assist designers in designing for ambiguity in exploratory game environments.

References

  1. Roger Caillois. 1961. Man, play, and games. Free Press of Glencoe, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Kathy Charmaz. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. SAGE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Greg Costikyan. 2013. Uncertainty in Games (Reprint edition ed.). The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Katherine Cross. 2015. How "walking simulators" allow us to touch other worlds. Gamasutra. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/251191/How_walking_simulators_allow_us_to_touch_other_worlds.phpGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Katherine Cross. 2016. Come Back: Dear Esther 's devs and walking simulators 9 years on. Retrieved November 20, 2016 from http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/282791/Come_Back_Dear_Esthers_devs_and_walking_simulators_9_years_on.phpGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Rob Daviau and Matt Leacock. 2017. Board Game Design Day: The Making of "Pandemic Legacy." Game Developers Conference 2017. Retrieved February 26, 2018 from https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1024300/Board-Game-Design-Day-TheGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Ed Key & David Kanaga. 2013. Proteus.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. William Empson. 1966. Seven Types of Ambiguity. New Directions, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Fullbright. 2013. Gone Home.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Galactic Cafe. 2013. The Stanley Parable.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. William Gaver, Jacob Beaver, and Steve Benford. 2003. Ambiguity as a Resource for Design. In SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (1), 233--240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Ayse Gursoy. 2013. Game Worlds: A Study of Video Game Criticism. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Kenneth Hullett and Jim Whitehead. 2010. Design Patterns in FPS Levels. In The 5th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Independent Games Festival. 2018. IGF. IGF. Retrieved February 14, 2018 from http://igf.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Henry Jenkins. 2004. Game Design as Narrative Architecture. In First Person: New Media as Story, Performance, Game. Cambridge: MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 118--130.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Adriaan de Jongh. 2017. Playtesting: Avoiding Evil Data. Game Developers Conference 2017. Retrieved February 26, 2018 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EUeYu0aPn4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Brendan Keogh. 2015. On Everybody's Gone To The Rapture. brkeogh.com. Retrieved January 15, 2016 from http://brkeogh.com/2015/08/14/on-everybodys-gone-to-the-rapture/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Raph Koster. 2004. A Theory of Fun for Game Design (1st ed.). Paraglyph Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Rudolf Kremers. 2009. Level Design: Concept, Theory, and Practice (1 edition ed.). A K Peters/CRC Press, Wellesley, MA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Margaret Diane LeCompte and Jean J. Schensul. 2010. Designing & Conducting Ethnographic Research: An Introduction. Rowman Altamira.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. George Loewenstein. 1994. The Psychology of Curiosity: A Review and Reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin 116, 1 (July 1994), 75--98.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Kevin Lynch. 1960. The Image of the City. MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ian MacLarty. 2017. The Catacombs of Solaris. Retrieved February 27, 2018 from https://ianmaclarty.itch.io/catacombs-of-solarisGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Alexander Muscat, William Goddard, Jonathan Duckworth, and Jussi Holopainen. 2016. First-Person Walkers: Understanding the Walker Experience through Four Design Themes. In DiGRA/FDG '16 - Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/paper_318.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Celia Pearce. 2007. Narrative Environments. In Space Time Play. 200--205. Retrieved September 20, 2013 from http://www.springerlink.com/index/K60151100T033RG1.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Lana Polansky. 2015. Against Flow. Sufficiently Human. Retrieved January 28, 2018 from http://sufficientlyhuman.com/archives/995Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman. 2004. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Jesse Schell. 2008. The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses (1st ed.). Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Miguel Sicart. 2014. Play Matters (1 edition ed.). The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts London. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Brian Sutton-Smith. 2001. The Ambiguity of Play (Revised ed. edition ed.). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. The Chinese Room. 2012. Dear Esther.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Alexandra To, Safinah Ali, Geoff Kaufman, and Jessica Hammer. 2016. Integrating Curiosity and Uncertainty in Game Design. In DiGRA/FDG '16 - Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG. Retrieved from http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/paper_428.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Christopher W. Totten. 2014. An Architectural Approach to Level Design. A K Peters/CRC Press, Boca Raton.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Steffen P. Walz. 2010. Toward a Ludic Architecture: The Space of Play and Games. ETC Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. WORLD4: Designing Ambiguity for First-Person Exploration 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 Conferences
      CHI PLAY '18: Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play
      October 2018
      563 pages
      ISBN:9781450356244
      DOI:10.1145/3242671
      • General Chairs:
      • Florian 'Floyd' Mueller,
      • Daniel Johnson,
      • Ben Schouten,
      • Program Chairs:
      • Phoebe O. Toups Dugas,
      • Peta Wyeth

      Copyright © 2018 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 the author(s) 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: 23 October 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI PLAY '18 Paper Acceptance Rate43of123submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader