Advertisement

Microbial Integration on Player Experience of Hybrid Bio-digital Games

  • Raphael KimEmail author
  • Siobhan Thomas
  • Roland van Dierendonck
  • Antonios Kaniadakis
  • Stefan Poslad
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 273)

Abstract

Hybrid bio-digital games physically integrate non-human, living organisms into computer gaming hardware and software. Whilst such type of game can add novelty value, the positive impact of the added biological element on player experience has not yet been verified quantitatively. We conducted a study involving two groups of 20 participants, to compare player experiences of two versions of a video game called Mould Rush, which relies on the growth patterns of micro-organisms commonly known as ‘mould’. Results from self-reporting Game Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) showed that the group who played the version of Mould Rush that integrated real mould, had produced significantly higher mean GEQ scores (p < .001) on the following dimensions: Positive Affect; Sensory and Imaginative Immersion; Positive Experience; and Returning to Reality. Furthermore, results from participant interviews indicated that the slowness of mould growth was enjoyed by those who played real-mould-integrated version of Mould Rush. Contrastingly, the slowness was perceived as a negative feature for those who played the game without integrated mould. We discuss the implications and limitations of all of our findings.

Keywords

Hybrid gaming Microbial integration Bio-digital interaction 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by EPSRC and AHRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Media and Arts Technology (EP/L01632X/1).

References

  1. 1.
    Riedel-Kruse, I.H., Chung, A.M., Dura, B., Hamilton, A.L., Lee, B.C.: Design, engineering and utility of biotic games. Lab Chip 11(1), 14–22 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1039/C0LC00399ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Database: Hybrid Biological Digital Games. https://biodigitalgames.com/database/
  3. 3.
    Jabr, F.: How brainless slime molds redefine intelligence. Nat. News. (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2012.11811
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Gerber, L.C., Kim, H., Riedel-Kruse, I.H.: Interactive biotechnology: design rules for integrating biological matter into digital games. In: DiGRA/FDG (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim, R., Thomas, S., van Dierendonck, R., Poslad, S.: A new mould rush: designing for a slow bio-digital game driven by living micro-organisms. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG 2018) (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3235765.3235798
  7. 7.
    van Eck, W., Lamers, M.H.: Biological content generation: evolving game terrains through living organisms. In: Johnson, C., Carballal, A., Correia, J. (eds.) EvoMUSART 2015. LNCS, vol. 9027, pp. 224–235. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16498-4_20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hossain, Z., et al.: Interactive cloud experimentation for biology: an online education case study. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702354
  9. 9.
    Lee, S.A., et al.: Trap it!: a playful human-biology interaction for a museum installation. In: Proceedings of 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702220
  10. 10.
    Kim, H., et al.: LudusScope: accessible interactive smartphone microscopy for life-science education. PLoS One 11(10), e0162602 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Eck, W., Lamers, M.H.: Player expectations of animal incorporated computer games. In: Chisik, Y., Holopainen, J., Khaled, R., Luis Silva, J., Alexandra Silva, P. (eds.) INTETAIN 2017. LNICST, vol. 215, pp. 1–15. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73062-2_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weibel, D., Wissmath, B., Habegger, S., Steiner, Y., Groner, R.: Playing online games against computer-vs. human-controlled opponents: effects on presence, flow, and enjoyment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 24(5), 2274–2291 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.11.002
  13. 13.
    IJsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., Poels, K.: The Game Experience Questionnaire. Technische Universiteit, Eindhoven (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harvey, H., Havard, M., Magnus, D., Cho, M.K., Riedel-Kruse, I.H.: Innocent fun or ‘microslavery’? Hastings Cent. Rep. 44(6), 38–46 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang, W., Nielson, D.R.: Synthetic biology applications in industrial microbiology. Front. Microbiol. 5 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00451
  16. 16.
    Adli, M.: The CRISPR tool kit for genome editing and beyond. Nat. Commun. 9, 1911 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Poslad, S.: Ubiquitous Computing: Smart Devices, Environments and Interactions. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Charlton, P., Poslad, S.: A sharable wearable maker community IoT application. In: 12th International Conference on Intelligent Environments, IE 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Poslad, S., Ma, A., Wang, Z., Mei, H.: Using a smart city IoT to incentivise and target shifts in mobility behaviour – is it a piece of pie? Sensors 15(6), 13069–13096 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raphael Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  • Siobhan Thomas
    • 2
  • Roland van Dierendonck
    • 3
  • Antonios Kaniadakis
    • 1
  • Stefan Poslad
    • 1
  1. 1.Queen Mary UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.London South Bank UniversityLondonUK
  3. 3.Studio Roland van DierendonckAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations