Background
As museums transition from rigid exhibition spaces to hubs of interactive engagement, we were tasked with designing a multiplayer walk-up-and-play experience intended for natural science museums.
1. Topic searching
From ideation,
to down-
selection
2. Ideas in motion
Evaluating the
ideas
through video
prototyping
3. Wizard of Oz
Play testing before technical implementation
4. Building an MVP
Computer vision and game algorithm.
5. Refining Interactions
Usability test and more iterations
6. Final Showcase
Public exhibit and reflection
1. Topic Searching and Ideation
With the goal of achieving team alignment on one topic space for our interactive experience, we generated 24 initial walk-up-and-play concepts that take on the different topics for environmental awareness.
After down-selecting to 12, we went through rounds of rapid peer review sessions to glean initial feedback. We eventually landed on the topic space of wildlife habitat fragmentation by highways and roads.
Design Principles
To make actionable what we've learned from the initial collection of concepts, I crafted design principles based on the peer review feedback. This framework primed the team for easier discussion and decision making later on. We then went through multiple round of crazy 8s to generate and refine ideas, using the design principles as a decision matrix to evaluate the impact of each new concept.
01.
Storytelling
Tie the core game mechanics to the narrative of the social impact.
02.
Go big
The scale of the controller and input design should fit a public setting.
03.
Collaboration
Emphasize teamwork and collective strategies for the core gameplay interaction.
04.
Call-to-action
Provide actionable steps or resources that players can use to make a difference.
2. Storyboarding and Video Prototyping
We wanted to test out the key interactions of the two selected ideas with a focus on core mechanics and social impact. We first storyboarded the ideas and used stop motion and green screen techniques to put them in motion. The video prototypes allowed us to better understand the ideas in a storytelling format.
3. Wizard of Oz Testing
Before moving onto implementation, we wanted to test out the interaction with Wizard-of-Oz techniques. The goal was to evaluate the learnability of the mechanics, observe how players collaborate and strategize, and compare the effectiveness of the two options for our input method.
We tested two different input methods. Option 1 involves players using a stylus to draw bridges between different plots of land, while option 2 requires players to place physical bridge blocks. Our assumption was that both methods embodied the tactility and engagement we envisioned for a public space.
I created this visualization to plan out the testing setup. The WoZ prototype was built on Figma and projected onto a whiteboard. To simulate the effect of the gameplay responding to controller input, we assigned two “wizards” working behind the scene, adding bridges and controling the movement of the animals.
Finding 01
The participants preferred placing physical bridge blocks for its interactivity and visual representation of wildlife crossings.
Finding 02
The participants expressed a desire for in-game animal dialogues and audio feedback for deeper emotional immersion.
Finding 03
Rather than collectively strategizing bridge placement, one participant typically took over the gameplay.
Finding 3 revealed a lack of intended collaboration, making it the highest priority to address. I advocated for a revised approach where Player A places bridge blocks while Player B manually steers the animal with a bear-shaped controller. This method also obviated the need for developing a pathfinding algorithm for the animal.
5. Usability Test & Refining the Experience
As we approached the date for the showcase, we conducted 4 final usability tests to identify points of friction. To address them, I aligned the team to stick to the 80/20 rule to concentrate our efforts - we focused on addressing the 20% of issues or pain points that were causing 80% of the friction or dissatisfaction in the player experience.
Finding 01
Although we provided an onboarding animation teaching the mechanics, participants expressed the need for real-time guidance during initial gameplay.
Finding 02
Participants had different instincts as to how the animal character responds to the bear controller, often confusing forward movement with backward.
Solution 01
We incorporated the onboarding tutorial into the first parts of the gameplay.
Solution 02
We updated the tutorial in the onboarding animation to clarify the input method.
