Exploring Help Facilities in Game-Making Software

AI-generated keywords: Game-making software Help facilities Interactive Help Video Help User experience

AI-generated Key Points

  • A study compared six different help facility conditions in game-making software: Text Help, Interactive Help, Intelligent Agent Help, Video Help, All Help, and No Help.
  • Interactive Help had the greatest positive impact on measures such as time spent, controls learnability, learning motivation, total editor activity, and game level quality.
  • Video Help closely followed in effectiveness across these same measures.
  • Having some form of help facility was always more beneficial than having no help at all.
  • Giving users the choice of help facilities led to worse outcomes compared to providing one effective option like Interactive Help or Video Help.
  • The study suggested involving experienced game developers in future experiments for further insights into the effects of help facilities on experts.
  • Longitudinal studies were recommended to determine if certain types of help become more effective over time and for different levels of experience.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Dominic Kao

License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Help facilities have been crucial in helping users learn about software for decades. But despite widespread prevalence of game engines and game editors that ship with many of today's most popular games, there is a lack of empirical evidence on how help facilities impact game-making. For instance, certain types of help facilities may help users more than others. To better understand help facilities, we created game-making software that allowed us to systematically vary the type of help available. We then ran a study of 1646 participants that compared six help facility conditions: 1) Text Help, 2) Interactive Help, 3) Intelligent Agent Help, 4) Video Help, 5) All Help, and 6) No Help. Each participant created their own first-person shooter game level using our game-making software with a randomly assigned help facility condition. Results indicate that Interactive Help has a greater positive impact on time spent, controls learnability, learning motivation, total editor activity, and game level quality. Video Help is a close second across these same measures.

Submitted to arXiv on 05 Jun. 2020

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2006.03519v1

A study exploring the impact of help facilities on game-making software compared six different conditions: Text Help, Interactive Help, Intelligent Agent Help, Video Help, All Help, and No Help. A total of 1646 participants were involved in creating their own first-person shooter game level using the software with a randomly assigned help facility condition. The results showed that Interactive Help had the greatest positive impact on measures such as time spent, controls learnability, learning motivation, total editor activity, and game level quality. Video Help closely followed in effectiveness across these same measures. Interestingly, the cost/ease of development was not analyzed in this study but may explain why Text Help is prevalent in game-making software. Despite this finding, having some form of help facility was always more beneficial than having no help at all. It was also noted that giving users the choice of help facilities led to worse outcomes compared to providing one effective option such as Interactive Help or Video Help. The study acknowledged limitations such as using Amazon Mechanical Turk for participant recruitment and suggested involving experienced game developers in future experiments for further insights into the effects of help facilities on experts. Longitudinal studies were also recommended to determine if certain types of help become more effective over time and for different levels of experience. Overall, in game-making software is crucial to enhance user experience and productivity.
Created on 16 Sep. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.