skip to main content
10.1145/1978942.1979287acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Target assistance for subtly balancing competitive play

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 May 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

In games where skills such as targeting are critical to winning, it is difficult for players with different skill levels to have a competitive and engaging experience. Although several mechanisms for accommodating different skill levels have been proposed, traditional approaches can be too obvious and can change the nature of the game. For games involving aiming, we propose the use of target assistance techniques (such as area cursors, target gravity, and sticky targets) to accommodate skill imbalances. We compared three techniques in a study, and found that area cursors and target gravity significantly reduced score differential in a shooting-gallery game. Further, less skilled players reported having more fun when the techniques helped them be more competitive, and even after they learned assistance was given, felt that this form of balancing was good for group gameplay. Our results show that target assistance techniques can make target-based games more competitive for shared play.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

paper383.mp4

mp4

24.3 MB

References

  1. Adams, E. Fundamentals of Game Design. New Riders, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Ahlström, D., Hitz, M., and Leitner, G. An evaluation of sticky and force enhanced targets in multi target situations. Proc. NordicCHI, (2001), 58--67. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Asano, T., Sharlin, E., Kitamura, Y., Takashima, K., and Kishino, F. Predictive interaction using the delphian desktop. Proc. UIST '05, (2005), 133--141. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Balakrishnan, R. "Beating" Fitt's law: virtual enhancements for pointing facilitation. IJHCS, 61, (2004), 857--874. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bateman, S., Mandryk, R., Gutwin, C., Xiao, R. Targeting-Assistance Techniques for Distant Pointing with Relative Ray Casting. Technical Report 2009-03, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Univ. of Saskatchewan, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Baudisch, P., Cutrell, E., Robbins, D., Czerwinski, M., Tandler, P. Bederson, B., and Zierlinger, A. Drag-and-Pop and Drag-and-Pick: Techniques for Accessing Remote Screen Content on Touch- and Pen-operated Systems. Proc. Interact 2003, 57--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Blanch, R., Guiard, Y., Beaudoin-Lafon, M. Semantic pointing: improving target axquisition with control-display ratio adaptation. Proc. CHI '04, 519--525. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Bostan, B., and Öğüt, S. Game challenges and difficulty levels: lessons learned From RPGs. In International Simulation and Gaming Association Conference, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapuis, O., Labrune, J., and Pietriga, E. DynaSpot: Speed-Dependent Area Cursor. CHI'09, 1391--1400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Csíkszentmihályi, M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper and Row, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Elmqvist, N. and Fekete, J-D. Semantic Pointing for Object Picking in Complex 3D Environments. Proc. GI, 2008, 243--250. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Falstein, N. Understanding fun -- the Theory of Natural Funativity. In Introduction to Game Development, Rabin, S. (ed.), 71--98. Charles River Media, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fitt, P. M. The Information Capacity of the human motor control system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J. Exp. Psychology, 47, (1954), 381--391.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Grossman, T. and Balakrishnan, R. The bubble cursor: enhancing target acquisition by dynamic resizing of the cursor's activation area. Proc. CHI '05, 281--290. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hanson, B. Game balance for massively multiplayer games. In Massively Multiplayer Game Development, Alexander, T. (ed.), 30--48. Charles Rive Media, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Herbrich, R., Minka, T., and Graepel, T. TrueSkill(TM): A Bayesian skill rating system. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 569--576, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Hunicke, R. The case for dynamic difficulty adjustment in games. In Proceedings of Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, vol. 265, 429--433, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hurst, A., Mankoff, J., Dey, A. K., and Hudson, S. E. 2007. Dirty desktops: using a patina of magnetic mouse dust to make common interactor targets easier to select. Proc. UIST '07, 183--186. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ibáñez-Martínez, J. and Delgado-Mata, C. From Competitive to Social Two-player Videogames. Proc. Workshop on Child, Computer and Interaction, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Kabbash, P. and Buxton, W. The "Prince" Technique: Fitts' Law and Selection Using Area Cursors. Proc. CHI '95, 273--279. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. MacKenzie, I. S. Fitts' law as a research and design tool in human-computer interaction. HCI, 7, (1992), 91--139. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Mandryk, R. L., and Gutwin, C. Perceptibility and Utility of Sticky Targets. Proc. GI '08, 65--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. McGuffin, M., and Balakrishnan, R. Acquisition of Expanding Targets. Proc. CHI 2002, 57--64. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Meyer, D., Smith, J., Kornblum, S., Abrams, R., Wright, C. Optimality in human motor performance: ideal control of rapid aimed movements. Psych. Rev. 8, (1988), 340--370.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Nelson, D. Fire Control. Game Developer, 16(11), 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Newheiser, M. Playing Fair: A Look at Competition in Gaming. Strange Horizons. www.strangehorizons.com /2009/20090309/newheiser-a.shtml, accessed June 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Onyett, C. Shadowrun Interview. IGN. http://pc.ign. com/articles/740/740187p1.html, accessed June 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Parker, J.K., Mandryk, R., Nunes, M.N., and Inkpen, K. TractorBeam Selection Aids: Improving Target Acquisition for Pointing Input on Tabletop Displays. Proc. INTERACT '05, 80--93. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Pedersen, C., Togelius, J. and Yannakakis, G. Modeling Player Experience for Content Creation. IEEE Trans. Comp. Intell. and AI in Games, 2 (1), 54--67, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Sweetser, P. and Wyeth, P. GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in Entertainment, 3, 3--3, 205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Thompson, C. What Type of Game Cheater Are You? Article on Wired.com. Retrieved August, 15, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Vorderer, P., Hartmann, T., and Klimmt, C. Explaining the enjoyment of playing video games: the role of competition. Proc. Entertainment Computing'03, 1--9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Worden, A., Walker, M., Bharat, K. and Hudson, S. Making computers easier for older adults to use: area cursors and sticky icons. Proc. CHI '97, 266--271. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Yeung, S., Lui, J., Liu, J., and Yan, J. Detecting cheaters for multiplayer games: theory, design and implementation. Proc. IEEE CCNS 2006, 1178--1182.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Youssef, A. and Cossell, S. Thoughts on adjusting perceived difficulty in games. Proc. Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment, 1--4, 2009.. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Target assistance for subtly balancing competitive play
          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          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 '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            May 2011
            3530 pages
            ISBN:9781450302289
            DOI:10.1145/1978942

            Copyright © 2011 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: 7 May 2011

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            CHI '11 Paper Acceptance Rate410of1,532submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader