Alt-Click

Entries tagged as ‘games’

Rick Dangerous for iPhone – UX review

July 11, 2009 · Leave a Comment

The period from 1987 – 1990 was a golden era of gaming for me.  I was 14 years old, so I had plenty of spare time, had a Commodore Amiga, and had access to a large collection of games, not all exactly legal to be fair.  The games that emerged for this platform were incredible, Populous, Lemmings, Cannon Fodder, SWIV, and are almost certainly ideal for conversion to the iPhone.

One of the first Amiga-to-iPhone conversions to a appear is Rick Dangerous, a game which at the time received 89% from Amiga Format.  The One magazine said “Rick Dangerous rates as one of the best 16-bit arcade games in a long time”.  High praise indeed, this is exactly the sort of game that makes ideal sense to port; it’s a game that has already been developed and has gained very high ratings, so there’s plenty of potential for a good return on investment you would imagine.

First Impressions

I start the game and jump straight in.  The first screen is similar to the famous ball rolling scene in Indiana Jones, when you start moving a ball comes from behind and chases you.  The design of the level would suggest that you could jump up and avoid the boulder, but I wasted all my lives just trying to do this simple task.

Pixel precision required - and good controls

Pixel precision required - and good controls

It quickly sinks in that the controls are the main Achilles heel of this conversion.  So within the first minute of gameplay the developers have made me feel mad, both causing frustration at not being able to play a game that I had strong memories of, and also of wasting £1.19 on this game.  Yes, it’s only a small amount of money, but it’s not even worth that much, there is no enjoyment to be had here.

Let’s split the overall user experience (UX) into four categories:

1. Usability – is it clear how to play the game?

2. Interface – is the feedback clear (both visual and audio)?

3. Interaction – control method

4. User Experience – is it enjoyable?

1. Usability

When you start a new game you are asked to choose your level, but you only see one choice, perhaps I need to unlock the others first?  It turns out that you can use the joystick to move left and right to choose 3 further levels, but I only figured this out by accident, there was nothing to suggest the player should do this.  Would it have been too hard to put arrows at either end of the screen to suggest there are more options?

A choice of one level?

A choice of one level?

After dying many, many times I decided to read the instructions. From the top of the screen I could see I had some sort of weapons available, but I couldn’t work out how to use them.  The help screen I discovered was less than perfect.  It says that to fire your gun the controls are Up + button.  If you try this however you realize that as soon as you press up, Rick starts jumping and pressing the button doesn’t fire the gun (unless he happens to be on the ground at the exact time as you press).  What the developers really mean is that you should press the button first, then tap up to shoot. The same is true for the other controls, it works much better if you press the button first, then tap the direction.

Do the opposite of everything they say

Do the opposite of everything they say

2. Interace

As far as the visual interface is concerned, there are no real issues.  The audio quality is bad however, the opening samples are hissy, and I wonder have they been lifted from the original Amiga version.  If so, it seems a bad decision to make.

3. Interaction

This is where it all goes wrong.  The ability for the player to accurately control the character is almost non-existent.  You’ll know in your head exactly what you’ll want to do, but the chances of that plan succeeding are almost zero.

The main reason is the developer’s decision to use fixed controls at the bottom of the screen. Whereas most iPhone developers have realized that a virtual joystick is a better method, allowing the player to control movement wherever they place their fingers, these devs have fixed the location.   This means that if you’re trying to move the character right for example and your thumb moves out of the joystick region then the character stops. Usually resulting in another life lost. This means you constantly have to glance down to see where your thumb is, and if it’s near an edge (which it will be), then readjust its position. This takes your attention away from the game and turns Rick Dangerous into a ‘where is my thumb’ game, a new genre of game granted, but not a good one.

Fixed area of control - disaster

Fixed area of control - disaster

This is a game built around pixel-perfection, the timing of jumps and shooting needs to be very accurate, so this game just doesn’t work with the current interaction method. Even simple tasks such as climbing a ladder causes immense frustration with the character stopping near the top for no reason, but not actually reaching the top.

Jumping requires the player to move their thumb onto one of the upper diagonal directions, trying to do this in an accurate way it just impossible as your thumb is likely to move over the left or right directions first, causing you to move into the object you’re trying to jump over.  And loose another life of course.  The large button should probably be a jump button, and possibly another dedicated button needed for weapons, basically anything apart from what they have come up with.

