Early analysis of the 3rd test, Part I

(test description)

Non-apparent affordances are hard to discover without proper amplification

In the introductory Resident Evil 5 chapter that was included in the test, there was several possible interactions with objects - affordances - that was difficult for the participants to discover. In an action scene that was a part of the session, the player is able to block the doors of a shelter by pushing shelves in front of them. This affordance (that a shelf affords pushing) is not amplified at all. None of the test participants discovered this interaction.

Earlier in the same session, the player is introduced to breakable objects that contain usable or valuable items. This affordance (object is breakable) is amplified in three ways: 1) a "Investigate" button prompt when the player stands near the object (a wood box) and looks in its direction, followed by a textual message ("This box looks conveniently placed"); 2) a tutorial message popping up about one seccond after the box is "investigated" (press LB + RT to swing knife, hence break the box); 3) the player characters partner Sheva demonstrating the affordance by breaking objects randomly. The first two amplifiers is used only the first time a breakable item (a wood box) is encountered. The third amplifier occurs at random moments during gameplay, if the player happens to look in his partner's direction he see's the partner breaking an object.

Far from all test participants dicovered that certain objects were breakable. Only one test participant breaked the first box encountered (affordance amplified by "Investigate" message + tutorial message), and one other participant discovered the affordance later on during the game session when encountering a group of barrels (no amplification at all).

Apart from the "smash object to pieces" affordance, participants had problems discovering that a window afforded jumping through it when trapped inside a building. The affordance "jump through window" was only amplified when standing close to it, by a "Jump through window" button prompt. The problem was that the players rarely positioned themselves close enough to the window for the affordance amplifier to occur. This resulted in a state of confusion, when the players did not know how to escape the building. Only one of the participants discovered the affordance instantly.

It should be noted that if enough time passes by, the player's partner Sheva positions herself next to window and communicates by dialogue that the window is a way out of the building (an affordance amplifier as such). However this occurs after a significant period of time and the participants tended to find the way out by trial-and-error before it happened.

This somewhat falls in line with our hypothesis. The "break object" affordance was not discovered by the majority of the test participants, resulting in poorer interactivity with the game geometry. The "Push shelf" affordance was not discovered at all, also resulting in the players missing out on possible interaction with the environment. The "jump through window" affordance was only discovered instantly by one test participants, for the majority who didn't this resulted in a state of confusion until the affordance was found by trial-and-error. Note that decreased immersion/engrossment isn't necessarily a direct result of the player missing out on optional affordances such as breaking boxes or pushing shelves, but might be an indirect result as affordances are hopefully put into the game to flavor and enrich the game experience. For affordances required to make progress through the game (jump through window) it should be important not to frustrate the player and force him/her to rely on trial-and-error, which might take the player out of the gameplay experience.