Exploring Spatial Experiences of Children and Young Adolescents

While Playing the Dual Flow-based Fitness Game “Plunder Planet”

Anna Lisa Martin-Niedecken

Subject Area Game Design, Department of Design, Zurich University of the Arts, Zurich, Switzerland

Keywords: Exergame Fitness Training, Dual Flow, Spatial Experience, Exergame Spaces, Children.

Abstract: With the trend towards movement-based exergames and the gamification of sport, new body-centered

controller technologies have moved into the living rooms and the gyms. The highly complex, multi-modal

and multi-sensory interactions with these systems create new ways of perception and interaction, the

exploration and experience of which completely captivate the users. Based on related work we analyzed

interactions and interdependencies between these new perceptual and interactive spaces at the levels of “body

space”, “controller space” and “in-game space”. This extensive theoretical framework is then used to illustrate

possible applications of these theories, using the example of our fitness game environment “Plunder Planet”

for children and young adolescents. Subsequently, we present a user study specifically focusing on the

qualitative analysis of space-related gameplay experiences and play strategies of users playing “Plunder

Planet”. We introduce and analyze sketches drawn by children and young adolescents after playing the

psychophysiologically adaptive exergame with two different controller devices. The additional qualitative

evaluation showed positive effects of all three design categories (body, controller and in-game scenario) on

the player’s space-related gameplay experiences. Finally, we identify possible departure points for future

research-based developments of holistic, user-centered exergame settings which have maximum

attractiveness and effectiveness for the player.

1 INTRODUCTION

Movement based games, targeted gamification of

fitness training, and fully equipped game gyms are

today more popular than ever. In incorporating the

whole body into the gameplay, and by controlling the

game through special full-body motion controllers,

these applications present not only an effective

alternative to traditional training, but also offer the

player holistic flowing, immersive experiences.

These new, multi-modal and multi-sensory

interactions offer the player unknown perceptive and

interactive spaces, which in their turn offer a point of

departure for innovative and holistic exergame

developments. In order to fully exploit this potential,

these arising exergame spaces need to be explored

and analyzed both as single dimensions as well as a

construct of mutually interdependent and influencing

dimensions on the levels of “body”, “controller” and

“in-game scenario”.

Currently, various studies provide insights into

the effects of specific body movements (e.g. Pasch et

al. 2009), controller technologies (e.g. Shafer,

Carbonara and Popova, 2014) as well as game

mechanics and other aspects of design (e.g. Cardona

et al., 2016) on the player’s gameplay experience (e.g.

flow, immersion or engagement), and propose

specific frameworks (e.g. Martin and Wiemeyer,

2012) or design guidelines (e.g. Mueller et al. 2011).

However, these approaches rather focus on single or

dual dimensions than on the combination and

interplay of all three exergame space dimensions.

Consequently, insights from these studies remain

limited although they hold important indicators for

designers of future exergame developments.

Furthermore, mainly quantitative research

methods were applied for the evaluation of exergame

spaces. Regarding the target group of children and

young adolescents in particular, qualitative methods

hold additional benefits and could provide extremely

informative insights, which might be missed with the

exclusive application of quantitative methods.

Children and young adolescents often struggle to

explain their feelings and experiences with words.

Thus, qualitative methods like drawings should be

applied more often in order to obtain a more

comprehensive evaluation.

Finally, the majority of existing exergame studies

Martin-Niedecken A.

Exploring Spatial Experiences of Children and Young Adolescents While Playing the Dual Flow-based Fitness Game â

AIJPlunder Planetâ

DOI: 10.5220/0006587702180229

In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications (CHIRA 2017), pages 218-229

ISBN: 978-989-758-267-7

is conducted using commercially available

exergames (e.g. Wii® Fit or Dance Central) and input

devices (e.g. Nintendo Wii® or Microsoft Kinect®),

which are neither user-centered nor research-based

designed, or may be developed based on single

theories and dimensions only. Game designers should

exploit the full potential of all dimensions in the

research-based development of exergame

environments, including the design of synchronized

virtual game scenarios and full-body-motion

controllers as well as the specification of associated

body movements. Thus, they target the most

attractive and effective gameplay experience for the

player and simultaneously allow researchers to

investigate promising aspects and effects of game-

based perception processes, usability and human

computer interaction in the fields of physical activity

and health.

In order to approach the topics mentioned above and

to bridge the existing gaps, we conducted both,

theoretical and applied research and development

work, which will be presented in this paper.

We begin the paper by giving an outline of

existing frameworks and findings from related work

and studies. We introduce space-related gameplay

experience concepts and theories, which are specified

and discussed in the context of exergaming. As a next

step, and in order to determine a theoretical design

and evaluation framework for our research and

development work, we assign the existing approaches

to the categories of “body space”, “controller space”

and “in-game space”.

Based on this theoretical foundation, we then

present our research-based designed, dual flow-based

fitness game environment “Plunder Planet” for

children and young adolescents, which was

developed in an user-centered and iterative design

process. We show how we translated and

implemented the existing interdiciplinary know-how

into the design of an attractive and effective exergame

setting.

