Search

Game design is a trending multi-million business with an accompanying large body of research with almost 80.000 publications on Scopus. Based on serious games we and our students have created over the years we identified 4 different types of approaches to serious game design. In the current paper we present 4 exemplary games spanning two main game design approaches: a goal-oriented or context focused approach, and a more entertainment-oriented approach. Secondly, we looked at the technology was used in the game (e.g. either board or more oriented at computer games). Based on a structured literature search we furthermore made a selection of 7 papers on which the framework was mapped. In the seminal work we see a similar distinction in game design approaches emerging. In addition, we see opportunities for a more hybrid way of designing serious games. We see opportunities for a better mix of the goal-oriented and entertainmentoriented in order to reach a broader target audience. This paper adds a relevant view for the manner in which the field approaches the design of serious games. It allows to reflect on the merits of a more entertainment-oriented versus a more goal-oriented approach (e.g. a structured need-driven HCI approach). We postulate that this could have an impact on the way we educate and also how we can approach commercial projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this position paper we share our view on learning sport specific movements using interactive technology. We build upon our experience with playful and embodied technology for HCI, and link our views to related work from a sportrelated and non-sport related view. Aiming to bring these together in new future research on learning sport specific movement, this brings us to address our view on five main points in this paper. One, as the most obvious, the end-user should give input as often as fitting. Two, within this new domain there are different types of contributions focusing on technology, interaction, and context, where each brings its own benefits. Three, to make use of the power of entertainment computing (e.g., gamification) entails more than just "adding points as rewards". Four, one can view new technology in relation to the trainer, ranging from a tool in the hands of the active trainer to a 24/7 available independent "stand-in" for a trainer (being configured and controlled by the trainer); this relation should be taken into account in design and research. Five, technology can of course solve problems (while leaving the core of sports training unchanged), but in order to really transform the domain and fundamentally change sports training practice we need to consider that "potential for change" is different from "actually achieving a useful system in-context"; how technology fits the real world and what it actually benefits is not known beforehand. We conclude the paper with an outlook on our research and design activities in the near future, through educational projects as well as research projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]