Artefact 6 consisted of a user survey and user testing. The maps created over the course of artefacts 4 and 5 were tested by a total of 60 males, aged 14-16. The 60 people were split in to 3 groups of 20, and each group tested 1 of the maps I had created. The aim was to discover which devices were most effective for the manipulation of player movement.

The results are encouraging, in that they support my claims that lighting can be used to affect the player’s decision making. My test group showed a tendency (65%) to follow the route I intended them to follow, simply by the way I had set up the lighting. When signage was included as well, this tendency grew to 70%. In the map containing considered weapon placement, this quickly increased to 90%. This indicates that these devices all have the ability to guide the player, especially when they’re combined. The user survey was even more interesting in that it revealed that players are unaware that these factors are at influencing them. This means that not only do they hold importance for level functionality, but also immersion. Using these subconscious techniques as opposed to quest arrows or heads up displays means the player has less on screen indicators which tell them they are playing a game.

Some players did get lost in the map however, which suggests that some people do need on screen indicators. From this it can be deemed that player skill and experience is an important consideration when designing levels. Some players need an option in place which can help to guide them more clearly through an environment. These are observations, rather than hard and fast rules. They are observations with proof and evidence however.

Artefact 6 is going to consist of a user survey. My aim is to get 50+ people involved in this, preferably 14-25 year old males (video games main demographic). Due to the manner of my test, I’m going to need 3 separate groups to test out each of my 3 maps. It’s going to be difficult to get this number of people involved, but I need to try so I have some meaningful results. In previous artefacts I was only surveying 10 people at a time, and the results I was gaining didn’t provide very convincing evidence because the groups were so small.

It’s going to be difficult to get this set up and tested in time for my presentation. Wish me luck!

The purpose of artefact 5 was to start introducing the visual cues such as lighting and signage. These would aid in the subconscious guidance of the player through the environment built in artefact 4. There are three different versions of the environment; lighting only, lighting and signage, and lighting with signage and weapon pickups. By testing them separately (this will be done in artefact 6) it will allow me to draw more informed conclusions about which factors are affecting the player’s movement.

Lighting has been used in a slightly different manner for this experiment. Rather than simply using the light to gain the players attention, the direction of the shadows also acts a subtle indicator. I have set the light up in such a way that shadows being cast by large buildings are pointing towards the path I wish the player to take. This was the result of feedback from peers during surgery sessions. The hope is that this will also have some influence over the player’s movement. With the signage I have set it up in such a way that it catches the eye, but at the same time it doesn’t necessarily tell the player where to go. I want to see if by drawing the player in towards the right path I can then use other techniques such as weapon placement to push them along my intended route. The power of weapon placement has been shown in previous artefacts, but with this one I want to prove it even further. I have set up two experiments to see how much effect they have over the player’s decisions.

This artefact does not present me with any conclusions, but it will be used extensively in artefact 6 to prove or disprove my theories.

As promised. Annotated Images. Hopefully this makes a bit more sense.

I’ve jumped straight in to artefact 5, after completing 4. Putting the layout together was pretty straight forward, but I’m finding that 5 is a lot more trial and error based. Setting up the lights in such a way that they’re going to influence the player is proving to be tricky. I’ve found that using the ‘lighting only’ setting in UDK displays where the light is being concentrated and this is helping me a lot. I’m also considering using shadow direction to my advantage. I’ll elaborate on this at a later date.

The purpose of artefact 4 was to build an environment within which theories could be tested and experimented. I wanted to create a more complicated space this time, rather than working with symmetrical or repetitive layouts. Due to the complexity of the space, and the way it was being built, it was agreed with my tutor that this artefact would consist of the layout only. Future artefacts will build on to this one, with lighting, signage and weapon placements being added or removed as necessary.

This environment was built from static meshes and props, rather than from builder brushes as in previous artefacts. The reason for this is that games levels are now built up from static meshes, so it would be helpful for me to get to grips with this way of working. I also wanted to better emulate current generation video games, so the scene appeared less like an experiment and more like a game. I went about building a city area, with multiple paths branching in different directions. There is one specific route which I wanted to try and guide the player through, and I deliberately made this a difficult task. This path is the least obvious one to take, being a narrow alley way as opposed alternative routes which are large open roads. Once the player enters the alley way I want to try and lead them through a series of gates and fences, rather than following an easier option. The city was built up using some of my own meshes and textures, combined with a package from Unreal Development Kit.

Though this artefact does not present me with any findings in its current state, it does play an important role in my two remaining artefacts, which will be a culmination of everything leant so far.

There’s not much to say with this update, I’ll let the pictures do the talking. Basically I’ve been working in UDK, using my own meshes and textures, mixed with some UDK packages. This time I’m working with meshes rather than brushes, because it seems most games are made this way now. I want this to really come across as a better considered game level with art direction. I don’t want people to look at it and think it’s an experiment or test.

Hopefully my next post will make a little more sense, I might annotate some images so you can get a better idea of what I’m trying to achieve.

After speaking to Andy it was decided that Artefact 4, 5 and 6 would all be related to one another. Artefact 4 I will put together the layout for a map, then in artefact 5 I will put together the lighting and other elements, and artefact 6 will be a large user survey. The reason for doing it spread out like this is that putting it together will take me more than 2 weeks (especially with all the other work we have on). The test will be very similar to what I’ve done in previous artfacts, only now I can correct any mistakes and undertake a much more in-depth study.

Below is a quick sketch I did of the map layout. The goal will be for the player to reach the flag and return it to their base. Along the way there will be various things influencing the players decisions. My ultimate goal is to have three different maps, testing out different factors. The first will test lighting and dynamic elements, the second will add signage to the mix, and the third will contain weapon pick ups.

This time I am going to deliberately make it hard for myself. The path I am going to try to make the player follow will be the least obvious path. Let’s see how it goes!

The purpose of this artefact was to explore the impact dynamic elements have on the design and aesthetics of game environments. Through writing the research document it was discovered that techniques such as moving foliage and weather effects were utilised to make environments more immersive. It was deemed that environments composed of static objects were less realistic and thus less engaging.

Using the Unreal Development Kit a scene was built consisting of terrain covered in foliage made from simple planes and alpha masks. To make these appear more alive a ‘wind actor’ was added which would make the meshes bend and flutter as they would in real world wind. A similar technique was applied to the trees. While the foliage added a lot of movement to the scene I felt more effects should be explored and implemented. Fire was created to add a central focus to the scene, and a flag simulating cloth physics. The flag was also affected by the wind to give the scene an overall cohesion. Lastly rain was implemented, again using diffuse and alpha masks on a plane.

When combined these elements made an otherwise simple and lifeless environment appear to be alive. Through feedback during the presentation it was agreed that such effects do in fact aid in immersion and make the environment mimic the real world. It was important to test this theory as it is intended that future artefacts build upon this one and what was learnt in artefacts one and two. I want to discover if dynamic elements have any power over player’s movements. It may be possible they are attracted towards moving objects, especially when coupled with factors such as lighting and signage. A map will be built over the course of three artefacts taking on board these findings.

Here’s the final environment I put together in UDK. You can see how the foliage on the ground and in the trees is affected by the wind. There is a flag, simulating cloth physics also. These are all affected by the same wind actor, to give the scene cohesion. I have also recreated fire and smoke effects, as well as rain. It’s been really interesting (and time consuming!) getting to grips with the particle systems and setting up materials to make these effects. I’m hoping that by showing this video to my seminar group that they understand what I am trying to achieve with this artefact.

Artefact 3 from Philip Howlett on Vimeo.