Comparing an interaction to its real-life equivalent can be a useful test of how intuitive it is. Does it match your real-life mental model?
Example 1: In-Game Inventory Management
Imagine you’re scavenging in a post-apocalyptic city. Your bag is full. Get to a safe place. Lock the door. See what you have.
What do you do?
I bet you dump it out on the floor in front of you.
But in the Fallout games, you pull out an alphabetical list with obscure names:
Now, you could get fancy with mimicking a real-life experience. Instead, what if we had a simple gallery that we can reorder by dragging, like this rough mock-up:
You can now see how many pistols you have, which weapons are bigger… all at a glance.
It’s best to use an existing intuitive cue (like size) than create a new abstract cue (like range). What if more powerful weapons were always beefier? What if the most accurate rifles were longer?
In the game, there is little correlation between a weapon’s size or visual impressiveness and its damage. You’d think ANY gun would finish an enemy with just a shot or two at close range, but that’s not the case. I don’t know which weapon can incapacitate a raider with a single shot at close range. If I did, the choice of which pistol to carry would be less intimidating.
Example 2: Storage Metaphors
Here’s another example. In the Farmville game, the user can buy all sorts of equipment, seeds, etc. But seeing getting to the inventory requires menu diving.
Where’s my stuff?
Well, in real life, my stuff would be in my storage shed. So let’s add a shed:
Example 3: Character Interaction
In one aquarium simulation game, the fish swim around, and you have to feed them and buy stuff for the aquarium. I found it unexciting.
I used to have a real fish once (a rescue) and my real-life experience with him was quite rewarding. He saw me and followed me when I entered the room. He was at times curious, lethargic, startled, cozy… Why not model the AI of the fish to simulate some of these real-life behaviors? Wouldn’t that engage users more?
There are many situations where comparing to the real-life equivalent can generate solutions to UI problems.
Meaning is not in the words — it’s in the total situation. – Ronald Langacker
To know if we created a great product, we need to test the User Experience beyond the screen:
Level of Test
Types of Stories
Individual screens
Short-term usability stories about UI-level problems.
“I wanted to buy the product but couldn’t find a Buy button.”
Flow in context
User Experience stories that show whether the product can successfully do the job it was hired for.
“I avoided using the medical software, because it forced me to turn away from my patient.”
Usage over time
Full User Experience stories that show how well the product works as the details of the job change over time.
“The gorgeous curved screen design that I loved at first caused the screen to break a few months later, which cost me $400 to repair.”
Visually polished and usability-tested screens can still lead to a failed product experience in the long run.
Case Study: Inventory System in Fallout 4 Game
The inventory gets long and hard to manage as you pick up tons of items. For example, it’s hard to compare weapons, because you can only see stats for one at a time:
But these sorts of usability-level issues are easiest to fix. For example, as a work around, this user prefixed the weapon names with useful stats. This makes it possible to compare items at a glance.
However, fixing screen-level problems is small potatoes in comparison to the larger issues that hurt the game. Here are user stories that evaluate the inventory system at different levels:
Example: Choosing the best apparel
Screen Level
Context & Time Levels
Problem
I can apply clothing in inventory mode A by clicking it, but how do I apply apparel while in inventory mode B? Clicking in mode B sells apparel instead.
What kind of apparel is going to keep me safe?
What happened?
My workaround is to exit the trade dialogue and go into inventory mode A. I then use the body chart there to see what I’m wearing now and which new apparel is superior. I click the right apparel to apply it and go back into the trade dialogue and click the apparel I’m no longer wearing to sell it. However, I sometimes nearly sell an item by mistake when I reflexively click it to apply it.
I’ve spent hours wondering which items to carry, figuring out where to stash inventory when I had too much to carry, comparing items, and agonizing over which to sell. In the end, I mastered the inventory UI, but my overall UX was poor.
I expected my diligence to pay off, but that optimal weapon I handpicked still couldn’t kill the next enemy and despite all the hoarding and trading I still couldn’t afford the best apparel.
