Me, us and them: evaluation of cooperation and competition in a location-based serious game design

Introduction Parallel to the growing interest in the deployment of digital games as an instructional tool for educational and social purposes and their theoretical underpinning and viability (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2006), the social aspect of gaming itself has also gained interest as in how various forms of human interaction in digital games and game play manifest. For example, Zagal, Nussbaum and Rosas (2002) developed a model for multiplayer game design to support initial steps in the design process of multiplayer games, proposing that social interaction depends on elements of the game (i.e. player(s), rules and goals, and props and tools) and characteristics of a multiplayer game. Moreover, mobile technologies offer new opportunities to embed and exploit multiplayer game and/or game features to various contexts, potentially adding an extra element to the human interaction and digital games, such as the spatial environment in which the digital game is played). For instance, due to GPS integration in mobile devices, game play progression in so called location-based games is based on players’ interaction with certain game features in a predefined physical location. For example, Huizinga, Admiraal, Akkerman and Dam (2009) developed a mobile city game for students from secondary education to acquire historical knowledge and motivation for history. Likewise, Facer et al. (2004) developed a mobile game experience to encourage the development of children’s conceptual understanding of animal behavior in a direct physical interaction with space and with other players. Due to new game formats, new media and technology opportunities, the social aspect of multiplayer digital gaming the complexity of optimizing game design and eventually game play rises. This paper therefore aims to further explore the competition and cooperation elements (Zagal et al, 2002) for a location-based serious game. This study was part of a larger study aimed to design and develop a game-based road safety campaign from a user-centered design perspective using several mixed methods throughout the game development process (Pagulayan, Keeker, Wixon, Romero, & Fuller, 2003). The goal was to develop a serious game to enhance the awareness of road safety and to stimulate safe behavior on the road among adolescents. In the first part of the game development process a literature review, interviews and focus groups with relevant stakeholders resulted in a game design concept. [Reference removed to protect anonymity] involved stakeholders in a co-design sessions to gather input on the perception and needs of the target group on several game mechanics. Insights obtained in part one led to the creation of a beta version of the game ‘City Jam’. The game’s goal is to become the most popular band of the city by collecting virtual items spread throughout the city center and therefore competing against one another in teams (four > team < ten); each team consists of two to four players and players have the option to cooperate given the game mechanics and features. In order to evaluate the results we considered a social hourglass shaped framework as to describe cooperation and competition during game play (see figure 1). Methodology Three field tests were deployed during the game development process of the beta version of the location-based serious game ‘City Jam’ with roughly one and a half month between each test. A total of 43 adolescents from the third cycle of secondary education were recruited from eight schools (see table 1). Field test Game testers (N=41) Number of teams Age range (years) Gender M F 1 18 4 14-18 15 3 2 7 3 14-17 6 1 3 16 5 15-17 8 8 Table 1. demographics of game testers in the iterative testing phase. Each field test consisted of two parts: the game test and a focus group held directly afterwards to evaluate the game play and experience among the target group. In preparation for each field test a checklist with predefined and/or adjusted goals to optimize game experience were established in collaboration with the game developer. Game mechanics throughout the development process were subject to adjustment based on the insights and results obtained in the test phase. In the game test audio and video recordings were gathered with a Go Pro camera with head mount and audio recordings and survey data were collected in focus groups sessions with (a selection of) the game testers. A semi structured list was used as guidance throughout the focus group. Survey field test included game experience. However, given that the full final version of the game was developed after field test three, researchers evaluated the value of the Likert scale survey on its contribution and decided to reduce survey to open questions only: game testers were asked to write down the 3 most positive and 3 most negative experiences during game play. The field tests were held after school time in the low traffic city center. Each game test was approximately two hours and focus group sessions were around one hour. Results Our preliminary results from field test one showed that on the competitive level sabotaging other teams (dropping virtual bombs to steal points) was considered one of the most positive aspects of overall game play. Also, the menu function ‘newsfeed’ was also received positive as to obtain knowledge on the movements and actions of other teams (although not all teams used this function). Although game testers enjoyed the location based game (good concept), they stated that the game was seen as an individual rather than a team game. Discussing strategy, explaining game features was mixed from team to team and testers addressed that they were not always involved in the game given the restriction of game play on one tablet (size, visibility and walking makes cooperation difficult). Additional physical maps with information on items and scores for non-tablet holders for each team were often neglected during game play. Four promo actions (e.g. taking group pictures with virtual fans) were integrated as to promote cooperation and interaction, however, actual interaction with these elements were considered as mildly interactive. When players were asked during the focus group which elements they would add to improve game experience, several suggestions were made to interact with other groups (via chat) and to expand options and scores of sabotaging other teams. Furthermore suggestions were made to improve cooperation (extra tablet or sync with mobile devices). Field test two results strengthened the positive game experience of sabotaging other teams as it was a recurrent topic of discussion in the focus group. In focus groups, teams addressed that city maps were not used during game play although a game element was changed so that pubs were removed from the tablet map and only shown on the physical city map in order to stimulate cooperation within teams. Traffic questions implemented in the game with the purpose to stimulate cooperation and discussion resulted in mixed results; some teams negotiate and in other teams the tablet holder made decisions and proceeded without mentioning or providing team members with information. Some game testers addressed that the game was not that difficult and in another team the switching of tablet was a considerable issue, which influenced negative game experience on an individual level and resulted in minimal cooperation within the team. In field test three, new game mechanics were integrated and introduced to game testers as to improve cooperation (and to a lesser extent competition, hence it was evaluated based on the previous field tests that this game dynamic was working to expectations in line with the expectations and goals of the game). Results showed that sabotaging was again one of the top positively received game mechanics. The role of a bodyguard was implemented to safeguard that the game was played in a safe manner; hence tablet usage can lead to a decrease in situational awareness due to attention shift. However, all game testers were confused on the extra roles implemented in the game, given the initial role of ‘musician on tour’ and traffic participant. Furthermore, go pro results obtained showed that although interaction during game play is obvious, game related cooperation was mild. As in previous field tests, the improvement in theory did not match expectations on cooperation improvement; decisions and strategy for game play were mainly discussed among two players who were directly into contact with the tablet. The other team member(s) were seldom involved and often not aware of their status in the game. Traffic questions were mostly discussed together which influenced cooperation positively and promo actions were received as positive. A full analysis on the extensive audio and video data will be conducted as to evaluate how to optimize cooperation and competition considering the hourglass social framework in a location-based serious game

