The project was nicely broken-down into tasks allocated to each team member. The purpose and how it was tested are clear. Post-experiment interview is also posted, with constructive comments. The experiment is mandatory for the project, and the experiment design was easy to understand. The idea of random acceleration is unique. It would have been great if you had a graph roughly showing how Josh sensed the movement, and compare it with the actual acceleration. The vertical of the figure has three legends, but the lines are in the same color and it is hard to see. Which directions are x, y, and z? I wanted to see if the random acceleration pattern has equal randomness in 3 axes, or if you have just shook the cart along one direction. I m wondering if shaking side ways (perpendicular directions to the translation) is actually numbing the sense of translation and giving the not-moving illusion to visitors.

return to top of page

It is AWESOME that you got user feedback! I think that is the most important of all at this stage! Great! It's also good to get quick-and-dirty prototypes that can tell you a lot of information very quickly. Good Job.

It was also a good idea to measure the accelerations that made a difference. I wonder how much acceleration due to the floor roughness was enough of a cue to the user that the cart was moving... That would be good to know.

A few suggestions:

* I would consider trying this out with more users, just to get a better idea of how people react. Did you try it out as well?

* I wonder if this effect is different in a room? Maybe standing up and being able to see some visual cues changes things ... I would definitely try something that would be a little more like a room and see if people are more or less sensitive.

* Your cart accelerations (~1/3 g) are actually pretty significant! You glossed over this in your presentation, making it sound small, but people wold definitely fall over or stumble under these kinds of accelerations! If your user was blindfolded and standing on the cart when you were jerking it around, he would have definitely ended up eating pavement. You have to be even more careful because the users have no visual cues.

(1) Can you accelerate an entire room at this rate? (2) Is it safe? (3) How much do you actually have to accelerate the room to achieve the effect you want? Does it work with 0.1 g? What about less?

Good job!

return to top of page

From your storyboard it appears that it is the experience of being in Room B (the claustrophobia, the noises, etc.) is what distracts the users rather than them moving around blindfolded. The testing was very interesting and it seems you learned some good things from it, but I don t quite see how that plays into your story and how it is going to fool people into thinking two separate rooms are the same. The concept of leaving a room and then re-entering it in a drastically altered state would be a great effect and totally creepy. The testing all your team members did was great, but I am worried that it will be hard to deliver as a prototype a series of rooms that allow you to pull off this switcheroo. I think focusing on one room and one means of disorienting people will be your best bet moving forward.

return to top of page

Nice use of testing, although I’m not sure if one test person on a cart makes the testing completely viable. The concept is definitely technical in nature. i read the storyboard and understand where the team is trying to investigate the before/after aspects of an attack. I’m not sure I understand how an accelerometer and a cart is going to fit in with a potential works like model for an interactive adventure. Do you expect to have a moving room? Overall, good job. You have good presentation skills. I’m just not clear of what you are selling.

return to top of page