Finally, we present relevant and inspriring

extracts from a user study, mainly focusing on the

introduction of children’s drawings as an additional

explorative method for the qualitative evaluation of

spatial and gameplay experiences of children and

young adolescets after playing “Plunder Planet” with

two different controller devices. The sketches were

analyzed following the approach of a qualitative

analysis (similar to Mayring’s (2010) qualitative

content analysis) employing the main categories of

our theoretical framework, which is established on

the dimensions of “body space”, “controller space”

and “in-game space”.

To conclude, we identify potential points of

departure for future exergame environments and

provide an outlook on promising future R&D work.

2 RELATED WORK &

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Gameplay Experiences

There are now numerous concepts that concern

themselves with the analysis of many different

dimensions of user experience in digital gameplay.

The most commonly identified are immersion, fun,

presence, involvement, engagement, and flow

(Brown and Crains, 2004; Ijsselsteijn et al., 2007;

Nakatsu, Rautberg and Vorderer, 2005; Sweetser and

Wyeth, 2005). The majority of these, however, cannot

be understood as single, independent dimensions, but

only in combination and interrelation with each other.

One generally speaks of a multi-dimensional user

experience in gameplay, as well as of so-called

gameplay experiences (Takatalo, Häkkinen and

Nyman, 2015).

In general, gameplay experiences can be

described as a kind of hallmark of the quality of a

game. If a game succeeds in eliciting particular

experiences for the player, it will leave a lasting

impression. Game experiences that are repeatedly

brought up in relation to body-centered innovation in

exergames and controller-technologies are the closely

related, and spatial-concept based experiences of

immersion and presence, as well as flow experiences.

2.1.1 Immersion and Presence

Ermi and Mäyrä (2005) identify three equal types of

immersion:

 Sensory immersion – refers to the multi-

sensory properties (e.g. game mechanics,

audiovisual representation, etc.) of a game.

 Challenge-based immersion – refers to the

immersion in the cognitive and motoric aspect

that results from a challenge-skill balance

(flow) while playing a game.

 Imaginative immersion – refers to the

immersion within the imaginary world created

through the game.

Brown and Cairns (2004) introduce a concept of

graded immersion and define three levels of

immersion that build upon each other: Engagement,

Engrossment and Total Immersion (Brown and

Crains, 2004). Whether, and if yes, how a player can

dive into the lowest immersion level – “engagement”

– depends on fundamental, individual preferences,

game control and the willingness to invest time, effort

and attention during gameplay, as well as on the

feedback from the game. If players have the feeling

that they understand the controlling mechanisms, and

like the game genre, they rapidly attain the level of

“engagement”. Conversely, any antipathy to any of

the components mentioned makes it difficult to

experience “engagement”.

Access to the next highest state of “engrossment”

depends greatly on the game structure and

construction. If this is found wanting, for example, in

the area of game tasks or audiovisual representation,

the player will not attain “engrossment”. At this level

the player is already emotionally involved in the

game, which is what spurs them to continue playing.

The highest level, which can be equated with

“presence experience”, is “total immersion”. In this

state, players forget everything around them and are

“cut off” from the real world. They find themselves

in a world in which only the game matters. Barriers

to experiencing total immersion include a lack of

empathy with the avatar or insufficient game

atmospherics.

According to Weibel and Wissmath, the

immersion experience is directly related to flow and

presence. While presence refers to the sensation of

being physically located in the mediated world

(Weibel and Wissmath, 2011) flow refers to the

sensation of being involved in the gaming action at a

high level of enjoyment and fulfillment

(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).

2.1.2 Flow Variations

Sweester and Wyeth (2005) take classic Flow Theory

and apply it to games. In their “GameFlow Model”,

they describe the core elements of “Enjoyment”:

Concentration, Challenge, Player Skills, Control,

Clear Goals, Feedback, Immersion and in the case of

multiplayer games, Social Interaction.

In contrast to classical computer games, movement

based games are played with the whole body. The

body movements are tracked by a motion-based

controller and mediated into the virtual game

scenario. Exergames challenge the player holistically

with regard to both coordination and to cognition.

In response to the classic flow concept, Sinclair et

al. (2007) have extended this concept to the

components of the body, calling it “Dual Flow”.

According to this concept, the optimal flow

experience during exergame play requires a balance

between the game-related challenge and player skills,

and the intensity of the required movement input and

the player’s fitness level. In the ideal exergame, the

player is never physically or mentally over- or under-

challenged. Only in this way can players attain their

individualized, perfect training/game mode.

Concepts derived primarily from game research draw

from the theoretical concepts described above and

extend them into practical application for exergames,

in the form of so-called “dynamic game balancing”

mechanisms (DGB) or “dynamic game adjustment”

mechanisms (DDA) (e.g. Altimira et al., 2016).

This makes it possible, for example, for players

with different levels of skill to play an exergame with

or against each other, still allowing each player to

have a dual flow experience (e.g. Gerling et al. 2014).

Balancing mechanisms range from different

movement inputs (easier for less-skilled players vs.

harder for better-skilled players), to the use of

different controllers (e.g. one-button for less-skilled

players vs. gesture-based devices for better-skilled

players), all the way to different credit systems (e.g.

more points for the less-skilled player vs. fewer points

for the better skilled player for completion of the

same challenges).

Other examples are directed towards the

individual dual flow experience, even though these

are transferable to multiplayer DGBs. This includes,

in particular, psychophysiological measurements of

the affective and effective state in game design (e.g.

