Author:

Abstract:

Since the release of the Nintendo Wii console in November 2006, we have witnessed its success, mainly attributed to its innovative Wii remote. This wireless controller can be used as a handheld pointing device that senses motion. Players do not need to familiarize themselves with buttons or button combinations in order to execute actions in a game. Instead, a motion by a player can be mapped directly onto an in-game action, allowing ‘motion-based play’. Nintendo’s Wii remote resulted not only in providing a new player experience for existing gamers, it also managed to broaden its market demographically, and fostered a wider adoption of gaming by previously non-gaming audiences. Not surprisingly, competitors have followed. Recently, we have witnessed the introduction of motion-based controllers by competitors. PlayStation has launched the PlayStation Move on September 2010. Microsoft launched the Kinect on November 2010. Clearly, motion-based play is here to stay. Notwithstanding the popularity of motion-based play, not all game lovers are equally positive. Several forums run active ‘Wii bashing’ topics and sarcastic gamers put out spoof trailers and parodies of Wii games, testifying to the frustration of some gamers. These forum posts and parodies suggest that despite the popularity of motion-based play, it cannot provide the benefits that certain gamers seek in digital games. Clearly, the appeal of motion-based play is neither universal nor invariant. In this study, we investigated the appeal of motion-based play: “How does it impact the player experience and why do players choose (or not) for motion-based play, rather than for other types of play?”.In order to investigate the motives for motion-based play, we employed both qualitative and quantitative research methods, conceptually related to Means-End theory. Our multi-method approach allowed us to investigate the attributes of motion-based play (i.e., features such as the visibility of player movements and the naturalness of the interaction) and link them to the psycho-social consequences that players seek in motion-based play (i.e., benefits such as an enhanced immersion into the virtual world or more social fun amongst players). Therefore, we investigated and observed motion-based play at the home of Wii players via observations and depth-interviews , via questionnaires submitted on a larger scale, as well as via an experimental research design , comparing playing via a motion-based controller to playing with a classic controller. Finally, we interviewed players to understand how attributes link to gratifications (i.e., means-end chains) via a specific interview format, namely Laddering. Our results show that motion-based play does offer ‘physical presence’ or the sense of being immersed in a virtual world. We conclude that characteristics of motion-based play, especially natural mapping and exploiting existing mental models, leads to physical presence and that physical presence is a motive for motion-based play. Our results also show that the visibility of gross motor movements favors sociality characteristics such as monitoring other players, mutual awareness, and nonverbal communication. Therefore, motion-based play enhances ‘social presence’ or the salience of the other player. We additionally argued that players would be aware of their performances in front of others, be it co-players or bystanders. A player of motion-based games is not only operating (i.e., controlling the game) and performing (moving in front of the other players), but additionally he is an implicit spectator of his own actions (being aware of how the movements are perceived by the other players). This ‘performer awareness’ also impacts the player experience and leads to ‘social fun’. Participants emphasized the ‘fun’ of playing and of pretending together, and the importance of ‘laughing’ together. Via the perception of player movements which often hold a specific socio-cultural meaning, and the humor and ‘fun’ it induces, players share a bonding experience. Social fun as a motive for motion-based play was particularly emphasized by female players.While our results suggest that motion-based play enhances physical and social presence, our results also show that it offers less ‘flow’, the absorption into a challenging gaming activity, an experience that skillful gamers are often looking for. Explanations for this relative absence of flow with motion-based controllers can be attributed to their limited precision, resulting in the perception of insufficient control. This was particularly emphasized by male players. Those players that play from a performance motive and want to be challenged will prefer classic ways of controlling a game, compared to motion-based play. The question arises whether it will be sufficient for the new generation of motion-based controllers to implement more precise technology in order to experience flow. We argue that as long as game controllers demand actions relying on gross motor skills, there will always be a loss of perceived control compared to classic game controllers that focus on fine motor skills.This leads us to the final conclusion that while playing with current motion-based controllers provides more (social) fun, it provides less flow.