At times I was paralyzed, even quit the game, when I found something important and had to figure out what to drop to make room. I’ve found myself not wanting to go into a new building, because finding new things had become a burden.
You can clearly see which user stories affects the User Experience more profoundly.
There are issues of both clarity and meaning. Should I use the gun with 100 accuracy & 30 damage or the gun with 200 accuracy & 10 damage? What’s the difference between “accuracy” and “range”? Is a “fire rate” of 6 good or bad? These questions are frustrating, but the bigger UX problem is why any of this matters in the first place.
How does a feature translate into outcomes the user cares about?
If we can’t answer that, we have more than just a usability problem.
Case Study: Context for Medical Software
There’s a great story about software failure in Clayton Christensen’s Competing Against Luck:
We’d designed a terrific software system that we thought would help this doctor get his job done, but he was choosing to ‘hire’ a piece of paper and pen instead…
Why? The design team overlooked the situational and emotional context:
“As [Dr. Holmstrom] began to discuss Dunn’s prognosis, he grabbed a piece of paper to sketch out, crudely, what was wrong with Dunn’s knee and what they could do to fix it. This was comforting, but puzzling. Dunn knew there was state-of-the-art software in that computer just over Holmstrom’s shoulder to help him record and communicate his diagnosis during an examination. But the doctor didn’t choose to use it. “Why aren’t you typing this into the computer?” Dunn asked.
…The doctor then explained that not only would typing the information into the computer take him too much time, but it would also cause him to have to turn away from his patient, even just for a few moments, when he was delivering a diagnosis. He didn’t want his patients to have that experience. The doctor wanted to maintain eye contact, to keep the patient at ease, to assure him that he was in good hands…”
Case Study: Samsung Galaxy Edge
The Samsung S7 Edge phone was very slick with its curved edge. But it turned out that this design choice makes the phone hard to protect. Flat screens allow protective cases with higher sides that rise over the screen. Cases for curved screens rise just barely. Even with a high quality case, this screen cracked along the curved edge (and it happened twice)!
If we look beyond the first experience and aesthetic factors, we see a very different User Experience story.
The cost of repair was $400 the first time. The second time, I had to replace the perfectly functional phone, which didn’t suit my ecological values.
Sadly, Samsung appears to have standardized this design. I suspect it’s even financially lucrative, due to demand for pricey replacement parts or replacement devices.
Case Study: Fitbit Dashboard
In The Big Book of Dashboards, Steve Wexler describes how his experience with his Fitbit changed over time:
“After a while, I came to know everything the dashboard was going to tell me. I no longer needed to look at the dashboard to know how many steps I’d taken. The dashboard had educated me to make a good estimate without needing to look at it. Step count had, in other words, become a commodity fact. I’d changed my lifestyle, and the dashboard became redundant.
Now my questions were changing: What were my best and worst days ever? How did my daily activity change according to weather, mood, work commitments, and so on? Fitbit’s dashboard didn’t answer those questions. It was telling the same story it had been telling on the first day I used it, instead of offering new insights. My goals and related questions were changing, but Fitbit’s dashboard didn’t. After a year, my Fitbit strap broke, and I decided not to buy a replacement. Why? Because the dashboard had become a dead end. It hadn’t changed in line with my needs.”
So there wasn’t anything wrong with the dashboard in 2 dimensions, but its usefulness wasn’t constant along the dimension of time.
How to Uncover the User Experience Story
Time is a necessary dimension of user testing. Retrospective interviews and delayed customer feedback help reveal the total story. You want to know how the customer enjoyed the shopping experience or their first time playing a game. Then you should follow up to see how they feel weeks later.
You can get more insight into how the story unfolds through something like a diary study, which allows users to keep track of their usage at their own pace. They can capture one-off occurrences and experiences that might at first seem insignificant and would get lost otherwise.
Farmville is a farm simulator for Facebook from 2009.
Original Home
Redesigned UI (Rough Mock)
Theme
Problem
Solution
Neighbours
Greatest real estate to empty slots for Facebook friends
Simplified Neighbors pane and surfaced stats (level and cash), can grow as more social features are used (progressive disclosure)
Action menu
Buried actions requiring multiple clicks
Exposed action menu with animated transition to avoid loss of context (view prototype)
Key Stats
Key Stats are scatteredDifference between “Cash” and “FVO” Farm Cash is unclear
Compact Key Stats, together on the leftFarm Cash deleted
Levels
Unclear “level” system
Explicit level labelLevels are now goal-driven, so it’s clearer what to do and what the constraint/deadline is (added Time Remaining to the stats)
Selected States
No selected states for tools, selected seed, etc.
Clear selected style for actions (e.g,. in my mockup, the Plow is selected in nav and mouse cursor looks like plow)
Plot labels
Easy to miss wilted plots
Clearer labeling of plot status (Ready, Wilted tags)Status summary on the side (when plot clicked, map pans the screen to the plot)
Cash
Two types of cash (confusing)
Simplified “cash” concept (removed Farm cash)
Inventory
No buildings by default.Unclear where my inventory is.
Created default building (how can you have a farm without buildings?)This building doubles as the inventory (you can click the barn to see what you own so far)
Settings
Full screen mode not discoverable.
Full screen icon in standard bottom right location.
Original Product List
Redesigned Product List Concept
Theme
Problem
Solution
Costs / Layout
Low contrast on costsUnclear prices (two prices shown: cost to buy and eventual profit; unclear which is which)
Cleaner, standard layout for all “costs”Can’t confuse cost and profit (using price look for cost and “earn” label on profit)
Action
Small BUY buttons and unclear that BUY means Plant Now
Entire item card is clickable
Scrolling
Horizontal navigation via arrows is awkward
Standard, faster scrollbar navigation
Transition
Loss of context when menu opens and covers up game
Animated slide out attached to main menu, less jarring (See Adobe XD Prototype below)
Top Usability Lessons
Avoid Competing Concepts
It was unclear why I was seeing a “you’re out of cash” message when I had tons of cash.
In my mockup, I removed Farm Cash, leaving money and water as the two main constraints. Users would buy regular cash or other perks.
Free Should Be Playable
I ran out of “Farm Cash” too fast, without knowing what it is, leaving few things left to do in the game. A game should still be playable and fun for all, not only paid players. A user could still make upgrades later. Otherwise, they will just spread the word that the game is not fun, hurting adoption.
User Research Question: At what point would players be ready to invite friends? Would they do so right away to say “Hey, I’ve just started this game” or would they do it later to say “Hey, I’ve played this game already and it’s great”.
Reward Every Session
Once you plant a lot of stuff, there’s not much to do. It teaches users not to expect much. Delayed gratification and long feedback loops are always weaker motivators. One factor aggrevating this is that interesting Actions are burried inside the Market dialogue:
Even if the game could support short play times (plant now and harvest tomorrow), it should also be playable during longer sessions. In my mockup, I exposed some of the actions, so it looks like there is more stuff to do. I would also unlock more of the categories, so users could play around. For example, they could buy 1 cow and maybe do something with that cow (feed it, tickle it). This would provide a simple experience with immediate feedback, while the longer feedback loop of growing/harvesting is ongoing.
User research question: What are some contexts in which users will play the game? For example, user plays for 1 min while waiting for a bus or for 15 minutes while riding the bus. Will there be lots of distractions? How long should the typical session be to fit the constraints? What are the user’s most satisfying moments?
Avoid Interrupting The User
There are lots of pop-ups and early upgrades that happen at the wrong time or interrupt another process. For example, I was trying to plow but found a box. This popped up a new screen and another about the box, completely interrupting my task. Often dialogues pop up one over the other. It’s better to show messages when they are relevant. When I’m planting is not a good time to suggest that I customize my character. Detect the “end” of a process or task and show relevant messages then.
User research question: What are natural pauses in the user’s game play where a general message could be shown? What are key problem moments when a contextual message could help? Which things do users enjoy figuring out for themselves and which things are frustrating?
Enable Wayfinding
There are many screen orphans: they pop up, you close them, and later don’t know how to go back to them. For example, when you click a plot of land with the default Multi-tool, you get a pop-up with seed choices to plant. There’s no direct link to this screen. There’s no headline to explain whether this is an inventory of seeds I own or stats on what I’ve planted. Also, there is no selected state although you can choose your seed.
User Research Question: What are most common and enjoyable tasks? How long do users spend on a task e.g., planting crops? What categories of items do users care about? What do they want to do with those items? How much choice is too much?
Clearly Label What Is Selected
There is no selected state on tools, which makes it unclear what mode I’m in or what to do (especially if I clicked something just exploring early on). In the screenshot below, my mouse pointer shows no clue as to what tool is selected and what will happen if I click the ground. The plow tool has no selected state. It’s also unclear how to exit plow mode.
In my mockup, I labeled the selected states and the tool clearly.
Create Explicit Rules And Constraints
Some of my crops wilted, and it was unclear by looking at them that they wilted. When I clicked them, I just plowed over them, because I didn’t know what “unwilting” means.
In my mockup, I labeled “wilted” plants more explicitly. I would also show some kind of message, perhaps along with the “Ready” status updates on the side.
User Research Question: What do users want to do while things are growing? Are they receptive to, say, email notification when their crop is ready or wilting?
Feature Ideas To Improve Immersion And Create Better User Stories
Keeping It Fresh
Daily opportunities + challenges:
Extra rain causes crops to mature faster, BUT you have to harvest quickly
Drought is causing wilting, you have to water your crop immediately
Phone call from a vendor who wants to arrange an ongoing bulk order and pay your extra (if you grab the deal, you make extra for every sale and you get free shipment of resources like fertilizer)
Material upgrades:
A barn upgrade, so you can store more stuff
Better rake that can plow faster and cheaper
A plot size upgrade, so you plant more and earn more per plot
You discover an old well that gives you extra water
You receive sample bags of fertilizer so your next 10 crops will grow faster
Environmental challenges and opportunities:
Storm endangers your crop so you have to build greenhouse to protect your crops, or fix damage before your crops fail
A tornado destroys your barn so you need to recruit neighbours to help you rebuild it
Surprise new characters:
A part-time helper shows up to pick crops before they wilt (your cousin who’s come to stay for a week and help for free or a part-time employee who requires minimum payment)
A feral dog comes wandering onto your property, and you can tame it (it then keep badgers away)
A new neighbour moves in: if you get on bad terms, they can drive you out of business, but if you get on good terms, they can help you
Compete with AI neighbors for business
Mini games
Add some RPG elements (e.g., ride a tractor), so there is a purpose to controlling the avatar
Combine big picture activities and specific farming tasks: zoom on crop plots and do something detailed (e.g., a mini bug spraying game like Whack-a-Mole or Candy Crush)
Characters
Invite friends to visit farm. They can water crops or pick ready crops when I’m not available. If they want to do more, they need to get their own farm next door.
Users get different perks and can share props e.g., “Can I borrow your tractor? I’ll pay you 50 coins for a day” You get rewarded for sharing.
Auction where you can get items cheaper (tractor, animals, tools)
Invite friends as helpers (e.g., “A drought destroyed my farm. I need 2 people to sign up to help me rebuild. I need someone to play carpenter to rebuild the barn and someone to dig a new well”)
AI neighbours whom you can borrow things from
Multiplayer-like features and co-ownership of items:
Start a farm together with friend, spouse, etc.
The more people, the larger the default farm and more cool farm props (e.g., a farm with 3 people gets a tractor by default)
Chat features
Game posts friend updates automatically (e.g., “John just got a larger shed”); users can then like an update or reply with text
Team chat for multi-player farm g., User 1 asks User 2: “Hey, I just sold a large harvest. Should we buy a tractor or buy more land?”
Chatbot: you can talk to your avatar or AI neighbour e.g., “How are you? Go plant some carrots”
Integration with Messenger for chat with avatar e.g., “Something’s happened. Come right away.” or “Crops ready. Should I harvest?”)
