[论文解读] Multimodal vs. Unimodal Physiological Control in Videogames for Enhanced Realism and Depth

Gonçalo Filipe Lopes Coelho Amaral da Silva|arXiv (Cornell University)|Jun 2, 2014

Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts参考文献 44被引用 3

一句话总结

本文提出在第一人称射击游戏中采用多模态直接生物反馈，通过每种游戏机制结合两种生理传感器（如呼吸和体温）来增强真实感与深度。结果显示，尽管单模态生物反馈相较于标准控制方式提升了趣味性和真实感，但多模态生物反馈显著增强了感知深度、真实感与玩家掌控感——尽管也带来了更高的身体与认知负荷。

ABSTRACT

(arXiv abridged abstract) In the last two decades, videogames have evolved in a nearly explosive way from the pixelated graphics to today's near-realistic 3D environments. The interaction devices traditionally used in videogames have not evolved with the same intensity, but recent HCI studies have explored biofeedback interaction - the explicit manipulation of a person's physiological data as input to a system - as an alternative to them. Traditional biofeedback prototypes apply 1 sensor to each game mechanic (unimodality). In this dissertation, we introduce the combination of 2 physiological sensors simultaneously per game mechanic (multimodality) and present a First-Person Shooter game comprised of 8 game mechanics with three interaction flavours (no biofeedback/vanilla, unimodal and multimodal). An empirical study with 32 regular players was employed to explore and study differences between the three interaction types and where they can be best employed. Players compared the three games in terms of Fun, Ease of Use, Originality, Playability and Favourite Condition. For the sake of completeness, other evaluation methods were used as well: IMI Questionnaire, keywords association and open-ended commentaries. The vanilla version was considered easier to use, but both biofeedback versions were considered the most fun. Both versions were praised differently: the unimodal version for its simplicity of use, and the multimodal for its realism, activation safety of game mechanics and depth added to the game. Our conclusion is that multimodal biofeedback can have a relevant impact in terms of added depth, depending on the way it is used inside the game. On a boundary case, it can be used to increase the feeling of empowerment on the player when using certain abilities, or to intentionally make in-game actions more difficult by demanding more physical effort from the player.

研究动机与目标

• 解决单模态生物反馈的局限性，后者过度简化了玩家交互，且难以证明其替代传统输入方式的合理性。
• 探究将多个生理传感器结合用于同一游戏机制（即多模态生物反馈）是否能增强真实感、深度与玩家参与度。
• 比较多模态生物反馈与标准键盘/鼠标操作以及单模态生物反馈在趣味性、可用性、原创性与可玩性方面的表现。
• 评估不同生物反馈类型对玩家感知的影响，特别是沉浸感、真实感与身体努力程度。
• 探讨情境敏感型生物反馈机制的设计启示以及长期可用性挑战。

提出的方法

• 使用Unreal Development Kit开发第一人称射击游戏原型，包含三种控制变体：原生版本（键盘/鼠标）、单模态生物反馈（每种机制对应一个传感器）以及多模态生物反馈（每种机制对应两个传感器）。
• 集成测量呼吸（RESP）与体温（TEMP）的生理传感器，用于控制游戏内动作，如后坐力降低与水下探索。
• 设计机制，使多模态控制需要协调的生理输入（例如，屏息+体温变化以实现潜行或下潜）。
• 招募32名参与者，对三种版本在多个指标上进行对比测试：趣味性、易用性、原创性、可玩性及最喜爱的控制方式。
• 通过关键词分类与开放式评论收集定性反馈，并使用IMI问卷评估内在动机与感知愉悦度。
• 采用对比评分与主题分析方法，评估单模态与多模态生物反馈在感知深度与真实感方面的差异。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 与单模态或标准控制方式相比，多模态直接生物反馈是否显著提升感知真实感与深度？
• RQ2 玩家如何评价多模态生物反馈相较于单模态与原生控制方式的趣味性、可用性与可玩性？
• RQ3 在每种机制中结合多个生理信号在多大程度上增强了沉浸感与玩家掌控感？
• RQ4 当机制共享传感器输入时，单模态与多模态生物反馈在认知混淆或激活难度方面是否存在可察觉的差异？
• RQ5 持续进行生物反馈游戏对长期可用性与身体负荷有何影响？

主要发现

• 单模态与多模态生物反馈版本在趣味性方面均显著优于原生键盘/鼠标版本，且两种生物反馈类型在整体趣味性与可玩性上无显著统计差异。
• 多模态生物反馈被感知为更具真实感、更深邃且更安全的激活方式，玩家赞赏其带来的额外身体与认知参与度。
• 玩家报告称，多模态生物反馈增强了其掌控感与沉浸感，尤其是在需要协调生理动作（如屏息与体温变化以实现潜行或下潜）时。
• IMI问卷证实，生物反馈对内在动机与愉悦感有显著积极影响，可能源于身体动作在游戏中的直接映射。
• 部分参与者在单模态版本中报告混淆，当同一传感器（如RESP）控制多个无关机制（如水下屏息与隐身）时尤为明显；此问题在多模态版本中通过传感器分离得以解决。
• 本研究建议，根据游戏情境（如轻物与重物操作）结合单模态与多模态生物反馈，可优化游戏深度与玩家体验。