Cardona et al., 2016; Mueller et al., 2012). The focus

is on the individual tailoring of game mechanics (e.g.

game difficulty) to the sensitivities and/or the heart

rate. In that context, sensor technologies which

measure these psychophysio-logical states come into

play in this setting, and are often directly coupled

with the game or the game engine.

Game balancing can therefore occur on several

levels in both single- and multiplayer modes: on the

“real level” in the area of the game controller and the

body movements, and on the “virtual level” via game

scenario, game mechanics and audiovisual

representation.

2.2 Exergame Spaces

A consideration of all of these exergaming theories

and concepts gives a new significance to the notions

of space and spatial perception in this highly

complex, multi-sensoric and multi-modal interaction

of the player on the various levels of an exergame

(body, controller, game scenario).

Nitsche (2008), for example, speaks, in relation to

the interaction with classical computer games, of an

interplay of five spaces:

 “Rule-based space” as defined by the

mathematical rules that determine e.g. physics,

sound, AI, and game-level architecture.

 “Mediated space” as defined by the

presentation, which is the space of the imagery

and the use of this image including the

cinematic form of presentation.

 “Fictional space” that lives in the imagination,

in other words, the space “imagined” by

players from their comprehension of available

images.

 “Play space”, meaning space of the play, which

includes the player and the video game

hardware.

 “Social space” as defined by interaction with

others, meaning the game space of other

players affected (e.g. in a multiplayer game).

If this spatial model is transferred to body-centered

exergames, two crucial components are found to be

missing, especially on the level of “play space”. In

contrast to classical PC games, exergame play

incorporates the whole body in a sportive manner.

The body in turn interacts through movements, which

is made possible by special body-centered controller

technologies.

2.2.1 “Body Space”

An indication of the degree of complexity created by

the extension of the game system through the use of

the body can be found in the model of the “Four

Lenses of Exertion Interaction” (Mueller et al., 2011).

Mueller et al. (2011) suggested looking at the moving

and interacting body from a four-lenses perspective.

They identified the “responding body”, the “moving

body”, the “sensing body” and the “relating body”,

working from the inside of the body to the outside:

 The “responding body” describes how the body

responds to physical activity and sport, both

immediately after the exercise and after some

time has elapsed. Short-term effects of physical

activity include sweating and increased heart

rate, whereas in the long term such effects as

increased lung volume and a better trained

cardiovascular system can be the result of

physical activity. As previously described,

these effects are also used to dynamically adapt

an exergame to the individual sensitivities of

the player.

 The “moving body“ describes the movement of

the body and individual body parts in

space/time relation to each other. The “moving

body” also comprises an individual’s natural

awareness of the location in space of the body

parts during a particular movement. This is

particularly important in the context of the

often complex movement inputs with special

exergame controllers.

 The “sensing body” describes how the body

reacts to and experiences the world. In the area

of sport, this includes sporting equipment. At

the same time, it incorporates the external

environment (spectators etc.). If this concept is

transferred to exergames, the world to be

experienced doubles: the player experiences

both the real and the virtual world and interacts

with them through the special controller

devices.

 The “relating body” deals with the player’s

own body in relation to other bodies, in

physical interactions that lead to other kinds of

interaction, such as social interaction. This

concept of body is relevant in multiplayer

exergames, for example.

Numerous game research studies have explored

further the fundamental meaning and effect of the

body as the central element of an exergame. In

general, the inclusion of holistic physical activity into

the gameplay is found to be a positive predictor for

the feeling of immersion and engagement (Pasch et

al., 2009), and to be an important variable in the

emotional experience of games (Vara et al., 2016).

Bianchi-Berthouze (2013) investigated how

body-movement can be exploited to modulate the

quality of the playing experience and identified five

classes of movement:

 Task-control movements: These movements

are defined by the game controller. They are

necessary to play the game and to score points.

 Task-facilitating movements: These

movements are not defined by the game

controller (the controller does not react to

them).

 Role-related movements: These movements

are typical of the role adopted by the player in

the game scenario.

 Affective expression: This class of gestures

expresses the player’s affective state during

game play. They are spontaneously expressed

or acted and generally not recognized by the

current game interface. They are a window to

the player’s experience.

 Expression of social behavior: Expressions of

social behavior are expressions that facilitate

and support interaction between players. They

are spontaneously expressed and are not

recognized by the controller.

The choice of movement strategy depends on

personal skills and on the motivation of the player

while playing the game. Pasch et al. (2009)

distinguished between the motivation “to achieve” (to

win the game) and “to relax” (to enjoy the game). If

the players’ motivation is “to achieve” they will

challenge themselves (“hard fun”) and optimize their

strategy to gain as many points as possible (e.g. by

using the minimum movements required). If the

players’ motivation is “to relax”, they will look for

mental relaxation (“easy fun”) and tend to recreate

movements from the actual sport.

2.2.2 “Controller Space”

Beside the body movement strategies (“playing

styles”) and the player’s motivation while playing a

game, the type of controller interface has a great

influence on the player’s gameplay experiences.

During exergame play, the intermediary

controller technology ideally assumes the role of

mediator between the “real” and the “virtual” game

worlds (Martin and Wiemeyer, 2012). However, the

decisive factor is always how well an input device

integrates itself into the body patterns of the moving

player. Kim et al. found that an embodied interface

improves user experience, energy expenditure, and

intention to repeat the experience within the

exergame (Kim et al., 2014).

