Personal and Ubiquitous Computing

, Volume 14, Issue 5, pp 417–424 | Cite as

Towards understanding how to design for social play in exertion games

Original Article

Abstract

Players invest significant physical effort when playing exertion games. In addition to improving physical health, exertion games are also believed to facilitate social play amongst players. Despite these advantages, our understanding of how to design these games to successfully support social play is limited. In this paper, we present a qualitative analysis of player data from “Table Tennis for Three”, a mediated exertion game for three players, that contributes to our understanding of how the design of an exertion game facilitates social play. We use the concept of “space” to frame our findings in order to create themes that can be used to analyze existing and to design future exertion games. We hope our work can support researchers gain an understanding of this exciting new field, while also help designers utilize the many benefits of exertion games.

Keywords

Exertion Interface Exergaming Exergames Physical Tangible Sports Exhausting Physical effort Social play Connectedness Ping pong 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The development work for Table Tennis for Three was initially supported by The University of Melbourne and CSIRO Collaborative Research Support Scheme. Thanks to Kerin Bryant for taking the pictures and Beryl Plimmer, Chris Wolf, Christine Satchell and Yolanda Rankin for their editing help. The corresponding author would also like to thank the support from a Microsoft Research Asia Fellowship.

References

  1. 1.
    Behrenshausen BG (2007) Toward a (Kin) aesthetic of video gaming: the case of Dance Dance Revolution. Games Cult 2(4):335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bianchi-Berthouze N, Kim W, Patel D (2007) Does body movement engage you more in digital game play? and why? Paper presented at the affective computing and intelligent interaction conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74889-2_10
  3. 3.
    Bortz J, Doring N (2002) Forschungsmethoden und evaluation. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Consolvo S, Everitt K, Smith I, Landay JA (2006) Design requirements for technologies that encourage physical activity. Paper presented at the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Kort YAW, Ijsselsteijn WA (2008) People, places, and play: player experience in a socio-spatial context. Comput Entertain (CIE) 6(2)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eriksson E, Hansen T, Lykke-Olesen A (2007) Movement-based interaction in camera spaces: a conceptual framework. Pers Ubiquit Comput 11(8):621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fitzpatrick G (2002). The locales framework: making social thinking accessible for software practitioners. In: Social thinking: software practice. MIT Press, USA, pp 141–160Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fogtmann MH, Fritsch J, Kortbek KJ (2008) Kinesthetic interaction—revealing the bodily potential in interaction design. Paper presented at the OZCHI ‘08: conference of the Computer–Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) of Australia on Computer–Human InteractionGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Graves L, Stratton G, Ridgers ND, Cable NT (2007) Comparison of energy expenditure in adolescents when playing new generation and sedentary computer games: cross sectional study. BMJ 335(7633):1282–1284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoonhout J, Fontijn W (2008) It’s hard, it is fun: throwing balls inside the home. Paper presented at the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. Workshop Exertion Interfaces. http://workshopchi.pbwiki.com/f/CHI2008_splashball_exertion_interfaces_uploaded.pdf
  12. 12.
    Larssen AT, Loke L, Robertson T, Edwards J, Sydney A (2004) Understanding movement as input for interaction—a study of two Eyetoy™ Games. In: Proceedings of OzCHI ‘04Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lindley SE, Le Couteur J, Berthouze NL (2008) Stirring up experience through movement in game play: effects on engagement and social behaviour. Paper presented at the Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moen J (2006) Kinaesthetic movement interaction: designing for the pleasure of motion. Unpublished PhD, KTH, Numerical Analysis and Computer Science, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mueller F (2002) Exertion interfaces: sports over a distance for social bonding and fun. Unpublished Master of Science, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mueller F, Agamanolis S, Picard R (2003) Exertion interfaces: sports over a distance for social bonding and fun. Paper presented at the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mueller F, Gibbs M (2007a) A physical three-way interactive game based on table tennis. Paper presented at the 4th Australasian Conference on Interactive EntertainmentGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mueller F, Gibbs M (2007b) Evaluating a distributed physical leisure game for three players. Paper presented at the conference of the computer-human interaction special interest group (CHISIG) of Australia on computer–human interaction: OzCHI’07Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mueller F, Gibbs M, Vetere F (2008). Taxonomy of exertion games. Paper presented at the OZCHI ‘08: conference of the computer–human interaction special interest group (CHISIG) of Australia on computer–human interactionGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mueller F, Gibbs M, Vetere F (2009) Design influence on social play in distributed exertion games. Paper presented at the CHI ’09. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neuman WL (2006) Social research methods, 6th edn. Pearson Education, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nitsche M (2009) Video game spaces: image, play, and structure in 3D worlds. The MIT Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    O’Brien S, Mueller F (2007) Jogging the distance. Paper presented at the proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systemsGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rettie R (2003) Connectedness, awareness and social presence. Paper presented at the Presence 2003, 6th annual international workshop on presenceGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Salen K, Zimmerman E (2003) Rules of play: game design fundamentals. The MIT Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sharp H, Rogers Y, Preece J (2007) Interaction design: beyond human computer interaction. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sheridan JG, Bryan-Kinns N (2008) Designing for performative tangible interaction. Int J Arts Technol Spec Issue Tangible Embed Interact 1(3–4)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. SAGE Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Strömberg H, Väätänen A, Räty V-P (2002) A group game played in interactive virtual space: design and evaluation. Paper presented at the 4th conference on designing interactive systemsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vossen DP (2004) The nature and classification of games. AVANTE 10(1):53–68Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wakkary R, Hatala M, Jiang Y, Droumeva M, Hosseini M (2008). Making sense of group interaction in an ambient intelligent environment for physical play. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 2nd international conference on tangible and embedded interactionGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Webb A, Kerne A, Koh E, Joshi P, Park Y, Graeber R (2006) Choreographic buttons: promoting social interaction through human movement and clear affordances. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 14th annual ACM international conference on multimediaGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Weinberg RS, Gould D (2006) Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florian Mueller
    • 1
  • Martin R. Gibbs
    • 1
  • Frank Vetere
    • 1
  1. 1.Interaction Design Group, Department of Information SystemsThe University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations