#su2017

Hi everyone!!! This is Janet!!!!

So in the previous weeks I had some trouble figuring out how to make people do what I want them to do. I tried using clues, lights, text.. etc. And I have finally come to the conclusion that I need to be more specific on what I want the audience to do. 

So here is a plan view of the game before the edits. 

The pollens and the flowers were to be matched according to their color. 

And the interaction itself would look like this

But it seemed that it was just too much for current audience, considering that most people were interested in touching/looking at the environment/the wrong prop. 

So I had to make a change in the game play. 

I made an edit so that there is literally no way for people to get confused. 

The game starts with just one flower, and when the player gets that one activated, it blooms the second flower.. so on and so forth. making it much easier for the audiences to follow. 

And at the end, the last flower=pollen takes the players to the next level. 

With this method, the gameplay map would change into something that looks like this:

a more foolproof way to directing the audience!!

And that is it for today! Ill upload an updated screen cap of the gameplay sometime in the near future U_U

Until then!!!! 

-Janet

WK10: Update of environment. 

Game: Tilt brush. Micro-interaction: manipulating 3d frames Trigger: -the player has to press the buttons on the side of the controllers to alter the shapes. -The action of moving the controllers towards each other will shrink the shape -the action of moving the controllers away from each other blows up the shape. Rules: -buttons on both controllers must be pressed at the same time -the controllers must be inside or on the border of the frame the player is trying to move. Feedback: -The shape lights up to indicate it has been selected -then the shape moves in ways the players are already familiar with from other interfaces. Pro: -The response is very intuitive. -the motion of pulling and stretching is very familiar -the motion has a lot of freedom Con: -unless someone tells the person what buttons they are supposed to press, it takes some time to navigate. -the triggers are very similar to another command; that is zooming in and out of the picture. It is easy to mistakenly zoom in or out while trying to manipulate just a shape.

Game: Accounting Micro-Interaction: Acid from VR king’s stomach Trigger: When you tilt the glass that holds the acid, the green liquid pours out of the glass. Then when you pour it on yourself, you proceed to the next level Rules: -The player has no pour the acid over his head in order to go on to the next level. -the players don’t ever run out of the liquid. -the liquid has physics that is kind of similar to those of ours. It reacts to gravity and other objects around, Feedback: -When the player starts to interact with the object, the surrounding characters start to talk to the character, letting the player know that this is something that advances the plot. -the characters around also tell the player that the liquid is very toxic, making the player curious about its effects -and finally when the player pours the liquid on his head, There is a scene change. Pro: It is an interesting play on how we like to think. It shows that it really doesn’t matter what we tell the players to do, if we put enough emphasis on a certain object, the players will get curious and start to interact with it more. Con: But it was not highly intuitive. I personally did not know what to do at first and wandered around the scene looking for more clues even after I saw that there was acid. The player would have to go through a series of trial and error. They would have to have done everything they can with that bottle of acid for them to finally try pouring it over their heads.

Game: Surgeon Simulator (or something like that) Micro-interaction: Using the saw. Trigger: The player has to pick up the tool and interact with a body with it. Rules: -The tool has to be touching the object(body). -the tool can take apart, but the same tool can’t put things back together. -the player needs to interact with the right part of the body in order to keep the virtual patient alive as long as they can. -the harder you hit the object, the more destructive it is. Feedback: -blood splattering -bone breaking -sounds of things breaking -background noise of the cardiogram speeding up when the player makes a mistake. Pro: It is kind of straight forward because all of the tools are something that we are familiar with in real life. And they do much of the same actions. Con: Ambiguous of what tool we need to use for the game since none of the tools given are exclusive to medical needs. Also a lot of the tools can be used to same way to do the same effect. Like for example a saw can be used like a hammer.