Interactive Prototype III Concept Idea/Experiment/Plan B.

For this prototype, I have decided to make a feature addition into my current prototype. The plan for interactive prototype III is to implement the beer pong technique game into the current game mash up of tic-tac-toe and minesweeper. The reason why this idea came up was to make the game more of a skill based and strategy as well instead of a chance/luck game. Naturally with this idea, the game will also last longer as it is harder to place a mark now rather than just choosing tiles in the previous prototypes.

The idea:

figure on the Left: 16 cups; figure on the right: one cup with three wires
*Three wires are horizontal, vertical wire and ground wire. 

There will be 16 cups in fixed positions and each of them with similar set up to the figure on the right. Players will now get to use a ball (either a ping pong ball or rubber or squash ball) and bounce it over from an acceptable distance towards the 16 cups. Logically, if the ball lands on either one of the cup, the player's mark will appear in the game.

Set Up Experiment/Trial Run:

To set this up for a trial run, I aligned the three wires in such a way that when the ball lands into the cup, the ball will make contact with all three wires and make the connection.

How i set up the wires for this trial run. 2 vertical and one horizontal beneath it to hold the ball together in place.
(click image to enlarge)

Ping pong ball with water used and tested.
(click image to enlarge)

Experiment Discovery
1. A ping pong ball doesn't work even if it is dipped into the water before it being bounced into the cup. This is because when it is bounced, the water that is around the ball will not make a good connection and hence, resulting a high chance of no connection being made.

2. A ball of plasticine (playdoh) works. From the .gif file on the left, I used a  red playdoh to test out the connection of three wires in the cup and it worked perfectly fine. The only problem was that a playdoh obviously cannot bounce and the game idea could not work with a playdoh.

Plan B:

From the figure above, I've added water to this same game concept. So this time, when the ball bounces into the cup, the 'grounded' water will be displaced and will touch the vertical and horizontal wire which will make the connection. I've decided to use a squash ball instead of ping pong balls as they have similar sizes to the ping pong ball but have more weight on it, making it easier to displace water in the cup. So yeap, i will have 16 cups of this which will correspond to each tile in the game!! (:

Progress- Setting up:

The .gif below shows a trial run i did to make sure this technique will work. This trial was done before setting up all the 16 cups in place. From the .gif below, it is seen that when the ball enters the cup, it displaces the water, making a connection; landing a mark in the game.

 I used 'Mighty Tac' glue to put together the cups and a solid cardboard as a base. The reason why the cups need to be glued was because the cups could fall over when the ball is being tossed at it, which is something we all dont want to happen.

Picture below shows the overall set up of the 4x4 grid 16 cups glue to the cardboard.

The COMPLETE Setup:

Picture below shows the complete set up of my new physical prototype.

Keys A, S, D and F mapped onto my surface pro trough MakeyMakey.

Two ground wires are put onto the cardboard which are then branched out into many wires that connects to all the 16 cups. Ground wires are always touching the water which makes the water itself grounded (earth).

Here's a demonstration video i made for this prototype

Thank you for visiting my blog! (:

Week 12 Contact (Revisit Definition of a Prototype)

For the last contact exercise, we have been asked to revisit the definition of prototype that we once did before back in Week 1.

Referring to week 1, i now realised that there are so many other forms of prototype than just  labeling them all into digital and physical prototypes. I've learnt many types of prototypes that i've learnt, especially lo-fi and hi-fi and even from horizontal to vertical to diagonal prototypes.

I (in week 1) defined Prototype as a test product after a basic idea is formed. I would like improve this definition. Prototype is actually a form of design iteration that users use to test the products after an idea is formed. Further and more Hi-fi prototypes are developed after each testing and feedack received to further improve the product.

i have also learnt and experienced that constructive feedback and also testing of the prototype is very important to further improve the idea. Without constructive feedback from other users, you are only constrained by what you think of the product. But when users start to test it, they will sometimes see it in a different angle and give you feedback that you couldn't think of, which was very important in my game mash-up prototype of minesweeper and tic-tac-toe.

Interactive Prototype II Testing, Evaluation and Interview

So, in Prac B several people including a tutor tested out the product. And along the way i interviewed them with these questions which are from my SOD. Each questions will have the answers of the users and also a reflection from my point of view.

a) Is there any problem with the interactivity of the physical board when the game is being played? If yes, any suggestion to improve on the concept/idea of the physical inputs?
- I didn't encounter any problems with the interactivity, it seemed fine to me.
- I did have trouble pressing the playdoh as different marks appeared on the computer. but that was easily solved when a small error was found out (some makeymakey connections were touching when they are not supposed to touch with each other).
- No problems at all. very good and easy and understandable interactivity.
- No, I think it works fine
- I don't have any problems at all, the controls are incredibly intuitive.

Reflection:
It was pretty surprising to me that nobody had problems with pressing the playdoh-made buttons except for one where the makeymakey connection was touching which caused a problem. It seems that most users who tested the game was not very rough at the game. Many pressed gently and nicely instead of smashing the buttons. eg. Smashing a particular button really hard may cause another button to appear on the game. But with the middle wires having smaller playdoh buttons compared to the side ones, it was proved that the problem was rectified.

b) What do you think of the current method of connecting the ground wire to the body using wristbands as finger ring holders? What about methods such as using sponge as a ground/ selector and also making an area on the physical board as ground connection?
 - I would like it if it could be done without having the user connected to ground, but I don't mind the way it is now.
- putting the ground on the board works well too, as users will free up their hand. with this then each time a user makes a move, he need to touch the 'ground area'. 
- I don't have a problem with the player being the ground, although You could maybe make the ground between the  two wires you want to connect, so that when you push down, all 3 connect at the same time.
- Using a potato would be better! 
- I would prefer if players didn't have to hold onto anything when they played. If a more convenient way for the cables to ground could be found it'd be a perfect interaction. I'd suggest a common grounding layer on the bottom.

Reflection:

Some users preferred the ground not to be connected to the user, but still feels that the current method works well. During the testing session, instead of using wristbands as ring holders to users' fingers, i brought potatoes in and connected the ground to it (see figure above). users will then instead hold the potato while the other free hand presses the buttons to play the game. i realized that potatoes were really good conductors as ground compared to sticking. Some users said holding potatoes does actually give them more freedom as they could put down the potato whenever it wasn't their turn. 

c) Is there a better way to make sure the floating wires are always tight and not becoming loose over time? Does putting a separator in between the buttons help?
- I think the way you have it currently works well
- A separator could work, you could also try attaching springs to the sides of wires to let them go back into place.
- the same one works fine. Dont see the need to why a separator is needed.
- Smaller more flexible cables could be used to control cable tension for each button precisely. 

Reflection:

As I received feedback upon this question, I realised I had alot of extra unused sponges from daiso, which worked really well as separators. Although most of the users who tested the prototype said that it is fine as it is, I think after having these sponges as separators, there would not be any wrong marks appearing on the screen would happen anymore.

d) What do you think of the freedom given to choose how the scoring system works? It is better than providing all the rules to the players?
- I think it works quite well for the way the game is played, due to how casual and locally it is played.

- It certainly allows for many variations of the game to appear

- Very good for players to just want to play casually.
- I like the freedom given to players. But in the standards of almost all computer games, the rules should probably be set.

Reflection:
Based on the feedback that I got, majority of the users agreed that giving the complete freedom to the players to set their own rules are good enough to match the game. a particular user said that as there are no exact rules to playing, players could just play the game until eventually one of them just gives up as the score may go up to 11-1 or 11-0.  So, i've decided that the gameplay will remain the same with no specific rules to the scoring system.

e) Any other suggestions that could improve the gameplay of the physical interaction?

- As I've said before, some way of detecting the mines beforehand would be very useful for making the game less luck-based
- I think to improve the interaction, a smaller controller should be made, with no playdoh involved, perhaps foil instead to stop inconsistency.

Reflection:
I do agree that the game is quite luck-based. So with the upcoming interactive prototype III, I will make increase the interactivity of the game with something more interesting. What i will aim for is to decrease the luck/chance based game into a more strategic and skilled game play.

OVERALL REFLECTION AND PROTOTYPE III PLAN:
All in all, i think I received quite a good response from the testing of this prototype. I believe that there are alot more improvements that I can make especially making the game less chance based and use another sort of button reactions. STAY TUNED FOR PROTOTYPE III! I plan to use the same game concept but this time implement beer pong into the game! (:

Week 11 Contact Class Exercise

Imagine a Theremin Duet or orchestra. Generate concepts for consistently reproducing & representing 3D movement in space that allows a musical composition to be accurately played on a Theremin. 

1. Using a Wii Remote or a Kinect Sensor or even a PS Camera to detect motions on both right and left hands. There should also be a monitor that constantly displays the positions of both hands at a suitable frame rate (24fps). With the monitor, user could track the amount of pitch and depth of the sound easily and hence make music out of the Theremin instrument!

2. Two strings method; one horizontally and the other vertically. These strings have sensors that can calculate the length/distance of an item, or solid rock on it that could be made as a controller. In each of the strings, there will be a node that acts like a controller. User moves these two nodes within the two strings and the position of it will be detected, hence a theremin instrument can be created.

3. Use two infrared sensors. These two sensors will detect the user's hand movements. one moving up and down and the other move away or close to the sensor. A theremin instrument is created here.

Pugh Matrix to compare concepts. What criteria important to measure against?

Week 10 Contact Exercise

The Restaurant Dining Experience
What is the existing experience? From different
stakeholder P.O.V.?
A customer's point of view:
1. I (the customer) walk in. I get greeted and asked by the waiter how many seats do i need.
2. I'm walked into my table. And menus were given to me by the waiter.
3. We (my significant other and I) took our time to choose the food to order.
4. I called for the waiter's assistance and with their help we ordered our food.
5. Then we wait for the food to be served to us.
6. We finish eating and ask for the bill from the waiter.

A waiter's point of view:
1. I (the waiter) greet new customers that walk in. Ask for how many seats do they need and ask them to wait if there are no current available seats. If not, I'd walk them into their seats.
2. I pass the menus to the customers.
3. I wait and give the customers some time to decide on the food. I approach them if they ask for me or after 10 minutes of wait.
4. I pass the order to the kitchen team where they will take care of the cooking part.
5. I take the cooked food and present it to the customer.
6. Coming up with the bill and handing it to the customer.
7. settle the payments and pass small titbits/ goodies to customer. and say thanks with gratitude.


What external/internal factors impact on the experience?
- on a specific day, how many waiters are working in the restaurant and with this same exact number of workers, how many people do they serve in an hour in the same day.

- another factor that can impact the experience is during rush/peek hours of the restaurants, say 12pm or 7pm where there will be many customers in the restaurant.

What aspects of the existing experience could be
enhanced/augmented/supported with technology?
- one way to improve the experience of ordering food is to provide a touchscreen tablet such as an ipad or note 8.0 with a dedicated app for customers to order food. Many modern resaturants such as sushi restaurants are already using this technology. it saves time and saves cost as they dont have to hire many waiters, although alot of of cost have to be spent on the tablets and the maintenance of it.

- another technology could be having the eptfos/debit card payment machine in every table, so customers would not have to waste their time lining up at the counter to pay the bill.

How would introducing technology in to this context
change the experience?
- it helps waiters especially during peek hours. customers could just order anytime they want without waiting for the waiter to come and take their orders.
- save cost by not having to hire alot of waiters, but only hire minimum waiters to serve food/drinks to customers.
- there would not be any mistakes in transmitting the order to the cooks in the kitchen as human transferring orders manually can randomly miss an order which could frustrate the customer.
- customers could also track the cooking status of their ordered food with the tablet.
- printing of menus are not needed as well.

What experience scenarios might you test with the
technology?
during peek hours such as 12pm lunchtime, the tablets will all be used in each table. customers would use the technology. Keep another corner of the room and allow that corner to use the traditional printed menus and using the waiters to take orders. Compare both the time it took for the food to be served to the customers since it was ordered, either through the tablet or through the waiters.

a picture of a customer ordering food in a sushi restaurant in Malaysia called Sakae Sushi that implements this technique.

image source: here! (:

Interactive Prototype II (Concept, Progression, Outcome and VIDEO Demonstration!

Concept and Idea for Interactive prototype II

image 1

The screenshot above is the plan that i had, to originally have 4 horizontal and 4 vertical wires that intersect with each other so when each time the buttons are pressed, the corresponding coordinate in the game will light up as a mark. So the idea is to have keys a,s,d,f mapped to the horizontal wires and also arrow keys left, up, down and right connected to the vertical wires. When a button is pressed, say the top left corner, the makey makey will read it as coordinate (a, left arrow).

Image 2

For image 2, it is a 3d view of the physical buttons that i came to think about, which are two horizontal wires that intersect with each other and once the button is pushed, button is connected to the ground and a full circuit connection is made with MakeyMakey.

PROGRESSION/PLAN

Image 3 - Electrical wires i found from Repco. and using a blade, insulators of the wires were cut in the middle. This is to make sure the connection occurs when buttons is pressed or touched. 

Image 4 - four vertical wires and also one of the four horizontal wires that is intersecting with the vertical wires.

 Image 5- using playdoh as buttons

BUT WAIT THIS PLAN DOESN'T WORK! As I connected all of the board to the MakeyMakey, it was obvious that it would not work, this is because as all the 4 horizontal and 4 vertical wires are constantly connected, this means that each time one button is pressed, the MakeyMakey recognizes it as all buttons at once (a,s,d,f, up, down, left and right), as all buttons are connected/intersected with each other all the time. Then what to do now??!!

PLAN B

Instead of having all these wires intersect with each other all the time, I made it in such a way that it only intersects when the buttons (playdoh) are touched.

See pictures below and you'll understand more!

 Image 6 - So with this new plan, the horizontal wires are on the base of the board, and the vertical ones are floating.

 Image 7 - Playdohs are added as buttons to the vertical floating wires. So, when these playdohs are pressed, it will touch the base wire and make an intersection, not forgetting that the ground will be connected to the user.







Image 8- image below: close up of the playdoh/buttons on the wires. there are four buttons in each wire, the buttons on the sides are bigger as it is harder for it to be pressed, compared to the middle buttons which are easier.

image 9 - connection of the wires to the MakeyMakey.

OUTCOME

Image 10 - the complete set up!

Referring to image 10, on the top right would be my surface (connected to the MakeyMakey) where i run the game, and the middle would be the physical board itself. At the bottom right, there are two wristbands green and red in colour; these two wristbands are used as ground connected to users. Users easily just slide the wristband into any of their finger.

Video Demonstration

Thank you for going through this long blog post! (: