Talk given by Mirjam P Eladhari and Elina MI Ollila at Game Research Methods 2010 in Tampere, Finland. In the last slide, with ink-notes, is a quick summary of other papers at the same event that related to the material we presented.

1. 1

2. This paper is concerned with development of experimental research prototypes,
sometimes also called demonstrators. A commonly used development method is iterative
design which, as described by Salen and Zimmerman shortcite{Salen2001}, is a play-based
design process. A prototype is textit{``played, evaluated, adjusted and played again,
allowing the designer or design team to base decisions on the successive textit{iterations}
or versions of the game. Iterative design is a cyclic process that alternates between
prototyping, play-testing, evaluation, and refinement.''}
2

3. 3

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7

8. it must be stressed that the iterations can and should happen even inside the early
prototype development, and in some cases, between the test sessionsfootnote{For
instance, test the prototype with the first participant, fix existing problems and develop
further promising new ideas, and test the evolved version of the same prototype with
participant two, and so on.}:
The traditional waterfall model cite{waterfallmodel} proposes a process where the
design, implementation, and evaluation follows each other in a linear manner. The iterative
design process for games see, e.g. cite{fullerton04,Salen2001}, emphasizes on iterations
where the game is designed, tested, and evaluated continuously during the process and
developed further. There has been some criticism that even this kind of process would not
be iterative enough cite{Fallman} and that design, implementation, and evaluation should
be done tightly together.
8

9. 9

10. Participant role: informant/co-designer <--- Jorgensen, “co-researcher”
10

11. OUR VIEW; IF U CANT DO IDEAL TEST EARLY, U SHOULD STILL DO QUICK AND DIRTY
TESTING AND DO IT A LOT. BUT DO NOT EXPECT IT TO PROVIDE PERFECT DATA
11

12. Filled in by research question.
easy to fall into a frame of mind where one aims to produce a good game, loosing focus of
obtaining research material.
The very reason for the development of research prototypes is to find methods, features or
approaches that can be used in other games, games which are specifically made to be fun,
challenging and perhaps carry a message. The researcher needs to approach the design of
the prototype both as a researcher and as a game designer.
Practicality. Resources, time etc – and ideology regarding validation. Own and projected.
12

13. 13

14. Jorgensen also talked about video commentaries. So maybe another arrow still under:
“feedback” -> after the game.
“”video commentary model, Jorgensen”.
14

15. 15