Fast forward several months, and a few UX book club meetings / lunches with the Sprowt team later, and… voila – they asked me to help out with their upcoming Fundamentals of Interaction Design Workshop Series!

I believe Sprowt’s mission to help designers make the transition from the university to a professional career is good one… and one which I’m honored to support. This workshop series is going to be a great one – I hope you can join us!

Register for the course now!

When:

Thursday, February 2nd

11:30am – 1:00 pm

Where:

Papa Joe’s on 1301 S. Capitol Blvd.

The Book:

Seductive Interaction Design by Stephen Anderson

Even if you don’t read the book, come to the meeting to talk about what makes a compelling and engaging web experience. This discussion is perfect for UX professionals, web designers/developers, content strategists, or anyone interested in consuming italian food with other really smart people.

Look at a few of the awesome people that have already told me they will be there: @Lenalou, @jhessing, @ryanlascano, @stevenorell, @kerryca, @erendrake , @tichelle and of course, I’ll be there too (@garyjanderson).

See our discussion on Twitter via the #BoiseUX hashtag, or follow @BoiseUX for future updates!

I’m really excited for this month’s book club meeting; Stephen Anderson’s work has never disappointed me!

See you there…

When:

Friday, December 2nd

11:30am – 1:00 pm

Where:

LuLu’s Pizza on 2594 N. Bogus Basin Road

The Book:

Content Strategy for the Web by Kristina Halvorson

I promise no one will glare at you if you haven’t read the book…  we are a welcoming lot!

Look for @Lenalou, @jhessing or myself (@garyjanderson) if you are new to the group.

Please join us if you are in the Boise area and want to talk about technology, the web, and user experience.

When:

Wednesday, October 5th

11:30am – 1:00 pm

Where:

Chicago Connection on 4th and Bannock

The Book:

Responsive Web Design by Ethan Marcotte

Everyone welcomed to attend if you are in the Boise area – even if you haven’t read the book!

We will have good discussion, good food, and almost certainly a good time!

Look for @Lenalou, @jhessing or myself (@garyjanderson) if you are new to the group!

Please join us!

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.

Please review the podcast on iTunes! Your feedback will help to increase our visibility to other listeners.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com, unless otherwise noted.

Theme (Open and Close):  How Far – Jamison Young, Shifting Sands of a Blue Car

Additional music in show:  Disco High – UltraCat

Today we pick apart my experience with Zombie Farm. I played Zombie Farm regularly (2-5 times per day) for nearly two months; significantly longer than many of the other games I experimented with. As with most games, my amount of interaction for each play session was small – about 3-10 minutes per session. During this time, I completed routine tasks not unlike other farm-themed social games – planting crops, harvesting crops, buying doo-dads to spruce up the aforementioned farm, etc. Pretty banal stuff, really.

What Zombie Farm does do (again, some of which is not unheard of in other social games) though, helps to catapult the game from being just a click-fest to something a little more compelling:

Quests: At the beginning of the game, players are challenged (at their own pace) to complete quests – for example, plant and harvest 10 tomatos or harvest 2 Headless Zombies. These quests provide a welcome focus to the player – giving them something to strive for. If we are generous, we might also say that these quests present an “appropriate” challenge to the player. Note the use of the word appropriate here: good games don’t assault the player with challenges that are not accomplishable nor do they present ones which would be too easy.  There is a sweet spot to hit when establishing the difficulty of the challenge to ensure that it fits squarely in the middle of this difficulty range. As I’ve discussed in previous posts, it is the challenge that creates the feeling of fun. Without challenge, we are just pressing buttons or swiping fingers.

Invasions: A differentiator for Zombie Farm from many other casual farming games is the actual inclusion of the zombies themselves… and their overall intent: invasions. Once you raise up a zombie army, you can choose to invade other locations (other farms, lawyers, pirates, robots, etc.). This aspect of the game is important because, much like the quests, it gives players an ever-present challenge to explore – the need to harvest zombies, complete the invasion, replace zombies lost in battle, rinse, and repeat. We see here the concepts of variability within gameplay (to keep things fresh) and appropriate challenge wrapped up within this single game mechanic.

Discoverability: If you would have asked me ten years ago if mainstream/casual gamers would grok the concept of an experience point (XP) system, I may have laughed in your face. Yet, here we are in 2011 and we see XP systems layered like MSG onto games that conceivably have no right to possess them – such as Zombie Farm. In Zombie Farm, the XP system works exceptionally well to drive players toward an arbitrary next level. Why would players want to get to the next level?  Simply stated, there is content that is not accessible to them until they hit that level. Zombie Farm smartly dangles the carrot of this content in front of the player, showing blackened outlines of the super cool zombie they will have access to at the next level… which will require just a little more play to get to. Players like surprises – whether they are casual or hardcore – and I easily succumbed to this trap myself within this game. Another note here: notice my interest in wanting to get that next zombie. We humans have a strong interest in collection activities – whether those are titles on FourSquare, badges in Gowalla, Achievements on XBox Live, stamps for your stamp collection, or zombies for your zombie herd – our inherent interest (need?) to collect things is a powerful psychological driver.

This sounds so amazing, right? Yet, I stopped playing this game after about two months. Why?

• The game stopped presenting quests after about the first month of play, hindering the focus/drive for advancement.
• Introduction of new game mechanics or opportunities slowed. Instead of presenting something new within 3-8 play sessions, it slipped to providing something new every 12-25+ play sessions. In short, gameplay became a bit of a repetitive grind. To me, the value of my time began to outweigh the delight/surprise earned from the investment of this time.

Let’s recap our learnings from my time with Zombie Farm:

• Good games always provide appropriate challenge to the player. Challenges that are too hard or too easy do not effectively drive engagement.
• Good games provide variability in game play. If players aren’t forced to learn or experience new things, then they stop having fun once they’ve “solved” the gameplay puzzles with which they’ve been presented.
• Good games can leverage inherent human pscyhological behaviors/interests – such as our desire for surprise and our interest in collection activities. Mechanics that tap into these strong motivators are effective for driving consistent engagement provided that they are attainable and of sufficient frequency.

Join me for Part 4 next week for ongoing analysis.

When I began my foray into social games two that I immediately gravitated to were City Story and Zombie Cafe. As a big fan of the old SimCity games and a zombie lover (ewww…), these two seemed like a great choice to kick things off.

Both games featured a fun theme, pleasing aesthetic design, and an easy-to-use user interface. Thousands of other players played them, had rated them favorably in the app store, and they were hovering at the top of the popularity lists for games. How could they not be great?

I uninstalled them both after a few days of play.

Why? The devil here was in the details. The details, in this case, being the (mis)use of a mechanic I’ve seen in so many other social games:  Time

In City Story, you use coins to build new buildings. Once you have some buildings (e.g. factories), you use some amount of coins to start off the production of some type of widget.  After a variable amount of minutes or hours, you can then retrieve these products, usually generating more money than you had used to create products. Production Money + Time = Production Output.

In Zombie Cafe, you use some amount of money to start off cooking a recipe. After a variable amount of minutes or hours, you can then retrieve this meal and start serving the dish to customers. Again, we see a simple equation take place: Production Money + Time = Production Output. As with City Story, as a gamer, it is our hope that the the output we get is worth more than the money and the time we invested.

These games layer some additional mechanics to drive this operation (e.g. build 3 of X type of products, keep food on the tabe for customers or your cafe rating decreases, etc.). As a player, you must rinse and repeat this interaction over-and-over to meet these (or similar) goals.

I suspect the use of a time mechanic evolved for two primary reasons:

• When gaming within social networks such as Facebook, the passage of time doesn’t feel like a major expense – you are coming back to check on your social network anyway… why not take a few minutes for a game?
• For less patient gamers, you can conduct micro transactions to circumvent this time barrier. This provides a route to income for the developer/publisher.

As I’ve explored social games, I’ve learned to live (often begrudgingly) with the time mechanic. I have no illusions as to their impact and why they exist.

But for today, I want explain how the implementation of the time mechanic in the two above examples drove me away. What is surprising is how simple my concern is, and how easy it would be to fix.

In both of these games: Failure to monitor and conform to the game’s time mechanic while not playing the game is penalized.

In City Story, if I don’t collect the products my factories built within an arbitrary (and for me, unknown) period of time, they would be “ruined” and unsalvageable. I lose the money I invested and have to start again. I have to wait because time is an insurmountable barrier – unless I want to invest real money via micro transactions to circumvent the barrier. Of course, just the subtle negative feeling you get from not retrieving your goods in time is frustrating just by itself, the “financial” impact within the game notwithstanding.

In Zombie Cafe, if I don’t get my prepared dish off of the stove and onto the serving table, it burns and is unusable.  Again, my failure to conform to the game’s timetable of when I should play it penalizes me. I’m asked to play the game when it says it should be played, not when I say it should be played.

In both of these games, the time mechanic is playing with you, instead of vice versa. I’ve played many other games where your end product doesn’t spoil… it just sits there and awaits player interaction. Sure, you lose out on the opportunity to be utilizing that resource to develop the next product, but at least you are not wasting previously invested time and money. In those cases, the time mechanic is in effect, but it is in effect within your control, and not vice versa.

What are our game design take-aways?

• As is the case with all interaction design, a good experience puts players in control of their actions and provides them with a clear understanding of the outcome of their actions. When we are playing a game, we exercise influence within the game. When we are not playing the game, most reasonable people assume that their lack of inaction wouldn’t (shouldn’t) have consequences. In both of my examples, the game punishes the player for not playing by the rules of the game – even when those rules shouldn’t be in effect because the game isn’t being played! And no, push notifications are not an acceptable solution to out-of-game interaction.
• Challenge is important to games (as I’ll discuss later), but insurmountable challenge or unreasonable/unknown punishment is regarded as unfair by the player.  Since the joy of a game is the subtle battle of learning the systems and mechanics in play (even if most gamers wouldn’t think of that process so literally), a system that is not discoverable by the player will be regarded as unfair, confusing, and flat-out un-fun. Challenges should be within scope and understandable.

I suspect that as the social gaming matures, designers will learn how to move past the use of time as a barrier or punishment. Time is a cheap, quick-fix mechanic to drive challenge. Game designers can do better.

As such, over the course of the next several blog posts, I’m going to take a non-empirical approach to discussing my time with these games and sharing some thoughts around their mechanics. Hopefully this discourse will prove interesting to fellow game designers, interaction designers interested in developing and incorporating game-like mechanics into their designs, or just the voyeurs out there that might like to pick apart how people think and feel. If that doesn’t sound like you, then plan on gaming back in a few months.  ;)

Before we jump in though, let me provide a snapshot of me as a gamer. This is important because I do not believe I’m the target audience for many of these social games (as you will most likely see via my analysis).

Gary the Gamer:

• I’ve been playing games consistently for 28 years – video games, card games, board games, role-playing games, athletic games, etc. (Read: I love games and have a lot of experience with them.)
• I routinely now dedicate anywhere from 8-12 hours per week to gaming. This amount of time can vary, based on professional and personal commitments, but if more time is available, I will typically dedicate it to gaming. (Read: gaming is a major hobby and I willingly dedicate hours to it.)
• I game on many different platforms: XBox 360, PS3, Wii, iPhone, PC (er… Mac, actually) and real-world games (board games, card games, etc.). As a consumer, I most likely purchase around 2-3 games every two months. (Read: I am willing to dedicate money/resources to further my hobby.)
• What I look for in a good game: a good story, good aesthetics, fun play, and a surmountable challenge. I enjoy lo-fidelity/simple efforts or big triple-A mega releases within almost all genres of games. My least favorite genre is sports simulation, although I have played (and been entertained by) a good number of them during my storied career as a gamer. (Read: I’m open to new experiences as long as they are compelling.)
• I listen to multiple game podcasts weekly and read game reviews, game commentary, and game philosophy in books, magazines, and online. (Read: I take gaming seriously, and unlike Ebert, I definitely think of gaming as a form of art, creativity, and intellectualism on par with books, movies, and plays).

Now that the stage has been set, join me for My Social Gaming Experience: Part 2, where I tackle my first two games – Zombie Cafe and City Story.

I’ve had a few people inquire about the status of my DIY card game, Farmageddon, recently. This is a very good thing, since I will admit that I haven’t been driving the project forward like I should be.

Here is where we are at:

Playtesting is ongoing.

I’ve had many people – from different walks of life and different experience levels with games – now weigh in on the theme, mechanics, and rough artwork behind the game. As you can imagine, there has been some major and minor changes to mechanics that have occurred. I believe that it is “almost there” now… just need to do some math around probabilities for the cards. This is the easy stuffy.

Artwork needs refined.

This is where I’m struggling. My attempts to refine the very loose concepts you see here into more professional art has been a daunting task. Couple this with a sometimes crippling distrust of the quality of my artwork and, well, you begin to see how the process can become stalled. Luckily, I have settled on a thematic approach to the art and card design, so it is really about putting in the time to get it done.

If you are following the plight of this saga and would like to hear about something in particular, let me know. Otherwise, stay tuned!

Here are the details for the 3rd meeting of the Boise UX Book Club:

When:

Thursday, July 7th

11:40am – 1:00 pm

Where:

Darla’s Deli (Penthouse of the CW Moore Plaza at 5th & Front)

The Book:

Remote Research by Nate Bolt and Tony Tulathimutte

Everyone welcomed to attend if you are in the Boise area and have an interest in discussing user experience.

Look for @Lenalou, @jhessing or myself (@garyjanderson) if you are new to the group!

Please join us!

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.

Please review the podcast on iTunes! Your feedback will help to increase our visibility to other listeners.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com, unless otherwise noted.

Theme (Open and Close):  How Far – Jamison Young, Shifting Sands of a Blue Car

During the show, Fred shared a lot of great resources that will help you with your prototyping endeavors.  For your convenience, we have captured these resources in this month’s show notes: http://bit.ly/UL12ShowNotes

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.

Please review the podcast on iTunes!  Your feedback will help to increase our visibility to other listeners.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com, unless otherwise noted.

Theme (Open and Close):  How Far – Jamison Young, Shifting Sands of a Blue Car

Additional music in show:  H the Last Ride by Rune

My topic: video games!

Check out my Examiner.com page to see some of my writings. The content I place there will focus mostly on game reviews and fun game analysis. Deeper game evaluation (mechanics, theory, etc.) will remain posted here on my personal site. If you have any topics you would like me to explore, or specific games you want to hear my thoughts on, let me know, I’m happy to oblige!

We’ve settled on a date, time, location, and book for the 2nd meeting of the Boise UX Book Club:

When:

Friday, April 29th

11:30am – 1:00 pm

Where:

Brick Oven Bistro

The Book:

Tapworthy: Designing Great iPhone Apps

Everyone welcomed to attend if you are in the Boise area and have an interest in discussing user experience.

Look for @Lenalou, @jhessing or myself (@garyjanderson) if you are new to the group!

Please join us!

I was quite addicted to this great online adventure until I ran through the majority of the main game content. At that time I stopped visiting The Kingdom and eventually forgot about it altogether.

Until tonight.

About 15 minutes ago I received a great letter from The Kingdom.

Here it is in its entirety:

Dear Lamprey,

Okay, I’m not good at this kind of thing, but I feel like I have to give it a try. So, here goes:

I was hanging out the other night, listening to some old mp3s, and I was just overcome with memories of when we used to hang out all the time. Remember? You were an intrepid, fearless adventurer, and I was the free-to-play, fun-and-funny online role-playing game that won your heart. Do you still remember those good times? I can’t stop thinking about them.

I mean, I know things got kind of messed up at the end, and believe me, I’m sorry. If I could take any of that back, I totally would. And I know people grow and change, and you’re not the same person you were then, but hey — I’ve changed, too! I thought and thought about how to win you back. I figured I’d make you a mix CD, but I couldn’t decide what “our song” was. So I just concentrated on becoming a better game for you, and here’s what I came up with:

Remember how much fun you used to have with your clan? Alternately, remember how you never joined a clan because you didn’t see the point? Either way, clans now have clan dungeons, group zones where your whole clan can work together. Crawl through sewers to Hobopolis, a vast underground vagrant vacation vista! Slide into the slime tube, and stir-fry sassy slimes!

I know I wasn’t the prettiest game when we were together, so I had some work done. Almost every interface got an interface-lift. You can even manage most of your inventory via chat commands! I also came up with a way for you to automate some of the things you don’t love about the game, so you can spend more time with the parts you do love.

Not only that, but there are way more animated .gifs than there were before. Don’t worry; I haven’t lost that low-fi edginess you love, but I’m a lot easier to play with now.

You can also have a custom title now, just in case you didn’t feel like I appreciated what made you unique as an individual.

I should also say
Haiku Dungeon’s been revamped.
See what I did there?