4. User Experience

UX comprises many factors. For gaming, a key component of UX is the fragile line between challenge and frustration. If done correctly, this produces a satisfying gameplay experience, constantly challenging the player, but not making them feel overwhelmed.  Sadly, this does not do any of that, it’s frustration all the way.  The best I managed was to reach the third screen, and there was no fun to be had along my journey.

Playtests

It’s a shame really, the developers are clearly technically competent, the port looks just like the original, but the feeling is far, far different.  It’s as if they had no understanding of the iPhone’s interaction methods and somehow thought that just by implementing the old-style controls would be enough. I think it’s also painfully obvious that they didn’t do any user testing, and from my point of view at least, that’s unforgivable. If a company doesn’t care about the people who are going to play their game, then they mustn’t care about making a financial return on the game either.  It must be nice to not have to worry about that bothersome activity of earning an income.

Lessons

The company, Magic Team, have joined my list of iPhone developers to avoid at all costs, they have ruined a perfectly good license and worst of all is that it could have been fantastic.

At least this disaster of a game can serve as a warning to other would-be Amiga porters; when you port, please don’t port the interaction methods also.

Categories: Review · UX · Video Games · Video Games Usability · usability
Tagged: , , ,

PEGI ratings – the trouble with icons

June 21, 2009 · 2 Comments

This week TIGA, the trade association that represents UK and EU video game developers said that more work was needed to make the new PEGI game rating logos more recognizable.

Icon design is incredibly difficult, when done well it can transcend language barriers and culture issues, but when done badly, it results in delays, confusion and wasted mental effort.

These new warning icons are designed to guide parents when choosing a game to buy for their kids. I decided to do my own evaluation of the icons and so yesterday I took to the streets to ask the good people of Brighton what these icons meant.  Here are some of the responses.

PEGI icon Guesses “Don’t know, worldwide, more than one person, needs access to  computers”  Actual meaning, online.

Picture 5-1 Guesses “Violence, fighting, breakable (as in Wiimote danger)”. Actual meaning, violence.

Picture 5-2 Guesses “Swearing”. Actual meaning, swearing.

Picture 5-3Guesses “Phobia warning, caution, don’t know, would put me off buying it,  contains spiders”. Actual meaning,  fear.

Picture 5-4 Guesses “For boys and girls, suitable for all sexes”. Actual meaning, contains  sexual content.

Picture 5-5 Guesses “Drugs, hospital”. Actual meaning, scenes of drug use.

Picture 5-6 Guesses “Don’t know, doesn’t mean anything, socializing, parent caution,  multiplayer”. Actual meaning, scenes of discrimination.

Picture 5-7 Guesses “Game of chance, competition, gambling, entertaining”. Actual meaning, gambling.

Overall, only the swearing icon was interpreted the same by everyone, the next clearest were violence and drug use, followed by gambling.  Worryingly, 4 of the 8 icons completely confused the people I asked, no one understood what they were trying to convey.  Everyone I asked were UK nationals, I would be keen to see how these are interpreted in the rest of the EU.

In my admittedly rather limited tests, the PEGI ratings scored 29% accuracy, so I fully support the TIGA recommendation to make these icons more recognizable.

Categories: HCI · Video Games
Tagged: ,

Video Games Usability and User Experience

April 8, 2008 · 1 Comment

In future posts I’ll be discussing video games, however the aim will not be to review a game in a traditional manner, but instead to discuss the areas of a game where the designer’s intentions do not meet the player’s expectations. To put this in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) terminology, we’ll be discussing video game usability and user experience. We could argue over what these terms really mean, and we might just do that another time, but for now, let’s say that video game usability is concerned with a game’s ability to communicate its capabilities to the player in an intuitive manner. So what I’m interested in is moments in a video game where any of the following happen; shouting at the game, wanting to give up, palms sweat, increased heart rate, loosing track of time, thinking about how to control your character, difficulty level, the list could go on.

Why do some games ‘feel good’? Can we really expect to develop a technique to measure enjoyment and if so, can we quantify it?

As you’ve probably guessed by now, the area of video games usability and user experience is multidisciplinary and multimodal, with the main aim being to improve the overall quality or experience of a game.

Let’s be clear here, we’re not trying to devise a magic formula to design quality games, but we are interested in techniques which allow us to identify, measure and resolve issues with video games.

Categories: Video Games Usability
Tagged: , ,