Immersive FPS games

Lugrin, Jean-Luc; Cavazza, Marc; Charles, Fred; Renard, Marc Le; Freeman, Jonathan; Lessiter, Jane

doi:10.1145/2512142.2512146

Cited by 31 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Supporting the findings of McMahan et al (2012), Lugrin et al (2013) reported higher user preference a first-person shooter game played on a CAVE, compared to desktop gameplay. On the other hand, their study report significantly lower game performance for CAVE gameplay, which could have been caused by technical limitations of wand button response time which is inferior to mouse configuration in desktop gameplay.…”

Section: Related Studiessupporting

confidence: 69%

“…Furthermore, response time is evaluated (Qi et al, 2006). Likewise, in-game achievements such as gained points or failures such as damage taken had also been employed (Litwiller & LaViola, 2011;Lugrin et al, 2013;McMahan et al, 2012). In order to assess perceived user performance, standardized questionnaires were employed, as usual in user research studies (Sauro & Lewis, 2012:185).…”

Section: Measuring Ux In Comparison Of Displays Systems For Virtual Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, standardized presence questionnaires were used such as Slater-Usoh-Steed Presence Questionnaire (Usoh, Catena, Arman, & Slater, 2000) in several studies (Johnsen & Lok, 2008;Kober et al, 2012;McMahan et al, 2012;Pallavicini et al, 2019;Zanbaka et al, 2005), Witmer & Singer (1998) Presence Questionnaire in some studies (Carroll et al, 2019;K. Kim et al, 2014;Kober et al, 2012), ITC Sense of Presence Inventory (Lessiter, Freeman, Keogh, & Davidoff, 2001) in (Lugrin et al, 2013;Wilson & Mayhorn, 2019). In order to assess game user experience with a standardized scale, Game Experience Questionnaire (IJsselsteijn, de Kort, & Poels, 2007) was employed in (Christensen et al, 2018;McMahan et al, 2012;Monteiro et al, 2018) and Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (Phan et al, 2016) was used in (Carroll et al, 2019;Shelstad et al, 2017;C.…”

Section: Measuring Ux In Comparison Of Displays Systems For Virtual Ementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of VR and Desktop Game User Experience in a Puzzle Game: “Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes”

Berkman¹,

Çatak²,

Eremektar³

2020

AJIT-e

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the contemporary game production process is based on the Integrated Development Environment (IDE) applications, it is easier for developers to create multiple versions of their game for both VR and desktop platforms. This provided a great opportunity for researchers to conduct comparative studies to explore the user experience of the relatively novel virtual reality applications In this study, we evaluated a puzzle game through a within-subjects experiment design using objective measures of game success and gameplay duration, as well as plenty of subjective measures in order to assess game user experience, comparing desktop and VR. In addition to selected dimensions of GUESS (Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale), we employed MEC-SPQ (Measurement Effects Conditions - Spatial Presence Questionnaire) to measure presence. Furthermore, we employed NASA-TLX (NASA Task Load Index) to compare the perceived task complexity of the same task executed in VR and desktop gaming environments. Results revealed that there is not a significant difference in objective measures of player performance, comparing the VR and desktop gameplay. The Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale did not reveal any significant difference between the mean scores of VR and desktop experiences. The spatial presence related dimensions of MEC-SPQ revealed significantly higher scores of VR, for Possible Actions and Self Location dimensions. NASA-TLX weighted scores were significantly higher for VR in physical load and for desktop in frustration. Our results show that a puzzle-based game experienced in VR does not lead to a higher level of satisfaction in terms of game user experience but triggers a sense of spatial presence. Due to the different control schemes, players perceive that HMD based gameplay demands more physical task load. However, the gameplay duration and game success rate are not significantly different. The failure in desktop gameplay might have led to higher frustration, since the experience seems more familiar to players. Since the results are partially concordant with previous studies, it is not possible to make a strict conclusion on the effect caused by different immersive technologies on game user experience. Further studies are required through a more consistent methodology with a focus on game design components rather than game genre.

show abstract

Section: Related Studiessupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Measuring Ux In Comparison Of Displays Systems For Virtual Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measuring Ux In Comparison Of Displays Systems For Virtual Ementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of VR and Desktop Game User Experience in a Puzzle Game: “Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes”

Berkman¹,

Çatak²,

Eremektar³

2020

AJIT-e

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the advent of new technological trends, digital games have achieved tremendous success. However, it is not just the visual aesthetics that contribute to their triumph; many successful games employ sophisticated design methodologies that elicit an emotional response from players [26]. However, Carrión et al [25] argue that many serious games lack proper design.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Create Serious Games? Proposal for a Participatory Methodology

Pacheco-Velazquez,

Rodes-Paragarino,

Rabago-Mayer

et al. 2023

IJSG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The demand for practical, engaging, and enjoyable learning experiences has led to a shift in student preferences. Students now seek active learning approaches that prioritize their involvement and utilize technology. In response to this demand, simulators and serious games have emerged as effective strategies in education. Serious games offer numerous benefits, including the promotion of critical thinking, creativity, problem-solving skills, and improved knowledge retention. However, it is crucial to ensure that serious games are well-designed to maintain their appeal and playful nature. Inadequate requirements definition during the initial stages of development can lead to issues in game design. This article emphasizes the importance of establishing clear requirements and objectives in the creation of serious games for educational purposes. By doing so, effective serious games can be developed that meet the needs of students and align with educational goals. This systematic approach to game development ensures that the games are engaging, effective, and conducive to learning.

show abstract

“…FPS games are a highly competitive genre with demanding requirements for reaction speed, and they have become one of the mainstream categories in the current gaming market [1][2][3][4]. Simultaneously, the issue of cheating has emerged as a major challenge in the FPS gaming industry, impacting the gaming ecosystem and players' overall gaming experience.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

VADNet: Visual-Based Anti-Cheating Detection Network in FPS Games

Nie,

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prevalence of cheating in first-person shooter (FPS) games poses a formidable challenge, undermining user experience and the integrity of competitive play. In response to this issue, a visual-based anti-cheating detection network, termed VADNet, has been developed, harnessing the capabilities of deep learning and computer vision techniques. VADNet incorporates a focus module designed to segment high-resolution images, alongside a Feature Pyramid Network (FPN) for the fusion of multi-scale features, culminating in a classifier module tasked with the quantification of cheating behaviors. Rigorous experimentation on a dataset derived from a real online FPS game substantiates VADNet's efficacy in identifying players who resort to cheating, as evidenced by high precision, recall, and F1 scores. This investigation advances the field of anti-cheating mechanisms for FPS games, offering a robust and reliable system to preserve the fairness and integrity of online gaming environments.

show abstract

Immersive FPS games

Cited by 31 publications

References 29 publications

Comparison of VR and Desktop Game User Experience in a Puzzle Game: “Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes”

Comparison of VR and Desktop Game User Experience in a Puzzle Game: “Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes”

How to Create Serious Games? Proposal for a Participatory Methodology

VADNet: Visual-Based Anti-Cheating Detection Network in FPS Games

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About