Maybe you quit because you got sick of always adventuring above the water. I admit that seems unlikely, but I fixed that, too — there are a bunch of underwater zones with new food, equipment, mechanics, and challenges.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, trust me. I’m still the silly, clever, deceptively-complex game you fell in love with, only with about 95% more awesome.

So, I’m just sayin’, if you can find it in your heart to give me another chance, I won’t disappoint you.

If you don’t drop by, I promise I won’t bother you again. I just really felt like we deserved one more try.

Love, The Kingdom of Loathing.

I share this letter because I think it is a great example of how to target a communication to your intended audience and, well, because I think you might enjoy checking out The Kingdom for yourself.  Now, time for me to head back in and see if I can relive some good times!

Currently I’m embarking on a fortitude-testing quest: I’m exposing myself to social casual games.

Why?

Social gaming is now (arguably, of course) the world’s most popular form of gaming.

My first exposure to these games was a brief one a little over a year-and-a-half ago.

At that time, I dismissed them as “those time wasters that people play between Facebook updates.”

Since that time, social gaming’s ability to successfully grab (and maintain) people’s hearts, minds, and wallets has been indisputable.

As a fan of games, amateur game designer, and perhaps more importantly, a user experience creator, I feel it is critical that I understand the mechanics of these games and what type of experiences these games provide.

As such, I’m now diving into these games head first and giving them a chance to woo me in the same way that they have seemed to woo 65+ (80+?) million others.

Currently, I’m exploring CityVille, Zombie Farm, and Trade Nations.

My plan is to dissect this adventure (and my learnings) in future blog posts. Stay tuned!

In fact, you will want to view the show notes for this episode – all the resources we talk about are captured in these two handy little pages: http://bit.ly/UL11ShowNotes

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.

Please review the podcast on iTunes!  Your feedback will help to increase our visibility to other listeners.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com, unless otherwise noted.

Theme (Open and Close):  How Far – Jamison Young, Shifting Sands of a Blue Car

Additional music in show:  Tears of my Soul by Martian (Tunguska Chillout)

This morning I started thinking about good and evil. First, I asked the question: “what is evil?” After some mental handwringing, I ultimately settled on this definition: “an action which creates harm.” As you would guess, the next question then became, “so what is good?” My thought: “an action which creates benefit.”

Scenarios began to play out in my mind and I began to categorize them… evil, good, evil, evil, good, good.

And then pause…

The classical ethical scenario: A mom steals from a store to give food to her starving children. Hmm…  evil and good.

My pondering continued – how is an action ultimately characterized if it both harms and helps?

A matter of scale.

Wait. Simple cost-benefit analysis.

Flashes back to Economics 101 and a hauntingly memorable statement from the professor:  ”If the cost outweighs the benefits, DO IT!”

The connection to the world of user experience was immediate.

All actions that a user takes are predicated on the outcome of a simple cost-benefit evaluation.

If the perceived benefits of doing this will outweigh the perceived costs, I should do it. As users, we are always making conscious (and many more subconscious) decisions about what we should do next. As such, I’m reminded that when designing interactions, this singular question, this focused lens, is a good one to use to evaluate the experience an interaction will yield.

Luckily, there are so many levers that can be pulled to adjust an interaction and make the outcome a positive one for the user:

• Reduce the costs: Simplify the interaction or speed it up. This can be accomplished by improving the design (more intuitive), reducing steps, increasing processing speed, etc.
• Increase the benefits: Improve the outcome (or even just the perception of the outcome) and make sure your user understands this payoff exists.
• Make the interaction engaging: Far from smoke-and-mirrors, simple improvements to the aesthetics and enjoyability (fun) of the interaction itself helps the user obtain benefit prior to the ultimate payoff.

After I rolled out of bed, I immediately Googled up “Benefits Costs Interactions,” and of course, found that (as expected) I didn’t just have an interaction design breakthrough – this is a well-documented concept. In fact, it is a concept that I know I’ve studied before which just had the misfortune of becoming buried in the mental clutter.

Regardless, I did applaud my brain (yes, I treat it as a third-person muse) for reminding me of such a simple concept and the importance it has when we design interactions.

When:

Friday, February 25th

11:30am – 1:00 pm

Where:

Brick Oven Bistro

The Book:

Storytelling for User Experience: Crafting Stories for Better Design

Everyone welcomed to attend if you are in the Boise area and have an interest in discussing user experience. Please join us!

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.

Please review the podcast on iTunes!  Your feedback will help to increase our visibility to other listeners.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com, unless otherwise noted.

Theme (Open, Close, and Interlude):  How Far – Jamison Young, Shifting Sands of a Blue Car

Additional Interlude(s):  Bagpipes (i.e. Amazing Grace) courtesy of SoundBible.com

In the interest of full disclosure, I must share an important caveat: there are a lot of other great games that I didn’t play this year. Consequently, there may be some titles that are undeservedly missing from my list. Hey, I’m only one dude, ya’know?

So, to make partial amends, let me begin with…

2010’s Startling Omissions: (great games that other people loved that coulda-maybe-shoulda made my list, but I didn’t get a chance to play them in 2010)

Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii), Bayonetta (Xbox360, PS3), Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood (Xbox360, PS3), Call of Duty: Black Ops (Xbox360, PS3), Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (Xbox360, PS3), Dead Rising 2 (Xbox360, PS3), God of War III (PS3), Donkey Kong Country Returns (Wii), VVVVVV (Mac OS/PC), Amnesia (Mac OS/PC), Kirby’s Epic Yarn (Wii), Professor Layton: Future Unwound (DS), Pacman Championship Edition DX (Xbox360, PS3), Deadly Premonition (Xbox360).

How about I make amends by swearing to play more in 2011? Phew… I’m glad that weight is off my chest.

Onward to the remaining best games that I did play…

The BEST Games of 2010 (continued):

5:  Plants vs. Zombies (iOS)

Any iPhone game that illicits multiple playthroughs from my wife or causes me to choose it over a flashier Xbox, PS3, or Mac/PC game is noteworthy. Plants vs. Zombies did both thanks to a simple-to-learn design that is deceptively deep and uproariously fun to play. We may want to consider monitoring this game, since I’m pretty sure it is a gateway drug to hardcore gaming.

4:  Limbo (Xbox360)

Here we have yet another game that might serve as ammunition for the “games can be art debate.” This is another title that I’ve already previously praised, so let me just say this: Limbo is not just a great game from this year, it is a thought-provoking effort that will be picked apart, discussed, and most likely mimicked, for many years to come.

3:  Super Meat Boy (Xbox360, PC/Mac)

I’d never played a game that engendered such true masochism prior to Super Meat Boy. I’m not talking about the shallow cry-for-help-because-you-are-emo-and-broke-up-with-your-girlfriend type of pain, I’m talking about honest-to-God pain that is pleasurable. Have I sold you yet? No? Let me clarify then: This retro-inspired 2D platformer has the most responsive controls I’ve ever seen and creates euphoric levels of reward after you’ve spent 10, 20, 50, or sometimes a hundred tries to complete a level. If Plants vs. Zombies is the marijuana of gaming, this is the ultra-high-quality cocaine reserved for celebs and politicians. So, now that I’ve referenced self-mutilation and drugs, I’m sure you are just dying to play it, right? Bottom line: cast these literary indiscretions aside and PLAY THIS GAME.

2:  Mass Effect 2 (Xbox360, PC)

Mass Effect 2 focuses on delivering a character-driven story; an effort in which it exceeds all expectations. Featuring one of the most well-realized original sci-fi settings ever seen in gaming, solid gameplay, meaningful voice acting, and an engaging storyline, it will stand the test of time as one of the greats.

1.5:  StarCraft II (PC/Mac)

What? 1.5?!?! You think I’m sneaking an extra game into this list? Well, deal with it – this list now goes to eleven.

The original StarCraft is still seeing play today – 12 years after its release! I can only imagine that this successor will see a similar uncanny lifespan. Hell, how many video games are you aware of that have entire televised leagues in the same vein as conventional sports? Obviously, StarCraft II provides an immaculate multiplayer experience similar to the first StarCraft (which led to it being referred to as “South Korea’s national pastime”), but interestingly, what is more notable to me is the high quality of the single-player campaign and the related storyline. Even without multiplayer, this game is good enough to earn the second place spot on my list. StarCraft II: see you at the old folk’s home in 2022.

1:  Red Dead Redemption (Xbox360/PS3)

Where to begin? Gunplay that never tires. Phenomenal writing and voice acting. Emotionally evocative landscape design. A soundtrack that captures the spirit of the Wild West. Room to continually explore and live in one of the most memorable digital worlds ever created. Well-designed multiplayer which included a series of epic cooperative scenarios. Red Dead has all of these and ties them all up with a bow in what many people are calling the best storytelling of the year. Much like a good book or movie, I’ve escaped back to this game time and time again, only to realize that my love only grows stronger with each visit. Red Dead is not only the best game of 2010, but a true masterpiece that is now one of my favorite games of all time.

There you go folks, the best games of 2010.  Go play some of them.

Towards the close of every year, all your major gaming sites post their “Top 10 Games of X Year” style articles. I will admit that I devour this analysis with the same devotion that the paparazzi have in their efforts to grab an upskirt shot of Britney Spears.

Let’s get back to love. I love games and play a lot of them. Luckily, the guise of “amateur game designer” provides me with ample excuses to couch my gaming time in a thin veneer of professionalism. At least that is what I tell my wife (“Hey, I’m workin’ here!”). Of course, that means I have to make good on that statement… and put in a little work when it comes to justifying my gaming.

As such, I offer you my analysis of the BEST games of 2010. In two parts. With some bonuses.

Today is part one.

The BEST Games of 2010:

10:  Halo: Reach (Xbox360)

Bungie wrapped up the primary Halo story with an opus to console first-person shooters. As with previous Halo games, you receive an excellent multiplayer package and a solid single-player campaign. I do believe this to be “the best” of the standard Halo games. Within the same breath, I would also note that I’m excited that Bungie is moving on to something else, since the Halo story and gameplay is ready to be refreshed.

9:  Carcassonne (iOS)

This is the first of two iOS games I’m including on my top ten list for this year, and it is easy to do. Based on the tabletop game of the same name, this version provides a slick electronic rendition of the game’s fun and intuitive gameplay directly to iPhone gamers. With single player and multiplayer options which allow you to parse out turns into smaller snippets of play time, any free minutes you have with your phone and this app will never be boring.

8:  Fallout: New Vegas (Xbox360/PS3/PC)

Fallout 3 was my favorite game of 2008.  Fallout: New Vegas uses the same engine (with a few improvements) to place you in the wastelands of the Mojave Desert instead of those found in Washington DC. Storytelling is even better than Fallout 3’s, too. So why isn’t this higher on my list? Fallout: New Vegas features more bugs than an entomology lab, punctuating the moments of exquisite storytelling with crushing frustration as you are forced to reload your game, or in some cases, fully reboot your system. A great game in need of some programming TLC.

7:  Civilization 5 (PC/Mac OS)

Imagine a portly, shoddily-dressed teenager with a really bad haircut locked away in his room for hours on end, peering unendingly at the VGA monitor on his Magnavox 386SX PC. Have that image in your mind? That was me in 1991 when Sid Meier’s very first Civilization game was released. This turn-based strategy game was a revelation – featuring exquisite gameplay and near-infinite replayability. Fast forward to 2010, and the fifth iteration of the game, and you can say the same… except, well, I’m no longer shoddily dressed. Civ 5 even does something better than all its predecessors – it features one of the most intuitive and well designed user interfaces I’ve ever seen in a complex game. Even if you don’t like this style of game, I would at least recommend checking it out simply to view the interface; it makes deep strategy gaming palatable for the masses. That, in and of itself, is a huge accomplishment.

6:  Heavy Rain (PS3)

Not without some flaws (including some bad voice acting and some really reprehensible and never-explained story red herrings), Heavy Rain nevertheless pushes the gaming genre forward. Remember all the outrage that occurred when Ebert said that games are not art? This may be one that could be used in the future to try and combat that statement. I found myself addicted to the ambiance, storytelling, and mystery this game brought to the table. It evoked true emotion, not unlike the emotion experienced with great music, books, movies, and artwork.

Join me tomorrow for the remaining BEST games of 2010.

Bonus:

Biggest Disappointment in 2010:  Fable III (Xbox360)

I loved the original Fable. Fable II being even better. Fable III took some bold steps to try and simplify gameplay, which I’m assuming they believed would help to propel the player through the game more easily. Unfortunately, this meant that the largely linear storyline, although intriguing, was straddled with some poor and basely un-fun game mechanics. If there is a future Fable IV, I’m hoping it makes an effort to go back to its roots.

Best 2009 Game Played in 2010: Demon’s Souls (PS3)

I’ve already written about Demon’s Souls in a previous post. It is challenging, eerily ambient, and the sole reason for why one of my friends bought a PS3. If I could go back, it would probably be my favorite game for 2009. Simply amazing.

It is currently in closed playtesting.

Keep your fingers crossed that things move along quickly. I would like to get this out to the world sooner rather than later.

IMPORTANT: Check out the full show notes for this episode as you listen. Find them at this link:  http://bit.ly/UL9ShowNotes

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com. Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  Looking at the Black Clouds by Serphonic

Selecting a book, establishing the date/time/location for the meetup(s), and getting the word out – all without a support structure in place – could be like trying to herd cats.

So here we go: my best attempt at creating some informal structure and getting the ball rolling.

Are you interested in participating?

Take a look at the three questions below. Share your feedback as a comment to this post. If you would rather shoot me an e-mail, that is fine too – I can add your thoughts to the comments for you.

Question 1: What book should we read?

Here are a few suggestions:

Storytelling for User Experience:  Crafting Stories for Better Design

Selling Usability:  User Experience Infiltration Tactics

Simple and Usable Web, Mobile, and Interaction Design (Voices That Matter)

Of course, if you don’t like any of my proposals, feel free to propose your own!

Question 2: When should we plan on meeting?

I personally think we should select the book within the next week or so, and plan on meeting in early January 2011. How does that sound?

Question 3: Where should we meet?

Can everyone make a lunchtime get-together or should we try for an early-evening get-together?  We could even consider a pre-work breakfast get-together… but that is my least desirable option – unless you would like me to sit comatose in the corner.

Please weigh in as soon as possible about what we should read, when we should read it, and where!

Now, this puzzled my better half – and justifiably so – since I’m guessing most people haven’t heard about or know what the acronym “RAID” even means.

Of course, Jake, the-ever-helpful-friend that he is, began to launch into a verbal definition of what RAID is and why he was so excited about it.

His explanation was overly complex and not helpful, and we all knew it.

Jake shifted tactics.

A condiment carrier was present at our table. Jake grabbed a bottle of mustard and tried again: “Okay,  this is a hard drive.”

“Now, let’s add a second hard drive.” Jake grabbed another bottle, this time Tapatio hot sauce, and positioned it beside the mustard bottle. “This is RAID 0. In RAID 0, data is kept on each drive separately so the computer can read the data off each drive at the same time, making it faster than a single hard drive.”

“Unfortunately, this gives you no protection. If a hard drive fails, you have no backup.”

“So we do this…”

Jake moved the Tapatio bottle behind the mustard bottle. “Our second hard drive is now a complete mirror copy – a backup – of the first drive. This is RAID 1. It gives us great data protection, but it doesn’t make our speeds any faster. That is why I chose a third option…”

Jake grabbed a bottle of disturbingly-pink cranberry mustard. He moved the bottle of Tapatio and the newly acquired cranberry mustard into a straight line next to the original bottle of mustard. He paused for a moment, looking down upon the procession of sandwich toppers like a proud father may gaze at his newborn child. “Now this… this is what I’m doing. This is RAID 5.” Jake paused again. Was he awaiting applause?

“RAID 5 uses a minimum of three drives. Data – and information about this data, called parity, is added to each drive. In RAID 5, information is shared between each drive, increasing the speed, but you still have data protection because the parity information is shared between the drives. It is a great solution!”

Diane nestled back in her chair, an understanding look on her face: Jake’s example, now supplemented with pictures, was easily understandable and quite memorable.

As an observer, what was most exciting to me was seeing how simply adding visual thinking to the conversation (imagery, relational placement, etc.) helped to make a confusing topic so much less confusing.  Visual thinking for the win!

The learning at User Interface 15 was intoxicating.  While nothing can take the place of “being there,” I thought you might enjoy looking at my very raw notes from a few of the sessions at the conference.

These notes have been heavily influenced by the visual design thinking concepts presented by Dan Roam and Dave Gray.  Additionally, if you want even better examples of how information from the User Interface Conference can be displayed visually, turn no farther than the excellent work of Jason Robb – his sketch notes from UI15 (and UI14) are impressive.

Dave Gray – Gamestorming:

Page 1

Page 2

Luke Wroblewski – Mobile First:

Page 3

Page 2

Page 3

Dan Rubin – Hands-on Prototyping with HTML/CSS:

Page 1

Page 2

Jared Spool – Anatomy of a Design Decision:

Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

Enjoy!