Social Data Offloading in D2D-Enhanced Cellular Networks by Network Formation Games

Recently, cellular networks are severely overloaded by social-based services, such as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, in which thousands of clients subscribe a common content provider (e.g., a popular singer) and download his/her content updates all the time. Offloading such traffic through complementary networks, such as a delay tolerant network formed by device-to-device (D2D) communications between mobile subscribers, is a promising solution to reduce the cellular burdens. In the existing solutions, mobile users are assumed to be volunteers who selfishlessly deliver the content to every other user in proximity while moving. However, practical users are selfish and they will evaluate their individual payoffs in the D2D sharing process, which may highly influence the network performance compared to the case of selfishless users. In this paper, we take user selfishness into consideration and propose a network formation game to capture the dynamic characteristics of selfish behaviors. In the proposed game, we provide the utility function of each user and specify the conditions under which the subscribers are guaranteed to converge to a stable network. Then, we propose a practical network formation algorithm in which the users can decide their D2D sharing strategies based on their historical records. Simulation results show that user selfishness can highly degrade the efficiency of data offloading, compared with ideal volunteer users. Also, the decrease caused by user selfishness can be highly affected by the cost ratio between the cellular transmission and D2D transmission, the access delays, and mobility patterns

Evaluation of the game development process of a location-based mobile game

There is a growing interest of government bodies and NGOs in using (serious) video games in awareness campaigns. Until now, however, little was known on how to set up such a campaign so as to effectively cater to the needs of different stakeholders including the target audience. Hence designing, developing and translating a game for educational purposes whilst balancing between fun and learning is a complex process, this paper aims to evaluate this by presenting a methodological framework for involving stakeholders in the design and development of a game-based awareness campaign based on a user-centered software design methodology and assesses its effectiveness in a concrete use case: the development of the location-based mobile game City Jam. The goal was to develop a game-based road safety campaign to confront adolescents with road traffic situations with the aim to positively influence road safety attitude and behavior. Mobile technologies offer new opportunities to embed digital game based learning by in different contexts. Given the nature of the road safety campaign, a location-based game format was chosen, aiming to facilitate learning by means of an extended three-way interaction (human interaction, game and context). Different user-centered design methods were deployed throughout several phases of the game development process: In phase one (the opportunity identification) a literature review was performed to investigate relevant fields for the game’s goal. In phase two (the game concept development) expert interviews and a focus groups were conducted with relevant stakeholders and in phase three (the game concept design) co-design sessions and a focus group resulted in a game design document. In phase four (game development and testing) the beta version of City jam was developed and tested in an iterative field testing design and resulted in the final game. Results obtained throughout the game development process provided us the opportunity to evaluate several major aspects. Firstly the impact of stakeholder involvement on the different phases of the design process and the final product resulted in a game that was tailored to the preferences and needs of the target group. Secondly translating the game concept into practice, such as game elements, proposed educational game elements, were evaluated based on the usability, playability principles and social and technological aspects. Benefits and challenges of user-centered design methods are discussed and how budget constraints and differing desired outcomes of different stakeholders challenge but also enrich the process

Incentive Mechanisms for Participatory Sensing: Survey and Research Challenges

Participatory sensing is a powerful paradigm which takes advantage of smartphones to collect and analyze data beyond the scale of what was previously possible. Given that participatory sensing systems rely completely on the users' willingness to submit up-to-date and accurate information, it is paramount to effectively incentivize users' active and reliable participation. In this paper, we survey existing literature on incentive mechanisms for participatory sensing systems. In particular, we present a taxonomy of existing incentive mechanisms for participatory sensing systems, which are subsequently discussed in depth by comparing and contrasting different approaches. Finally, we discuss an agenda of open research challenges in incentivizing users in participatory sensing.Comment: Updated version, 4/25/201

MAC design for WiFi infrastructure networks: a game-theoretic approach

In WiFi networks, mobile nodes compete for accessing a shared channel by means of a random access protocol called Distributed Coordination Function (DCF). Although this protocol is in principle fair, since all the stations have the same probability to transmit on the channel, it has been shown that unfair behaviors may emerge in actual networking scenarios because of non-standard configurations of the nodes. Due to the proliferation of open source drivers and programmable cards, enabling an easy customization of the channel access policies, we propose a game-theoretic analysis of random access schemes. Assuming that each node is rational and implements a best response strategy, we show that efficient equilibria conditions can be reached when stations are interested in both uploading and downloading traffic. More interesting, these equilibria are reached when all the stations play the same strategy, thus guaranteeing a fair resource sharing. When stations are interested in upload traffic only, we also propose a mechanism design, based on an artificial dropping of layer-2 acknowledgments, to force desired equilibria. Finally, we propose and evaluate some simple DCF extensions for practically implementing our theoretical findings.Comment: under review on IEEE Transaction on wireless communication