4.4 Article

Physical Activity Motivating Games: Be Active and Get Your Own Reward

出版社

ASSOC COMPUTING MACHINERY
DOI: 10.1145/2395131.2395139

关键词

Serious games; game design approach; physical activity; motivation; player modeling; adaptivity in games; user study

资金

  1. Australian Government through the Intelligent Island Program
  2. CSIRO

向作者/读者索取更多资源

People's daily lives have become increasingly sedentary, with extended periods of time being spent in front of a host of electronic screens for learning, work, and entertainment. We present research into the use of an adaptive persuasive technology, which introduces bursts of physical activity into a traditionally sedentary activity: computer game playing. Our game design approach leverages the playfulness and addictive nature of computer games to motivate players to engage in mild physical activity. The design allows players to gain virtual in-game rewards in return for performing real physical activity captured by sensory devices. This article presents a two-stage analysis of the activity-motivating game design approach applied to a prototype game. Initially, we detail the overall acceptance of active games discovered when trialing the technology with 135 young players. Results showed that players performed more activity without negatively affecting their perceived enjoyment of the playing experience. The analysis did discover, however, a lack of balance between the amounts of physical activity carried out by players with various gaming skills, which prompted a subsequent investigation into adaptive techniques for balancing the amount of physical activity performed by players. An evaluation of additional 90 players showed that adaptive techniques successfully overcame the gaming skills dependence and achieved more balanced activity levels. Overall, this work positions activity-motivating games as an approach that can potentially change the way players interact with computer games and lead to healthier lifestyles.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据