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com. Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  Walk the Streets by Jamison Young

Luckily, before I finished packing my bag for some self-imposed R&R at the local sanitarium, I realized something very important – I’m not alone here.

Zombies and the concept of a zombie apocalypse are hot right now: They are everywhere in the media, our entertainment, and the collective American cultural psyche. In fact, I’ve heard some people complain this trope is so prevalent that they are personally suffering from “zombie fatigue.” Luckily, a reminder to these dissidents about the alternatives out there right now (sparkly vampires, tweenyone?) usually jostles them to their senses – there are worse fixations.

Regardless of your personal state of undead malaise, we are still left with a question: why do we keep talking about zombies?

This is where I slide into my arm-chair psychologist… er, consummate user experience researcher role – and start to dissect the question and develop some hypotheses.

Of course, this analysis circles back to the concept of experiences and how we can apply what we learn from these stories to everyday user experience design.

(And yes, I recognize that segway is as rotten as the corpse-laden topic itself.  Hrrmph.)

Lesson 1:  Good design features intuitive goal(s)

A central theme of a good zombie apocalypse story is always the same: the last remnants of human society attempt to survive in an apocalyptic world where everyone else is a zombie. It is “us vs. them.” It is a story with a pinpoint focus, a singular goal: survive.

When we interact with something – whether it is a website, an appliance, or a game, we approach that interaction with a goal or a set of goals.

Without speaking a word (or guttural roar), the fictional zombie apocalypse provides the reader/viewer/player with a singular goal that we get easily. In fact, we get it intuitively. The zombie apocalypse story doesn’t need to educate you about the goal – you just know it. Good interactions are oftentimes the same – you don’t need to be educated – you know it. You see a door handle, you pull it. You see a piece of delicious food, you eat it.

Good design understands the goals its users will have, and makes sure it is as intuitive as possible for users to successfully pursue those goals using the design.

Lesson 2: Users like control

If you Google “zombie apocalypse,” a popular theme appears: tips and tactics for surviving. Much of the excitement of the fictional zombie apocalypse scenario comes from the mental questioning process we go through when we observe the story’s protagonists. Questions such as “what would I do here?,” or “what should they do next?” are commonplace when you are participating in such a story.

The zombie apocalypse scenario provides us with a platform where we get to explore two things we really enjoy: the ability to control our destiny (decision making) and the opportunity to learn.

From a design perspective, an important concept is well known: “always keep your users in control.” For example, in a well-designed website, a user will know where they are at and understand (or be able to easily find) where they want to go next. Zombie fiction excites us by ever-so-slightly toying with the lever of control without wresting that control away from us. In zombie fiction, all the basics are still understood – unlike in sci-fi or fantasy, where the question may be “how does this work,” the question is more like “what do I do next?” Good zombie fiction doesn’t destroy the basic rules of the world (other than the leap of faith that zombies can exist), so the viewers maintain a semblance of control that is focused on future action.

Good design provides users with the opportunity to explore an environment that makes sense to them in a manner which they choose.

Lesson 3: Users like to learn

As mentioned in lesson 2 above, zombie fiction prompts us to ask “what do we do next?!?”  This question is a prompt for exploration, of which exploration is fundamental to learning, and of which learning is a fundamental human need. We already talked about how the rules of the world haven’t changed in a zombie apocalypse. However, the change of context (we must survive!) forces us to look at how we must interact in new or different ways.

Survivors are challenged to develop a course of action (plan), execute that plan (act), assess the effectiveness of that plan (evaluate), and then repeat this process ad infinitum. The constant challenges our survivors face are intriguing, but it is how our survivors go about tackling these challenges that is so exciting;  even more so when the alternative to successfully accomplishing the goal (survival) is death.

Good design (especially game design) provides continual opportunities for exploration (i.e. learning) and the sense of accomplishment that comes from the learning process.

Lesson 4: We are social beings

A core theme found in the zombie apocalypse mythos is that of a small band of survivors who must stand together against the horde of zombies and the ravages of the new world they live in. Even better zombie fiction begins to explore what happens to these humans (and their interactions) when they are subjected to the pressures of this new world. The same itch that is scratched with reality TV is explored in this fiction. In fact, if you look at it mechanically, the zombie apocalypse is really just window-dressing for an elaborate play of human interaction.

This is the same for technology and design. Good design never forgets why it is there. Even better design acknowledges that it will play a role in the interactions of more than one human and their interactions with each other. Someone once noted (was it Clay Shirky?) that every technology will eventually be used in a social context. A zombie apocalypse gives us a window into how a design (the survivors’ plans for survival) play out in a social environment. Zombie stories are not exciting because of the zombies; they are exciting because of the people in these stories.

Good design not only takes into account its use by a singular person, but also the potential use by many people and/or its role in a larger sociological environment.

Just remember:  bad design is just as scary as undead, flesh-eating zombies.

Happy Halloween!

p.s. – if you like mixing your user experience/usability discussion with zombies, you may also want to check out Craig Tomlin’s “Be a Usability Zombie” post.

Well, the tide of discussion about gamification hasn’t receded: In fact, it keeps coming up in my conversations, the conversations of my colleagues, and in the variety of resources I read on a regular basis.

It would be unfair of me to not share some of the more inspiring gamification articles and resources with you all:

Gamification.co : Gabe Zichermann’s site is a great source of content about gamification. I’m enamored by Gabe’s intelligent, common-sense approach to explaining gamification in a way that never sacrifices an eye towards good business sensibility. A must read for those of you who are new to the concept of gamification.

avantgame.com : If you are interested in gaming and haven’t yet heard the name “Jane McGonigal,” then you may just be living under a rock. On the main page of Jane’s site you can watch her TED presentation “Gaming Can Change the World.” If you want to be inspired to stop thinking about games as the providence of children and a bonafide methodology for solving some of the world’s most complex problems, then you need to watch this video. Hell, even if you don’t want to be inspired, just watch the video – a few years from now you will thank me for directing you to it.

Gamepocalypse Now : I’ve referenced Jesse Schell before. He was the individual who really “let the cat out of the bag” for me as it applies to thinking about a potential future that could be saturated by games via his very influential DICE 2010 talk, “Design Outside the Box.” Gamepocalypse Now is Jesse’s blog dedicated to chronicling incidents of gamification in our everyday lives.

Just Add Points:  What UX Can (and Cannot) Learn from Games : Sebastian Deterding provides us with a great resource regarding the use of gaming in other contexts (a discussion of the implementation of gamification without actually using the word “gamification”).

Paper.Li for Gamification : Want to know what the Twitter community is talking about regarding gamification? I’ve found the use of Paper.Li with the keyword of #Gamification to be very helpful for aggregating news and commentary about gamification. Give it a try!

Lee Sheldon’s XP Grading System : Professor Lee Sheldon gained some attention by ditching a normal grading system and replacing it with a role-playing style experience point (XP) system to gauge student performance. There are a lot of articles out there talking about this. Take your pick of which ones to read via this link – it collects a ton of them.

Game Mechanics for Interaction Design : An Interview with Amy Jo Kim : As a User Experience professional and amateur game designer, the relevance of how games can impact user interaction is a concept of utmost importance to me. This interview from 2009 is a great snapshot of where we were at about a year ago (notice that the term “gamification” is completely absent from this article – although the concept clearly is not). It stands the test of time by providing some sage advice about integrating gaming principles into user experience design.

I could continue to share links ad infinitum, but I suspect the plate is full. So go now, and learn from these experts.

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com. Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Limbo (XboxLive Arcade): Limbo begins with no instructions and no words. There are no cutscenes and a minimalist musical score. Mechanically, the game is a puzzle-solver that is wrapped up in a 2D side-scroller. Based on this description, you might assume that the game is quite shallow. But you would be mistaken. And in a few moments, I will tell you why.

Demon’s Souls (PS3): Demon’s Souls is a 3rd Person Role Playing Game (RPG). The game drops players into a graphically-impressive dark fantasy world. There is a limited introduction and an even slimmer tutorial. The game is set at a punishingly-high level of difficulty (that cannot be changed by the player) and has some mechanics (or lack thereof) that you might see in a video game from the early 1990′s (for example, no pause, extreme punishment for player error, and arcane stats that would make most well-educated individuals scratch their heads in bewilderment). Again, we might assume that such a game would create frustration more than it would engender fun.  You might even accuse the design team of essentially “falling asleep at the proverbial wheel.” But again, this unique approach actually works in the game’s favor, creating an experience unlike any that I have played in the most recent decade of gaming.

I believe these games heavily utilize two concepts to great effect:

Ambient Adaptation: A widely-accepted theory (to which I ascribe) about what makes a game “fun” is that it is the process of learning that occurs while playing a game (i.e. being challenged and then learning how to overcome those challenges) which makes the experience enjoyable. As such, we can assume then that without a challenge, and without the accomplishment of beating a challenge, we would find the game to not be very fun. Demon’s Souls pushes players into a world where the player will live and die by not only their skill, but also by their ability to learn. This environment, while at times frustrating, also forces the player into an almost continuous-cycle of learning. As such, if we agree with the assertion that learning is the catalyst for fun, then Demon’s Souls effectively seeds the game with constant opportunities for fun. Sure there is the capacity for learning in many of today’s other blockbuster games (for example, via regular skill acquisition and basic puzzle-solving), but what is so unique about Demon’s Souls is how the game, by leaving the player out in the cold with little instruction, forces even the simple actions to become opportunities for learning. In turn, these seemingly insignificant learning opportunities form a cycle of continuous self-reward, thereby contributing to the creation of an overall positive and “fun” gaming experience.

Ambient Storytelling: Jeff Watson would define ambient storytelling as “stories or games that take place in the background, rather than traditional attention-focusing media artifacts such as movies or console video games.” Although this is certainly an appropriate definition, I might propose a definition for use within the context of interactive entertainment (e.g. video games): “Ambient storytelling is the conveyance of an experience through subtle methods during the course of regular gameplay.”

Limbo is a shining example of how a story can be generated without cinematics, talking, or text. Limbo provides an ambience and play mechanics that work seamlessly together to constantly challenge the player to ask him or herself a singular question: “what is going on here?” Many games unceremoniously provide the answer to this question via the aforementioned shortcuts (cinematics, text, etc.). Limbo, on the other hand, challenges the player to develop their own story as they play through the experience. This act of imagination and creation stimulates the mind in ways that many hand-fed experiences cannot. In fact, how often do we hear people say “the book is better than the movie”? Well, ten times out of ten, the book triumphs for the same reason why Limbo’s ambient storytelling is head-and-shoulders above a pre-defined game storyline: it empowers the reader/player to become the driver of a story that is inherently thought-provoking and personalized.

It is my hope that game developers will analyze and take to heart the lessons learned from these two exceptional games.  In fact, I would confidently wager that ANY and ALL games would benefit from the better use of ambient adaptation and ambient storytelling.

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com. Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  The Way Things Change by Shardik’s Walkman

This article profiled a local Indian cell phone maker named Micromax, which is currently experiencing great success with their very localized cell phone models. The article reports that Micromax is selling about 1 million handsets each month – about 4% of the 6.3 billion dollar Indian market. India’s largest mobile phone provider, Nokia, has seen their market share go from 64% in 2008 to 52% at the end of 2009, thanks in part to hyper-localized companies such as Micromax stealing some of their business.

So how did Micromax do it?

User research.

Now, if you were to ask Micromax, they may not refer to it in such “user experience-y” terms. They may call it “understanding their market,” or “targeting a demographic,” or even “localization,” but make no mistake:  the secret to their success here is most definitely due to user research.

They looked at how Indians were living their lives (the users and their context), identified the frustrations they had with existing mobile technology (the problems), and formulated a product that would alleviate these frustrations (the solutions).

Some examples:

Micromax’s recent success stands as a great example of how investing the time to understand your users’ needs and desires allows you to effectively stack the deck in your favor, thereby increasing the chance that the next hand you are dealt will be a winning one.

We went in looking for a challenge, but instead, we found a pizza that was quite delectable and not as hot as we were led to believe. As such, if you are familiar with Kevin’s and my particular brand of bravery/stupidity, it should not surprise you that prior to the end of that first pizza we were already asking sizing up our capability to tackle this:

The Triple Habanero pizza has (yes, you guessed it) three times the number of Habanero peppers as the Single Habanero pizza. The heat in the triple is the equivalent of 15 lbs. of Jalapeno peppers.

We descended upon the Fairview Flying Pie with something to prove, our somewhat-shaky confidence levels being bolstered only by our matching Habanero T-Shirts and the pressure of knowing everyone back at the office would be expecting our success.

We went into this session sans water (we learned that lesson from the first time) and stocked up with some extra pizza sauce for dipping.

Of course, Kevin employed the “add pepper flakes to create a conflicting heat so that the Habaneros won’t be so hot” tactic:

I guess if the logic “fight fire with fire” works in other arenas, should we really be so surprised that it just might work here?

I employed a different strategy. Swallow with as little chewing as possible.

Kevin reported the heat to be “not too different” from the single. I, on the other hand, stand by my assessment that it was somewhere around 50% to 100% hotter. My barometer: swollen/burning lips, a burning sensation in the back of the throat, and a sense of urgency to finish the pizza.

Kevin and I powered through the full large pizza, splitting it right down the middle. As such, it could be said that we both roughly ate 7.5 lbs of Jalapeno-equivalent heat.

Upon completion of our task, we felt entitled to wear the Habanero pin of victory upon our chest:

And we provided the top-notch Flying Pie team with some glowing customer service card feedback:

I am relieved that I lived to tell the tale of the Triple Habanero. Even more exciting is the prospect that the next pizza will not make my stomach feel like a raging inferno. If I can now delay Kevin’s suggestion that we should attempt the Buffalo Wild Wings hot wings challenge, my stomach may have time to recuperate.

Lets start with some definitions:

Gamification: “The integration of game mechanics or game dynamics into a website, service, community, campaign, or application in order to drive participation and engagement. In particular, gamification is the application of game technology and game design outside traditional ‘gamespaces,’ and the acceptance of games in non-gaming sectors” (via Wikipedia). The use of this term has been popularized by Gabe Zichermann, and it was through his research that I first encountered it.

Gamepocalypse: “The rapid advancement of sensor and computing technology will collide with human psychology to turn everything in life into a game.” This term, coined by Jesse Schell, gained popularity thanks to Jesse’s popular (and somewhat controversial) DICE 2010 presentation: “Design Outside the Box.”

When I was a boy (and young adult,even!), gaming (video games, board games, and heaven-forbid, role-playing games) were the providence of nerds. Never would you find gaming as a consideration for a serious pastime within a population of people who were well-adjusted and odor-free.

But here we are in 2010, and people are totally cool with it.

In fact, people that are way cooler than me are checking-in everywhere they go to get badges (or if they are lucky, the title of Mayor!), clicking and clacking for hours and hours to raise virtual crops, or translating Tweets just to “add a few levels.”

All of a sudden, gaming, or at least game-based mechanics and reward systems, seem to be everywhere.

Maybe it just took a few years for the nerds and geeks to grow up and gain prominence and power in popular culture.

Maybe it is the near ubiquity of mobile technology and social media that gave people easy access to games that they may have otherwise never played.

Or maybe, just maybe, technology is following an all-too-traditional developmental path: first things are useful (i.e. they help us solve a problem), then they become usable (we make them easier/faster/more effective), and finally, they become desirable (something we crave to experience).

When we think about some of these influencers and their context, is it then really so startling to believe in the possibility of gamification and the concept of a gamepocalypse? After all, at their very core, games are fun… and who doesn’t like a little fun here and there?  Or, to put it in other words, fun is desirable – and as mentioned, desirability is our sought-after technological endgame and a key product differentiator in a packed marketplace.

So, my friends and colleagues, be on the lookout – I truly believe we are just at the start of a new, expansive trend which will bring games to our lives in new and unexpected ways. We can try to ignore the trend and be at the whimsy of those people who will lead the charge, or we can educate ourselves and help this movement take shape in productive, ethical, and exciting ways.

I didn’t want to write this post.  It is risky.

With more than 500 million active users as of July 10, Facebook is one of the most popular websites in the world. In fact, it was second only to Google in a June 2010 internet traffic study. Everyone and their dog seemingly has a Facebook account.

But I don’t.

Go ahead. Make the “You don’t have Facebook?!?!” face… I’ve learned to steel my will against such base nonverbal tactics.

But that is why this post is risky. As soon as I mention that I don’t haz the Facebooks, I run the risk of appearing like a technological Luddite, some sort of crazy anti-privacy conspiracy theorist, or an old dude that just wants the kids to get off his damn lawn. Wait a minute, even our grandparents have Facebook accounts now. So, I guess it is just anti-tech or anti-change, and 100% head-in-the-sand.