The precision of movement recognition (Nijhar,

Bianchi-Berthouze and Boguslawski, 2011), as well

as the natural integration of this recognition into the

game scenario and the related movement feedback are

decisive indicators for the “incorporation” of the

game controller, and for the immersion into the game

world (Pasch et al., 2009).

If, for example, a controller vibrates

unexpectedly, or reacts to the player’s movement

inputs only sporadically or with delays, the controller

will interrupt the flow developed up until that point,

or make it impossible for a flow to develop at all. The

controller will then not be understood as a part, or an

extension of the integral game movement apparatus.

If, on the other hand, a controller supports the

spatial orientation of the player in their immediate

sphere of movement through well-balanced design,

and in doing so enables the most natural body

movements appropriate to the game scenario, then a

symbiosis results between the controller and the

player’s body (e.g. Shafer, Carbonara and Popova,

2014). Beside the natural feeling of control, Pasch et

al. identified that a “mimicry of movements” (if the

exergame-controller provides an accurate mapping of

the player’s movements and the representation on the

screen) positively influences immersion in

movement-based interaction (Pasch et al., 2009).

As exergames stimulate physical activity, it is

extremely important that, in addition to the simplest

possible integration of the controller into the player’s

body patterns, elements are included that result in

high activity. Taking Nintendo Wii-tennis as an

example, it is immediately apparent how easily the

Wii remote control can be tricked if a player wants to

hit a backhand: a simple flick of the wrist is all that is

required to hit a virtual clean shot.

Concepts from the so-called exergame fitness

training sector try to counter this. In this field, training

equipment is often retooled into game controllers and

extended with game scenarios (e.g. the Exerbike by

Motion Fitness), but completely new exergame

fitness game environments have also been created.

This includes not only the development of new

games, but also of matching full-body motion

controllers (e.g. the Makoto Arena by MakotoNow).

2.2.3 “In-Game Space”

At the level of “in-game spaces”, design aspects in

particular direct the (spatial) perceptions and

gameplay experiences of the player and should be

embedded as convincingly as possible within the

complete system of the exergame. At the audiovisual-

, spatial-, game mechanics- and narrative levels, the

game designer therefore should create an experience

which is as multi-sensory as possible for the player.

Perceptual psychology, in particular, provides

designers with a range of spatial concepts and

principles as anchors or points of departure for their

work. These include Gestalt theory and Gestalt

principles (e.g. Wertheimer, 1985), ecological

perception theory (Gibson, 1978), and information

processing theory (e.g. Shiffrin and Schneider, 1977).

With regard to immersion, presence and flow,

various game research studies have investigated the

impact of creative elements of games on the spatial

experiences of the player. For example, in a first-

person perspective, the player virtually turns into the

game character as he/she feels like he/she is acting

directly in the virtual game world. In addition to the

first-person perspective, the consequence and

meaning of player action within the environment and

its impact on gameplay greatly add to the feeling of

immersion (McMahan, 2003). Simultaneously,

seeing the avatar from a third-person perspective

positively influences the player’s identification and

emotional attachments towards his/her virtual image

(Blinka, 2008).

Furthermore, games provide so-called narrative

spaces (Jenkins, 2004). Narrative spaces allow

players to interact with each other, other characters,

the environment, and aspects of the game. These

narrative spaces are mapped throughout an

environment, and the narrative is constructed by the

relationships between space and events Dickey,

2005).

3 “PLUNDER PLANET“

Based upon the variety of concepts and theories

related to “body space”, “controller space” and “in

game space”, we created “Plunder Planet” (Martin-

Niedecken and Götz, 2016), a dual flow-based,

psychophysiologically adaptive fitness game

environment for children and young adolescents

(Figure 1, 2 and 3).

Below, we describe all components of the

exergame, which were developed within an iterative

and user-centered design process with a specific focus

on the previously introduced theoretical framework

of “body space”, “controller space” and “in-game

space”.

Figure 1: In-game screenshot of “Plunder Planet”.

3.1 Dual Flow-based Design

During gameplay, the player wears a Polar H7 sensor,

with which his or her heart rate is measured and

forwarded to the game engine using a specially

developed app. In addition, the in-game performance

allows inferences about the emotional state of the

player.

“Plunder Planet” is based on adaptive game

mechanics. Depending on the psychophysiological

state of the player during a “Plunder Planet” workout,

a Trainer-GUI can be used to gradually adjust the

difficulty and complexity of the game. This ensures

that the player is optimally challenged at all times,

and finds him- or herself in the dual flow-mode.

3.2 Plunder Planet: Controller

Beside the development of an adaptive game

scenario, we focused in particular on the exploratory

development of a specific Full-Body-Motion

Controller (FBMC). This was intended to further

support the dual flow and immersion experience of

the player, and also to enable cognitive and

coordination training. To achieve this, we

experimented with a variety of input variants and put

these through repeated user tests.

“Plunder Planet” can currently be played with two

controller variants (Figure 2): the specially developed

FBMC challenges the player’s cognitive and

coordinative skills, and offers haptic feedback

through the use of buttons. The gesture-based

Kinect® sensor allows more freedom of movement

and in principle allows more natural or intuitive

movements.

With regard to design, in both the development of

the FBMC and of the game concept, an effort was

made to cover all the categories mentioned in the

literature that were found to lead to positive gameplay

experiences, and especially to immersion, presence

and (dual) flow.

Figure 2: “Plunder Planet” FBMC- and Kinect-setting.

3.3 Plunder Planet: Narrative Frame

The narrative of “Plunder Planet” draws the player

into the world of a young pirate, searching for buried

treasures on an abandoned desert planet, with his or

her flying pirate ship. The decision to use this

scenario resulted from several user tests, in which we

included the target group in the design process of the

game.

3.4 Plunder Planet: In-Game Design

As the perspective, we chose an immersive point-of-

view, which allows the player’s avatar – a flying

pirate ship – a slightly raised third-person view of a

desert planet from the air.

Figure 3: In-engine screenshot of the procedural generated

race course.

We generated additional immersive moments using

dynamic elements, such as sand blowing around the

ship when it touches the ground, a change of direction

of the ship’s flag waving when the wind changes, ruts

leading towards a bright horizon, as well as a

procedural generated race course (Figure 3). These

visual elements and moments are intensified by the

strategic use of sound.

3.5 Plunder Planet: Body Movements

We also took care to ensure that the input movements

fit each scenario presented (so that they feel as natural

as possible), both with the use of the FBMC and the

Kinect®, and that these movements are comparable

despite the differences in the controls of the two

devices.

The FBMC is controlled by pushing six buttons in

the direct vicinity of the player’s body and/or exercise

space. The buttons are located at three heights (high,

middle and low) to the left and right of the player. The

player has to jump quite dynamically between the

buttons in order to press these at the right moments.

The height and distance of the buttons can be adjusted

to the size of the player. In order to avoid virtual

obstacles, the player must hit the middle and upper

buttons on the right or the left, while the two lower

buttons (one on each side) serve to activate force

fields to protect the player from giant sandworms.

The Kinect® sensor is also steered through six

movements on three levels. To avoid obstacles, the

player must either jump or duck to the left or the right

as the situation requires. The force fields are activated

by extending the left or the right arm to the front.

4 EXPLORATIVE USER STUDY

In order to validate the adaptive exergame design of

“Plunder Planet”, we conducted a feasibility study

(Martin-Niedecken and Götz, 2016). So far, we have

only reported preliminary, quantitative results (see

section 4.2). Based on these findings and our

theoretical framework, we collected further

qualitative data in the form of drawings within the

same setting, which has not been evaluated and

interpreted yet.

Since our R&D work targets children and young

adolescents, we hypothesized that these sketches

would provide us with additional insights into the

spatial effects and gameplay experiences of “Plunder

Planet” on players, and thus give us potential points

of departure for future exergame developments.

4.1 Participants and Procedure

We recruited 16 children and young adolescents (13

males and 3 females) with and without experience

with playing games (8 GX and 8 nGX), and with or

without athletic or sport experience (8 A and 8 nA).

The age of the participants ranged from 10 to 14 years

(M = 12.1 years; SD = 1.29). Participants were

divided into four equal groups (GX/A; nGX/A;

GX/nA; nGX/nA). To balance sequence effects, eight

participants started the exergame session with the

FBMC, while eight participants started using the

Kinect® sensor. Each exergame setup was played

twice, every session took 10 minutes.

Before starting the sessions, participants were

briefly introduced to “Plunder Planet” and asked

questions about their personal preferences in gaming

and sports. After two completed runs with one

controller, participants were asked to fill in two

questionnaires; the “KidsGEQ” (Poels, Ijsselsteijn

and de Kort 2008) for their gameplay experiences,

and the “SPES” (Hartmann et al., 2015), concerning

their spatial presence experience. Additionally,

participants were asked to answer questions about

dual flow, enjoyment and motivation.

4.2 Preliminary Quantitative Results

So far, the feasibility study (Martin-Niedecken and

Götz, 2016) has helped us to quantitatively examine

and confirm the design of Plunder Planet. We

compared the effects of both controller variants on the

extent of gameplay experiences and the spatial

presence experience, which, as can be seen from the

literature, can both influence (dual) flow.

In summary, we found that participants with

former game experience (GX/A and GX/nA)

generally felt more spatially present in the game

while playing “Plunder Planet”. If they had additional

athletic experience (GX/A and nGX/A), they also

reported a slightly better feeling of spatial presence

when playing with the Kinect®. Participants with

former game experience (GX/A and GX/nA) tended

to rank most items of the KidsGEQ better than

participants without previous game experience. All

subjects reported better feelings of immersion and

competence playing with the FBMC. Flow was

ranked slightly better with the Kinect®. All

participants who experienced a great feeling of flow

and immersion also reported a greater feeling of

spatial presence. A narrow majority of subjects

experienced a better dual flow and enjoyment with

the FBMC while motivation was higher playing with

the Kinect.

Generally, all components of “Plunder Planet”

(the virtual adaptive game scenario, both controller

versions and the related body movements) were

valued very positively.

4.3 Qualitative Data Collection

In addition to the questionnaires on the player’s game

and spatial presence experience, we asked

participants to sketch their most memorable

perspectives from the “Plunder Planet” gameplay

with the FBMC and with the Kinect®. All test

subjects played both controller versions, and created

a simple illustration for each experience immediately

after each game session and before filling in the

questionnaires.

The approach of using children’s drawings for

qualitative evaluation and for gaining additional

insights into their world of feelings has been used

successfully in various social research studies (e.g.

Scheid, 2013). Drawings enable children to express

more than they could say with words.

4.4 Qualitative Results

The sketches were analyzed following the approach

of a qualitative analysis (similar to Mayring’s (2010)

qualitative content analysis) according to the three

categories of our theoretical framework: “body

space”, “controller space” and “in-game space”. The

sketches were analyzed independently by two

researchers (1 male and 1 female) with the aid of the

specifically developed system of categories described

above. The individual surveys were compared and in

case of a deviation they were discussed to reach a

common consensus. We were especially interested in

the degree of immersion and spatial presence

experience as a result of the use of the two controller

variants, and how, and towards what, the players

oriented themselves and their relating moving bodies

during play.

4.4.1 Most Memorable Spatial Perspective

In total, four players in the FBMC version felt

themselves wholly absorbed by the game scenario –

that is, in the “in-game space” – (Figure 4a) while

only one player felt the same in the Kinect® version

(Figure 4b). By “wholly absorbed” we mean that the

player takes the first-person perspective and looks

through the eyes of the avatar. According to Brown

and Crains (2004), this can be described as “total

immersion”. The majority of these players had

previous gaming experience.

Figure 4a (left), 4b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

Seven test subjects in the FBMC version (Figure 5a),

and eight in the Kinect® version (Figure 5b) sketched

their most memorable perspectives from the real

exercise space – that is, in the “body-controller

space”. This is comparable with Brown and Crains’

“engagement level” and describes a very external

point of view on the exergame setting. The majority

of these subjects had previous gaming experience

(GX/A and GX/nA).

Figure 5a (left), 5b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

Five FBMC- (Figure 6a), and seven Kinect®-players

(Figure 6b) sketched their most memorable

perspectives as a mixture of in-game, body and

controller space.

Figure 6a (left), 6b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

Participants drew their own body or position of their

body as well as elements and sequences from inside

the game (e.g. sandworms). At the same time, they

clearly differentiated between the real or physical

space and the virtual in-game space. This experience

is equivalent to the intermediary level between

“engagement” and “total immersion”, i.e.

“engrossment”. The test subjects had all either sport

or gaming experience (GX/A, GX/nA and nGX/A).

In summary, it appears that all players felt “engaged”,

the majority even “engrossed” or “totally immersed”.

With regard to “engagement” and “engrossment” the

assessments of both controller variants were largely

balanced and positive.

These results correspond to the results from the

analysis of the quantitative data. These also showed

largely positive results for both controllers with

respect to spatial experiences. On average, test

subjects with gaming experience (GX/A and GX/nA)

judged the FBMC to be slightly better than the

Kinect®, while those with athletic experience (GX/A

and nGx/A) found the Kinect® slightly more

immersive.

The only somewhat surprising result was that of

“total immersion” or “presence”. Here, many more

test subjects in the FBMC version were found to be in

the “in-game space” than in the Kinect® version. The

qualitative data would have suggested the opposite

tendency.

4.4.2 Spatial Orientation Strategies:

Body, Controller & In-Game Elements

We deepened our qualitative analysis of the 32

sketches by looking at the marked location of the

body, the controller and in-game elements, in order to

make some inferences about possible orientation

strategies of individual player/sports types.

Body. Four FBMC players (Figure 7a) and five

Kinect® players (Figure 7b) sketched their own

bodies in the real exercise space.

Figure 7a (left), 7b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

Four test subjects in the Kinect® version sketched the

virtual image of their own body, which was only

visible during the movement tutorial at the very

beginning of the game session and in the intermediate

tutorials (Figure 8a), whereas none of the subjects in

the FBMC version considered this a memorable

orientation point. In the Kinect® version (Figure 8b)

one test subject drew a mixture of the representations

of his/her body in virtual space and his/her body in

the real exercise space. Thus, according to the

sketches, the Kinect® version tends to provide the

more body-centered experience while playing

“Plunder Planet”.

Figure 8a (left), 8b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

Controller. Nine participants sketched the controller

in the real exercise space in the FBMC (Figure 9a),

and six participants in the Kinect® version (Figure

9b). Consequently, the FBMC seems to provide more

spatial and bodily guidance compared to the Kinect®.

This result is confirmed by the quantitative findings.

Figure 9a (left), 9b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and Kinect-

sketches.

In addition, two test subjects in the FBMC version

(Figure 10a) and three in the Kinect® version (Figure

10b) produced illustrations of not just real but also

virtual steering information.

Figure 10a (left), 10b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and

Kinect-sketches.

In-game Elements. Nine subjects sketched in-game

elements like obstacles and sandworms or steering

information in the FBMC version (Figure 11a), while

the majority of seven participants in the Kinect®

version drew the virtual image of their own body

which was only visible during the tutorial sequences

(Figure 11b). Thus, the FBMC seems to allow for a

better involvement of the player into the narrative

space of “Plun-der Planet”, whereas the Kinect®

version tends to facilitate the bodily focus.

Figure 11a (left), 11b (right): Exemplary FBMC- and

Kinect-sketches.

Generally, it is striking that the majority of test

subjects with gaming experience tended to spatially

orient themselves with elements in virtual space and

using the controller, while those with sporting

experience tended towards orienting themselves

using their own bodies and the controller. This may

be due to the subjects’ specific experiences: athletes

generally have well-developed body perception and,

depending on the type of sport, are also used to the

interaction between the body and some sporting

equipment. Classical gamers on the other hand are

more accustomed to orienting themselves to virtual

objects and to interacting with the accompanying

controller devices.

It is also interesting that despite the third-person

perspective, none of the participants sketched the

external view of the ship. This suggests that all

players who felt themselves partially or wholly

integrated into the “in-game space” identified

strongly with the avatar, and therefore apparently

assumed a first-person perspective. This thesis is

supported by the sketching of in-game obstacles and

sandworms from the first-person perspective as well

as statements of the participants regarding their

experience of being in the driver’s cab of the pirate

ship.

5 DISCUSSION

The additional qualitative evaluation of “Plunder

Planet” showed positive effects of all three design

parameters (“body space”, “controller space” and “in-

game space”) on the player’s space-related gameplay

experiences (especially on the three levels of

immersion). All design levels targeted specific

experiences and play strategies among the players

depending on their previous experience in gaming

and sports. Specific design elements like the

sandworms and the obstacles were very appealing to

players with previous gaming experience while

athletic players additionally strongly focused on their

body and body movements. In terms of future work,

this provides interesting departure points for specific

exergame developments for different player/sport

types. To deepen the holistic design approach it

would be revealing to evaluate the three design levels

in more detail (e.g. by experimenting with different

body movements triggering the same in-game task).

Furthermore, applying the qualitative method

within further user studies (with larger samples), in

combination with further qualitative methods (e.g.

guideline-based interviews and participatory

observation) and in closer relation to the analysis of

the quantitative data will help to fix and solidify it as

evaluation tool.

6 CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK

The explorative analysis of the sketches, against both

the theoretical approaches laid out in the first part of

this paper, and the scientifically based development

of “Plunder Planet”, allows additional, and

confirmatory insights into the (space-)perceptual

processes and levels in the gameplay of “Plunder

Planet”. The lessons learnt should be deepened and

developed further in future, and can contribute

significantly to the next stages of research and

development.

Figure 12: The new FBMC-setup allows for individual

adjustments of height, distance and position of the but-tons.

Based on the results of all the partial examinations,

the three relevant areas “body space”, “controller

space” and “in-game space” should in future be

further experimented with using various, holistic

design approaches and concepts. We are particularly

interested in the application and exploration of

targeted DGB mechanisms on all three levels, and

their impact on the (space-) perceptual processes and

experiences of players.

In the meantime, our FBMC-prototype has been

successfully developed further (Figure 12) and now

offers multiple topics for further exploration in the

area of spatial interaction and experience (e.g. (i)

dynamical adjustment of the position of the buttons

depending on the player’s heart rate and in-game

performance or (ii) predetermination of body

movements the player is allowed to perform in order

to control the game, depending on the player’s skill

level).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Koboldgames GmbH for the excellent

cooperation in the realization of the “Plunder Planet”

game scenario. We also thank Roman Jurt for the

expert further development of our FBMC as well as

Prof. Ulrich Götz and René Bauer for their generous

and expert support.

REFERENCES

Altimira, D., Mueller, F., Clarke, J., Lee, G., Billinghurst

M. and Bartneck C., 2016. Digitally Augmenting

Sports: An Opportunity for Exploring and

Understanding Novel Balancing Techniques. In

Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in

Computing Systems (CHI '16), ACM, New York, NY,

1681-1691.

Bianchi-Berthouze, N., 2013. Understanding the role of

body movement in player engagement. HCI, 28(1): 40-

75.

Blinka, L., 2008. The relationship of players to their avatars

in MMORPGs: differences between adolescents,

emerging adults and adults. Cyberpsychology: Journal

of psychosocial research on cyberspace, 2(1).

Brown, E. and Cairns, P., 2004. A grounded investigation

of game immersion. In Proceedings of the Conference

on Human Factors in Computer Systems 2004 (CHI EA

'04), ACM, New York, 1297–130.

Cardona, J., Cameirao, M., Paulino, T., i Badia, S., Rubio,

E. (2016) Modulation of Physiological Responses and

Activity Levels during Exergame Experiences. In

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on

Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications

(VS-Games), IEEE, 1-8.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., 1990. Flow. Harper Collins

Publishers, New York.

Dickey, M. D., 2005. Engaging by design: How

engagement strategies in popular computer and video

games can inform instructional design. Educational

Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 67-83.

Ermi, L. and Mäyrä, F., 2005. Fundamental components of

the gameplay experience: analysing immersion. In

Proceedings of the DiGRA Conference 2005

“Changing views: worlds in play”, 15-27.

Gerling, K. M., Miller, M., Mandryk, R. L., Birk, M. and

Smeddinck, J. D., 2014. Effects of Balancing for

Physical Abilities on Player Performance, Experience

and Self-esteem in Exergames. In Proceedings of the

SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing

Systems (CHI '14), ACM, New York, NY, 2201–2210.

Gibson, J. J., 1978. The ecological approach to the visual

perception of pictures. Leonardo, 11(3), 227-235.

Hartmann, T., Wirth, W., Schramm, H., Klimmt, C.,

Vorderer, P., Gysbers, A., Böcking, S., Ravaja, N.,

Laarni, J., Saari, T., Gouveia, F. and Sacau, A., 2015.

The Spatial Presence Experience Scale (SPES): A Short

Self-Report Measure for Diverse Media Settings.

Journal of Media Psychology 1, 1: 1-15.

Ijsselsteijn, W., de Kort, Y., Poels, K., Jurgelionis, A. and

Bellotti, F., 2007. Characterising and measuring user

experiences in digital games. In Proceedings of the

International conference on advances in computer

entertainment technology (ACE '07), 27-30.

Jenkins, H. 2004. Game design as narrative. Computer,

44, 53.

Kim, S. Y. S., Prestopnik, N. and Biocca, F. A., 2014. Body

in the interactive game: How interface embodiment

affects physical activity and health behavior change.

Computers in Human Behavior 36: 376-384.

Martin, A. L. and Wiemeyer, J., 2012. Technology-

Mediated Experience of Space while Playing Digital

Sports Games. International Journal of Computer

Science in Sport (International Association of

Computer Science in Sport), 11(1).

Martin-Niedecken, A.L. and Götz, U., 2016. Design and

Evaluation of a Dynamically Adaptive Fitness Game

Environment for Children and Young Adolescents. In

Proceedings of the Annual Symposium on Computer-

Human Interaction in Play (CHI PLAY '16), ACM,

New York, NY, 205-212.

Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative inhaltsanalyse. Handbuch

qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie, 601-613.

McMahan, A., 2003. Immersion, engagement and presence:

a method for analyzing 3-D videogames. In M.J.P.

Wolf and B. Perron (Eds.) The video game theory

reader. Routledge, New York, 67-86.

Mueller, F., Vetere, F., Gibbs, M., Edge, D., Agamanolis,

S., Sheridan, J. and Heer, J., 2012. Balancing exertion

experiences. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference

on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '12),

1853-1862.

Mueller, F., Edge, D., Vetere, F., Gibbs, M.R., Agamanolis,

S., Bongers, B. and Sheridan, J.G., 2011. Designing

sports: a framework for exertion games. In Proceedings

of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in

Computing Systems, ACM, New York, NY,

Nakatsu, R., Rauterberg, M. and Vorderer, P., 2005. A new

framework for entertainment computing: from passive

to active experience. In Proceedings of 4th

International Conference on Entertainment Computing

(ICEC 2005), 1–12.

Nijhar, J., Bianchi-Berthouze, N. and Boguslawski, G.,

2011. Does movement recognition precision affect the

player experience in exertion games? In Camurri A.,

Costa C. (eds.) INTETAIN 2011. LNICST, Vol. 78,

Springer, Heidelberg, pp 73-82. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-

642-30214-5_9

Nitsche, M., 2008. Video game spaces: image, play, and

structure in 3D worlds. MIT Press.

Pasch, M., Bianchi-Berthouze, N., van Dijk, B. and Nijholt.

A., 2009. Movement-based sports video games:

Investigating motivation and gaming experience. Enter

Comp, 1(2): 49-61.

Poels, K., Ijsselsteijn, W. and de Kort, Y., 2008.

Development of the kids game experience

questionnaire. In Proceedings of the Meaningful Play

Conference (Meaningful Play '08).

Scheid, C. (2013). Eine Erkundung zur Methodologie

sozialwissenschaftlicher Analysen von gezeichneten

und gemalten Bildern anhand der Analyse zweier

Kinderzeichnungen. In Forum Qualitative Sozial-

forschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 14 (1).

Shafer, D.M., Carbonara, C.P. and Popova, L., 2014.

Controller required? The impact of natural mapping on

interactivity, realism, presence, and enjoyment in

motion-based video games. Presence, 23(3), 267-286.

Shiffrin, R.M. and Schneider, W., 1977. Controlled and

automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual

learning, automatic attending and a general theory.

Psychological review

, 84(2), 127.

Sinclair, J., Hingston, P. and Masek, M., 2007.

Considerations for the design of exergames. In

Proceedings of the 5th international conference on

Computer graphics and interactive techniques in

Australia and Southeast Asia (GRAPHITE '07),

289-295.

Sweetser, P. & Wyeth, P., 2005. GameFlow: a model for

evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in

Entertainment 3, 3: 3-3.

Takatalo, J., Häkkinen, J. and Nyman, G., 2015.

Understanding Presence, Involvement, and Flow in

Digital Games. In R. Bernhaupt (Ed.) Game User

Experience Evaluation, Springer International

Publishing, 87-111.

Vara, M. D., Baños, R. M., Rasal, P., Rodríguez, A., Rey,

B., Wrzesien, B. M. and Alcañiz, M., 2016. A game for

emotional regulation in adolescents: The (body)

interface device matters. Computers in Human

Behavior, Vol. 57, 267-273.

Weibel, D. & Wissmath, B., 2011. Immersion in computer

games: The role of spatial presence and flow.

International Journal of Computer Games Technology,

Article No. 6: 1-14.

Wertheimer, M. 1985. Über Gestalttheorie. Gestalt Theory,

7 (2), 99-120.