A5: Video Prototype (RUN.io)

Design: For this assignment, we were tasked to create a video prototype for an app or device centered around health. I am a firm believer in the power of “gamifying” things to increase their effectivity. Of the ideas typically associated with health, exercise seemed to me to be the easiest to do this with. I looked toward modern games that have been effective in getting people outside and moving. Apps like Pokémon GO and Ingress were major inspirations to me. I felt like the ideas of area control and monument mapping are very strong at motivating movement, so that was where the idea of RUN.io was born from.

Keeping these core gameplay mechanics in mind, I began thinking of other games that could be adapted in the physical world. This lead me to io games. Most specifically, paper.io. The purpose of this game is to run around the map using your sprite, taking over as much ground as you can without getting cut off by other players. I figured this would translate to an app very well, with your sprite being replaced by you, and the map being the world around you. The purpose of this game would thus be to capture as much ground as possible, and the video I was to generate should be able to convey this purpose using primarily visual context and as little dialogue and text as possible.

Storyboards:

Analysis: I went into my critique feeling very confident about the effectivity of my prototype. In the few “trial showings” of my video I held, my audiences seemed to understand the general point of the app right away, and were even able to draw connections between it and the source material. The in-class critique didn’t have the same kind of reception. While one member of my group seemed thoroughly engaged with the video and its content, to the point of commenting at several stages throughout and even at times making predictions of what was to come, the other two seemed to have parts of it go over their heads.

I realised in this moment that I may have been making some assumptions during the creation and early testing of my prototype that hurt it’s effectivity in the long run. I am pretty savvy when it comes to game design and video game tropes, as are the people I tend to surround myself with. I realised during the critique that some of the mental gaps needed to understand the content of the video were automatically filled by my understanding of game tendencies. I was sure to ask about ways to alleviate these gaps during the critique, and will touch on those changes in my reflection.

One thing that was abundantly clear as a product of my critique was that the quality of my video was high and that was appreciated by the audience. Several times during the screening of my clip, my goup members were audibly impressed, with utterences of “wow” or “that’s so cool.” Quality was a high priority of mine, which is why I shot and edited the video on my roommate’s Black Magic camera and did the vast majority of the sound design myself on a synthesizer. I am glad that these design choices, that resulted in much more work for me, obviously led to positive changes in the desirability and impact of the product.

Reflection: I really enjoyed this project. I am fascinated by film and the creative process of directors, so this was a really unique opportunity to force me to get something made. Was it time consuming and labor intensive? Absolutely. That being said, being able to watch and rewatch the final product is incredibly rewarding. I do think that, regardless of my pride in its quality, I have to admit a minor lapse in the usability. I cannot give myself perfect marks in this category with the number of people who were confused with parts of my video. I have taken note of some of the changes that were recommended to me below.

Call back to the game — A difficulty drawing connection between the video game and the app was brought to my attention. As this was the main way that I planned for people to understand the core gameplay mechanic of RUN.io, it is important for me to strengthen this connection. One way to do this that was recommended to me is a flashback of some kind, which I think I could get creative with while implement.

Identify the name of the game at the start — I was under the impression that more people were familiar with io games. No one in my group was familiar with paper.io. They said that name dropping it during the text exchange may help provide additional context.

Full screen of the T.V. — During the scene when the protagonist is playing video games, it was suggested to me to include a full screen shot of the game, as this may also make understanding the game play a little easier.

In addition to all of these things, I wish I would have known just how long video production takes at the start of this process. Had I, I may not have been quite so ambitious. I spent nearly 12 hours editing the 2 and a half minute video I generated, and I feel like I could have told a slightly more linear story and spent less time at that stage. That being said, I am still beyond pleased with my final project, and I can see myself elaborating on it to include in my portfolio at some point. Click here to see my video.