But I’m not anti-tech. In fact, I love tech. I yearn for an iPad and an iPhone 4. I was an early adopter of PDAs back when a PDA was an inappropriately timed kiss. I was one of three people in a Freshman floor of 55 to have my own computer. I was programming computers in 7th grade. Ultimately, if it is new technology, I want to learn more about it and understand how it can make our lives easier.

I’m not anti-change, either. Back in the day, my father would go into minor depression when my mom would change around the layout of the house for Spring cleaning.  Not me; I awaited such change with great anticipation. In fact, I favor change:  I routinely find myself championing change within my organization, converting to new philosophies when old ones become outdated, and continually looking at the big picture regarding things yet to come.

Yet here I am with no Facebook… and not wanting Facebook… even when everyone else around me wants to have Facebook. So, why have I uncharacteristically dug my heels in on not getting a Facebook account?  Here is my best shot at an explanation.

Disclaimer: Although I feel there are several logical explanations for my actions, I acknowledge that my decision is also a very emotional one. I fully acknowledge that my mentality may be rooted in irrationality or subconscious factors for which I cannot comprehend. Cest la Vie.

• I distrust Facebook’s stance on privacy. Even with recent changes to how Facebook handles privacy, I feel there is a definite trend as to where Facebook wants privacy to go. Although I can control the information I provide, I cannot trust that a network of friends will approach the network with the same level of scrutiny. Not that I’m a shady character, by any means, but I want to keep some level of separation between my personal and professional lives and how others perceive them.
• I don’t support Facebook’s leadership. Perhaps the alleged statements that Facebook’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg hacked into ConnectU are false. Perhaps the IMs he sent to a friend aren’t real. Perhaps I shouldn’t believe them. But I do.  And because I do, I find myself in a position where I want to “vote with my wallet.”  In other words, I don’t want to help him succeed, and the best (and very limited) way I can do that is by not using Facebook.
• I’m already feeling stretched with other social media tools. I have an active Twitter account, my network is 100% complete on LinkedIn, I put up designs on Dribbble, and I maintain this blog/personal website. If that wasn’t enough, I also use Yammer at work to communicate throughout my company.  Keeping these sources of information about me and my network updated on a consistent basis has already grown challenging. I shudder to think about what life would be like with a Facebook account tying me to obscure distant family members, former friends, and friends-of-friends.
• I cannot control how I am presented. One thing I very much like about all the social media tools I currently use (Twitter, LinkedIn, Dribbble, my site, etc.) is how I can more tightly control how the outside world sees me. One concern I hear from many Facebook users is about the dilemmas they are put in by their friend network.  For example, if a person has posted something that another set of friends shouldn’t see, the cat may already be out of the bag before the concern can be resolved.  Or perhaps, a friend-of-a-friend posts a picture of you that you don’t want posted.  You are in their network, yet not close enough to tactfully request that the photo of you be removed. Now, I don’t want to go too into-the-weeds here, but I would like to note that the other tools I mentioned provide the user with what I consider to be better control over such situations. With great interconnectivity comes great responsibility, and let’s face it, we all know (and are friends) with some people that can be pretty irresponsible at times. The sheer size of the Facebook network amplifies the potential for our friendships to define us more than we define ourselves.
• Now I’m the minority… an underdog… and I have to stick with it. Here we veer into the admittedly emotional side. At the same time you might think I’m crazy for not having Facebook, there is a kernel of joy inside me that “I’m not the norm” or “just like everyone else.” I’m an underdog. Okay, so I am just like the other people that don’t use Facebook. But you know what?  All twelve of us will be drinking juice in the comfy chairs off to the side the dance, happy to be special, unique, and under-doggy. Tease us if you will.

So there you have it: my best guess as to why Facebook isn’t for me.

Let me end by saying this:  Please, everybody, stop asking me to hop on the Facebook train.  If you really care about our relationship, use one of the other bajillion methods I have to contact me. Put your pictures in a public folder on Dropbox and send me a link. If you are really important to me, and I’m really important to you, we will be in touch.

Hugs and Kisses,

Gary

Colleague Kevin Selmasska and I journeyed to the Flying Pie to test this pizza out.  We had three options:  The Single Habanero pizza (which contains 6 Habanero peppers, the equivalent of 5 lbs. of Jalapenos), the Double Habanero (12 peppers), or the Triple Habanero (18 peppers – equivalent to 15 lbs. of Jalapenos!).

Since this was our first time trying something this hot, we opted for a large Single Habanero pizza:

I embraced my first bite with trepidation.  Kevin threw caution to the wind and added some additional red pepper flakes.

Of course, I immediately had to do the same.

Taking a drink of water was a bad idea:  It moves the capsaicin (the stuff in chili peppers that makes them hot) all around the mouth.  So, instead of a just a burning tongue, it now burns everywhere.  Luckily, the pain subsided quickly.  I didn’t drink any additional water, and Kevin wisely refrained from drinking any either.

The taste of the pizza was actually very good.  It had chicken, feta cheese, fresh garlic, cheddar cheese, and mozzarella cheese.  The habaneros had a smoky, citrus flavor that was quite delicious.  Surprisingly, although very hot, the taste of the pizza was not drowned out by the heat.  The whole “user experience” was an enjoyable one!

Our comment cards eventually shared our praise and “a few pictures that are worth a thousand words…”

Kevin and I left surprised that we did as well as we did and made a pact that within the next two weeks, we would try the Triple Habanero.

If we are still alive, perhaps I will post about that experience too.

UPDATE! Two weeks later Kevin and I tackled the dreaded Triple Habanero pizza. Check out the post here.

Here is one exercise the instructor gave us to work on as homework  (I’m reprinting it exactly as he posted on the blog):

Game #1: Dragon Die

This is a dice game that I invented with some co-workers one day (thanks Jeb Havens and Jesse King!) specifically to mess with people’s heads on probability. It’s a simple casino game called Dragon Die, and it’s a dice gambling contest between you and the House. You are given a standard 1d6, and you roll it. You’re trying to roll higher than the House. The House is given a non-standard 1d6 – it’s similar to yours, but instead of a 1 it has a Dragon on it (so the House die is Dragon-2-3-4-5-6). If the House rolls a Dragon, then the House automatically wins and you automatically lose. If you both roll the same number, it’s a push, and you both re-roll. Otherwise, the winner is whoever rolls highest.

Obviously, the odds are slightly against the player here, because the House has this Dragon advantage. But how much of an advantage is it? You’re going to calculate it. But first, before you do, exercise your intuition. Suppose I said this game was offered with a 2 to 1 payout. That is, if you win, you keep your bet and get twice your bet in winnings. So, if you bet $1 and win, you keep your $1 and get $2 extra, for a total of $3. If you lose, you just lose your standard bet. Would you play? That is, intuitively, do you think the odds are better or worse than 2 to 1? Said another way, for every 3 games you play, do you expect to win more than once, or less than once, or exactly once, on average?

Once you’ve used your intuition, do the math. There are only 36 possibilities for both dice, so you should have no problem counting them all up. If you’re not sure about this “2 to 1” business, think of it this way: suppose you played the game 36 times (wagering $1 each time). A win nets you $2 up, a loss causes you to lose $1, and a push is no change. Count up your total winnings and losses and figure out if you come out ahead or behind. And then ask yourself how close your intuition was. And then realize how evil I am.

And yes, if you’re wondering, the actual dice-roll mechanics here are something I’m intentionally obfuscating, but I’m sure you’ll all see through that once you sit down and look at it. Try and solve it yourself. I’ll post all answers here next week.

Are you ready for the results?   Here you go:

I was a bit surprised at how truly bleak this situation is for the player…  every time you play, 3/4 of the time you will be faced with a loss or a draw… and, I don’t know about you, but a draw to me isn’t much better than a loss.

I guess now if you ever see this game trying to tempt you, you will be armed with the information to help you (and your money) stay away from it.

Something definitely happened to my attention once I began following 120-140 people:  Monitoring my Twitter feed became much more taxing.

I attributed this largely to the fact that I recently began following more UX  and game design professionals – some of which you might consider to be “prolific tweeters.”

However, as I looked at many other people’s Twitter accounts, I discovered that these people also had follower counts somewhere in the 60 – 200 range. Aside from the social media hypermarketers who clearly used their tool for information dissemination vs. meaningful exchange, there really seemed to be a trend regarding the numbers of people that these accounts are following.

Was there something about a “manageable” size limit for Twitter followers? I decided to research it a little…

Behold:  Dunbar’s Number

Maybe I’m a little late to the party, or maybe I’m just a little too removed from my old Psych degree to have remembered the concept, but it boils down to this: Dunbar’s Number is a theoretical limit to the number of people that a person can maintain stable social relationships with at any given time.  Many place this number “around 150.”

If we accept this theory as mostly accurate, we may be able to speculate on what Dunbar’s Number means in this era of ever-expanding networking:

1. People will find themselves getting overly-taxed if they attempt to manage a TRUE network of relationships (what I would consider to mean relevant back-and-forth dialogue and true concern for each other’s wellbeing) that is larger than about 150 people.
2. If you are on a follower list for a person that has many followers (perhaps 450+) and you are not engaged in meaningful conversation with that person on a regular basis, you might be able to assume that your communications are not seen – i.e. you are not part of that person’s “important 150″ or “inner-circle.”
3. Excessive following (i.e. follower counts greater than 1000+, for example) becomes a “dog-and-pony” show for a meaningful relationship; true relationships simply cannot exist at that volume.  Assume that people employing this strategy are using their accounts for information distribution/marketing/customer support/etc. and change your expectations for the quality of the relationship accordingly. It may be important to note that I’m not saying there is not value in this approach, just that it is not a true relationship network.
4. Twitter list functionality can be employed to make parsing multiple networks of relationships easier, but point 1 from above will still hold true – there may just be a true cap to how many relationships we can effectively manage at one time.

It will be interesting to see if Dunbar’s Number receives further validation or if it is disproven as networking continues to evolve in the increasingly complex social media landscape.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close): Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show: Style by Kammerer

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.  Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  Making Me Nervous by Brad Sucks

What is a resource map?  It is a visual representation of all the resources utilized within the game that shows the interrelationships between those resources.

For my current DIY card game (name is still pending!), I created the following resource map:

As you can see here, as of this posting, the key resource is Morale.  A player wins or loses based on the status of their Morale.  The other resources – Energy and cards, have an interrelationship that ultimately results in changes to you or your opponent’s Morale.

I found the exercise of generating the resource map to be a good one.  As discussed in the course, it serves to explain the relationships between the resources and helps to define the impact of modifying one of them.

Amongst the great advice shared in the episode, there was a comment by Jared that particularly stood out to me (quoted below, to the best of my ability):

“Look at the people around you… Look at how they respond to certain types of products and services. Look at the things that get them really frustrated and then look at the things that get them really excited… the type of things they want to tell you about without prompting. Then ask yourself – what did the designers of those organizations do to explicitly get those reactions: was it an accident or was it intentional? How would you take the same thing they did to apply it [to your product] for the good stuff and how do you not do the same things for the frustrating things? Once you are doing that regularly, you are now talking strategy.”

Jared’s suggestion seems parallel to an exercise that my former UX manager made a part of our weekly team meetings: an exercise he called “Usability Moments.”

Each week, our team was given one simple task: Be prepared to talk about a situation that occurred in the past week that created a good user experience or a bad user experience. We were asked to explain what we thought caused the good/bad experience and also if we had any ideas about how we would improve the experience (if it was bad) or replicate that experience in other areas (if it was good).

This exercise provided a great arena for collaborative discussion and, in some cases, collaborative design.

But perhaps more importantly, the real genius of this exercise is that it began to shape my perception. At first, I had to look back each week to intentionally think about the usability of something I encountered, but then slowly and surely, I began seeing examples of good or bad user experience as I was encountering them. Each observation now comes with a whole lot of additional questioning: Why is this happening? What would change this experience? What are the costs and benefits of the proposed changes? In short, the exercise helped me move from “casual observer” to “thoughtful investigator” – a shift that would benefit any UX researcher.

Given this exercise’s success in helping me improve my ability to critically think about the user experience, it should come as no surprise that I would highly recommend its use within any UX team to build observational expertise and critical thinking. Luckily, it appears that Jared Spool would do the same.

Here is a basic overview of what this game will entail and some basic “goals” I have for the game:

• It will be published under a Creative Commons Attribution License (free to the public!)
• It will allow people to download card templates, print them, and then affix them to three traditional poker card decks for play.
• It will support play for two players… at least initially (although I have ideas for how to expand it to additional players!)
• It will be intended for mature teen/adult audiences (it will contain some graphic cartoon violence)

How far along is it?

Approximately 75% of the first card designs are completed (sketched loosely for playtesting), and the rule set is “mostly complete.”  Playtesting will occur after the full complement of cards are designed and the working rule set is completed.  Wave one of playtesting will be done locally and I expect a large amount of modifications to occur after it is finished.  In further waves, it is my hope to expand playtesting to a larger audience to further iron out the bugs and ensure the game is balanced and fun.

How can I help?

I would welcome your assistance.  Here are a few things I could use some help on:

• Graphic design/artistry: I would accept any and all artists who are willing to pitch in artwork to support the development of the game.  Of course, this is a not-for-profit Creative Commons project, so your support would need to be free (although you would receive heartfelt thanks and artist credits in the design).
• Playtesting support: As we get further down the path (past the first wave of playtesting) I would like to involve additional serious playtesters who can help to evaluate and shape the game.  As noted above, I cannot pay you anything more than thanks and the appropriate game credit for your time and services.

If you want to lend a hand, let me know!

So – stay tuned – more development updates will follow.

However, there was something noteworthy that occurred regarding browser tabs.

But first, some context. The client who commissioned this usability test had recently upgraded their corporate desktops from Internet Explorer 6 to Internet Explorer 7. The delay in doing so (IE7 was released in 2006!), was due largely to a variety of in-house applications that only worked correctly with IE6. Until those applications could be updated, the company was stuck on the less-current version of Internet Explorer.

You astute readers probably already guessed where this is headed. IE7 had a very important new interaction that was not in IE6: tabbed browsing.  As such, interactions that in IE6 would cause new browser windows to pop up would now show up as new tabs in IE7.

In this study, several links (which were seen as clickable by users, thanks to good use of blue/underline link appearance conventions) were clicked by users.

Almost 20% of the participants tested did not see the new tabs that were created by clicking on these links.

This statistic is not so surprising once I mention another little detail:  when the users clicked the links, a new browser tab did appear… but the focus remained on the tab that the user was currently on.  Users that were more acclimated to the newer tabbed-browsing convention successfully “found” the new tab, because they (1) either assumed their interaction would create a new tab or (2) they were pre-disposed to check the tab locations to “see if there is a new tab/window..”

The 20% who did not see the tab mentioned that they thought that “the link must be broken.”  In some cases, they executed multiple clicks of the links (launching multiple tabs) but still did not see the new tabs.  These users went through the full e-learning missing whole pieces of content and a post-course feedback survey.

I had a few good professional reminders from this study:

1.  Always remember the user’s background/experience/context.  Although I personally am very acclimated to tabbed browsing, I cannot assume others are the same.  Looking at the big picture in this case (i.e. learning that the transition from IE6 to IE7 was a recent one for the client) helped to further explain what may be going on here and helped to provide context for this discovery.

2.  Outcomes should align with user’s expectations. Users expected something to happen when they clicked the links.  Although something did happen, it was not visible to many of the users.  These users quickly made the assumption that something was broken.  One recommendation that was provided to the client was to ensure that the focus would move to the new tab when the link was clicked.  Since we did not test with this option, it would be interesting to see if users would then know how to find their way back to the correct tab with the e-learning.  Perhaps a more intensive solution is necessary?

3.  Although you might be using IE8, Mozilla, Chrome, Opera, or Safari, there are a lot of other people that are still using IE6. NetMarketShare reported as of June 2010 that IE6 was still approximately 17% of  the market share for all browsers surfing the web.  The learning here:  new technology/software/practices/etc. take a long time to permeate through an open marketplace if users are not forced into an upgrade path.

Conventions are important.  Unfortunately, new “conventions” (a la tabbed browsing) take a lengthy time for acclimation before they truly become “conventions,” and even then may still be conditional for select audiences.

Send questions and comments to the UserLove Podcast team at UserLovePodcast@gmail.com.  Your thoughts/questions may be featured in a future show!

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  Soldiers of Happiness by Jamison Young and Dynamite Funky Baby by Juanitos.

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity;

Additional music in this episode includes: This Lovely Snake by Xerak and Infralove by Diablo Swing Orchestra

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City

Additional music in show:  Balrog Boogie by Diablo Swing Orchestra;  Rythme Gitan by Latch Swing

All music used on the podcast is protected via Creative Commons Licensing and is courtesy of www.Jamendo.com

Theme (Open & Close):  Afro Blue by Triplexity – Live in Triplex City