Today’s post it’s about microinteractions and the importance of the details. Last week we had a conference about interaction design (#ISA2012) in São Paulo and I decided to make separated posts about the talks.
Microinteractions are the way we experience detailed events. So, when we try to approach a design process with attention to details, we are talking about creating microinteractions. Thus, while trying to solve massive problems through design tools, the details are often lost during the process. We should work by the bottom up system, giving more attention to small things. This is the theme of Dan Saffer’s new book, “Microinteractions“.
Do one task well
Improving the microinteractions is creating engagement. This means that we should attempt to small details. “The details are not the details. They make the design” – Charles Eames. So, details must be seen as special parts of one big project.
Besides, it’s better to manage and control the work, when we are building a fragmented and complex scenario. For example, creating a small form, or the feedback from translation words on Facebook.
Transform moments into instances of pleasure
Microinteractions are good for accomplish a single task. We can interact with a small piece of data and get the maximum of feedback from it or even create a small part of content that is totally relevant.
Do not overlook microinteractions
If the interaction is poor, the features get surrounded by pain and frustration.
While designing, we must consider the big picture and details to improve the user experience.
Small interactions fit well on small devices. Dan Saffer says that while designing microinteractions we can adapt the features to each device, allowing consistency.
With the attention to details and micro interactions we can try to preview actions. This happens when we focus in loops and modes, by the tripod made of trigger, rules and feedback. It’s about bringing the data forward and understanding the user needs.
A good feedback can transform they way we learn the rules and the loops.
I think that maybe with established microinteractions, we can try to create interaction patterns. So while designing a product, we can see which small interactions are concrete. It’s like going to the library and follow a guideline. Perhaps with an accurate pattern, we can develop tools for a better experience. If the big picture can be created by microinteractions and detailed experiences, we can try to approach to human interactions.
Yesterday, I posted about Prototyping experiences. Last week we had a conference about interaction design(#ISA2012) in São Paulo and I decided to make separated posts about the talks.
We create meaning from the quest for more emotional computer games, transforming games into playable artifacts. Olli Leno says that emotions define the way we relate to experiences, that’s why it’s important to design meaningful and emotional playability.
The future of games is emotional, not technological. Games are in pre-Citizen-Kane Era. They need to be reinvented in terms of content and address some issues from the real world. You need to feel the game as you are feeling the real world.
Playing is believing
Play is a primal mental action and emotions are judgments and interpretations of the world. The more we care, stronger is the emotion. This is known as a relative intensity.
The origins of the emotions in play is the interpretation of the game. The system’s content is the object of emotion.
Engagement and context
Caring about is a necessary condition for emotional judgment. So, why do players care? They do it because of threats of violence, rules, goals, challenges… Therefore if the challenge is right, the game is fun.
Games can also transform the context and its artifacts. Playable tools and elements can be meaningful if we create playable forms from this context. For example: a pinball machine it’s a game that became material.
Game-rules x rules
The players can get a positive description of the game behavior or rules that they need to incorporate. We are responsible for the freedom we enjoy and choose.
The possibility of failure makes playability
The GAME OVER meaning is that, you can fail in your quest. What makes Tetris playable? That you can lose. Failure is about significance. It provides a baseline for caring about in-game objects.
The Sims, for example, is a sandbox and it has no pre-defined goals but lots of opportunities to fail (like setting fire into the kitchen and letting your Sims to die)
But how to create caring?
Players need to survive in the game world. This creates a fear of failure that moves the game forward and gives an emotional commitment to the scenario.
The context became material and meaningful, so the players don’t want to lose the game, because it’s important to them to maintain this relationship.
Interaction through meaning
So when we create emotions through games, it’s possible to understand and offer more experiences for the players through meaningful choices. In order to create a complete interaction, we need to consider the logic of caring, emotional cognition and feedback.
On simulation, aesthetics and play: Artifactual Playground
Bringing emotions to video games
What is Love?
Emotions about the Deniable/Undeniable: Sketch for a Classification of Game Content as Experienced