Search for: All records

While normative – “good” – game design and user experiences have been established, we look to games that challenge those notions. Intentional frustration and failure can be worthwhile. Through a reflexive thematic analysis of 31 games we identify how intentionally non-normative design choices lead to meaningful experiences. Working within the established Mechanics Dynamics Aesthetics (MDA) Game Design Framework, we lay out themes to design Shitty User Experiences (SUX). We contribute SUX MDA themes for designers and researchers to counter the status quo and identify new forms of play and interaction. 

We consider mobile maps, the everyday smart-device-based programs that locate the user, provide insights into local space, and support wayfinding – or do they? The authors collectively reflect on past infuriating experiences with failures of mobile maps as pedestrians. We synthesise these thick descriptions, what we call reflective auto-aggro-ethnographies, to identify shortcomings in mobile maps: hidden verticality, missing local detail, incorrect sensor data, and poor pathing. We turn to human-centred design to point out how these shortcomings should be (or, rather, should have been) addressed. 

At times, the interfaces of videogames – gameworlds – contain tiny details that go unnoticed. One such detail is how designers employ ! and ? to communicate to players. These punctuation marks have existed in videogames since their creation, yet remain undiscussed by designers. They are used as ways to promote curiosity, as objects, as ways to symbolize excitement, and as a prompt to react. Their varied history is deserving of attention, so we present a chronicle of two pieces of gameworld punctuation: ! and ?. We discuss current and past uses and identify more ways that these could be used in the future. These symbols may present a useful space of inquiry not only for games and games research, but more generally, in terms of the rapid communication of complex information. 

At times, the interfaces of videogames -- gameworlds -- contain tiny details that go unnoticed. One such detail is how designers employ ! and ? to communicate to players. These punctuation marks have existed in videogames since their creation, yet remain undiscussed by designers. They are used as ways to promote curiosity, as objects, as ways to symbolize excitement, and as a prompt to react. Their varied history is deserving of attention, so we present a chronicle of two pieces of gameworld punctuation: ! and ?. We discuss current and past uses and identify more ways that these could be used in the future. These symbols may present a useful space of inquiry not only for games and games research, but more generally, in terms of the rapid communication of complex information. 

Emergency Management (EM) is experiencing a crisis of technology as technologists have attempted to innovate standard operating procedures with minimal input from EM. Unsurprisingly, there has yet to be a success. Instead, technologists have focused on consumer culture and fostered a slow-moving crisis as the gap between what consumers and EM can do is deep. At present, the most ubiquitous aspect of technology in disaster is its capacity to exacerbate response, create new kinds of disaster, and create consumer expectations that EM cannot meet. In the present work, we highlight how and why technological production needs to shift its ontological premises dramatically to meet the needs of technology for first responders. From supporting practice to taking a few steps back from the bleeding edge, we offer a range of suggestions based on the technological capacities of emergency management in the present and in the future. 

Emergency Management (EM) is experiencing a crisis of technology as technologists have attempted to innovate standard operating procedures with minimal input from EM. Unsurprisingly, there has yet to be a success. Instead, technologists have focused on consumer culture and fostered a slow-moving crisis as the gap between what consumers and EM can do is deep. At present, the most ubiquitous aspect of technology in disaster is its capacity to exacerbate response, create new kinds of disaster, and create consumer expectations that EM cannot meet. In the present work, we highlight how and why technological production needs to shift its ontological premises dramatically to meet the needs of technology for first responders. From supporting practice to taking a few steps back from the bleeding edge, we offer a range of suggestions based on the technological capacities of emergency management in the present and in the future. 

Emergency Management (EM) is experiencing a crisis of technology as technologists have attempted to innovate standard operating procedures with minimal input from EM. Unsurprisingly, there has yet to be a success. Instead, technologists have focused on consumer culture and fostered a slow-moving crisis as the gap between what consumers and EM can do is deep. At present, the most ubiquitous aspect of technology in disaster is its capacity to exacerbate response, create new kinds of disaster, and create consumer expectations that EM cannot meet. In the present work, we highlight how and why technological production needs to shift its ontological premises dramatically to meet the needs of technology for first responders. From supporting practice to taking a few steps back from the bleeding edge, we offer a range of suggestions based on the technological capacities of emergency management in the present and in the future. 

For many years, CI has tried to show the value of computational techniques for response to hazard events but has yet to see success outside of post-hoc analyses. Meanwhile, emergency management (EM) has been struggling to cope with the impact of computation. This duality wherein we know technology can be useful yet also complicates EM (and has not yet been fully integrated into EM) is what we dub the technology crisis in EM. To begin to address this crisis and revitalize CI, we argue that it is necessary to develop an inventory of what technologies EM is competent with and to design training that can extend that competency. This research reports a survey of EM Practitioners in the United States. We offer one of the first inventories of EM technologies and technological skills and identify how current EM technological integration issues are a crisis. 

For many years, CI has tried to show the value of computational techniques for response to hazard events but has yet to see success outside of post-hoc analyses. Meanwhile, emergency management (EM) has been struggling to cope with the impact of computation. This duality wherein we know technology can be useful yet also complicates EM (and has not yet been fully integrated into EM) is what we dub the technology crisis in EM. To begin to address this crisis and revitalize CI, we argue that it is necessary to develop an inventory of what technologies EM is competent with and to design training that can extend that competency. This research reports a survey of EM Practitioners in the United States. We offer one of the first inventories of EM technologies and technological skills and identify how current EM technological integration issues are a crisis. 

In the midst of a disaster event like a hurricane, all electrical, connected objects are typically rendered useless. A lack of connectivity, electricity, and potential mobility issues render devices (and sometimes users) unable to perform their basic functions. The potential for the sheer volume of these devices, of the apps installed on them, are as such that they are an unused canvas of design. We present extensible design, the activity of designing new uses for existing applications that may possess functionality that is useful outside of its intended function. We present a description of extensible design and provide a fictional example of what that approach may provide. In so doing, we help address existing gaps between emergency management and consumer-based communication behaviors during disaster. The “Decentralized Layer,” an extension of location-based games like Pok´emon Go, Pikmin Bloom, and Harry Potter: Wizard’s Unite, is meant to provoke discussion about the potential use of apps and the app ecosystem past its current, limited expression. We conclude by offering next steps, road blocks, and additional considerations for extensible design that will need to be in order for it to be realized.