Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T06:28:22.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluating Digital Games for Competitive Music Composition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2020

Thomas Studley ,
Jon Drummond ,
Nathan Scott  and
Keith Nesbitt
Thomas Studley*
Affiliation:
The University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia Emails: thomas.studley@uon.edu.au; jon.drummond@newcastle.edu.au; nathan.scott@newcastle.edu.au; keith.nesbitt@newcastle.edu.au
Jon Drummond
Affiliation:
The University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia Emails: thomas.studley@uon.edu.au; jon.drummond@newcastle.edu.au; nathan.scott@newcastle.edu.au; keith.nesbitt@newcastle.edu.au
Nathan Scott
Affiliation:
The University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia Emails: thomas.studley@uon.edu.au; jon.drummond@newcastle.edu.au; nathan.scott@newcastle.edu.au; keith.nesbitt@newcastle.edu.au
Keith Nesbitt
Affiliation:
The University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia Emails: thomas.studley@uon.edu.au; jon.drummond@newcastle.edu.au; nathan.scott@newcastle.edu.au; keith.nesbitt@newcastle.edu.au
*
Email: thomas.studley@uon.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Digital games are a fertile ground for exploring novel computer music applications. While the lineage of game-based compositional praxis long precedes the advent of digital computers, it flourishes now in a rich landscape of music-making apps, sound toys and playful installations that provide access to music creation through game-like interaction. Characterising these systems is the pervasive avoidance of a competitive game framework, reflecting an underlying assumption that notions of conflict and challenge are somewhat antithetical to musical creativity. As a result, the interplay between competitive gameplay and musical creativity is seldom explored. This article reports on a comparative user evaluation of two original games that frame interactive music composition as a human–computer competition. The games employ contrasting designs so that their juxtaposition can address the following research question: how are player perceptions of musical creativity shaped in competitive game environments? Significant differences were found in system usability, and also creativity and ownership of musical outcomes. The user study indicates that a high degree of musical control is widely preferred despite an apparent cost to general usability. It further reveals that players have diverse criteria for ‘games’ which can dramatically influence their perceptions of musical creativity, control and ownership. These findings offer new insights for the design of future game-based composition systems, and reflect more broadly on the complex relationship between musical creativity, games and competition.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 25 , Issue 1: Computation in the Sonic Arts , April 2020 , pp. 75 - 88
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aarseth, E. and Calleja, G. 2015. The Word Game: The Ontology of an Undefinable Object. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games. Pacific Grove, CA: Society for the Advancement of the Science of Digital Games.Google Scholar
Arjoranta, J. 2014. Game Definitions: A Wittgensteinian Approach. Game Studies, 14(1). http://gamestudies.org/1401/articles/arjoranta (accessed 25 July 2019).Google Scholar
Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T. and Miller, J. 2008. An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction 24(6): 574–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T. and Miller, J. 2009. Determining What Individual SUS Scores Mean: Adding an Adjective Rating Scale. Journal of Usability Studies 4(3): 114–23.Google Scholar
Blickhan, S. 2016. Listening through Digital Interaction in Björk’s Biophilia. In Kamp, M., Summers, T. and Sweeney, M. (eds.) Ludomusicology: Approaches to Video Game Music. Sheffield: Equinox, 133–51.Google Scholar
Bown, O. and Ferguson, S. 2016. A Musical Game of Bowls Using the DIADs. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Brisbane: Griffith University, 371–2.Google Scholar
Brooke, J. 1996. SUS: A ‘Quick and Dirty’ Usability Scale. In Jordan, P. W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B. A. and McClelland, A. L.. Usability Evaluation in the Industry. London: Taylor & Francis, 189–94.Google Scholar
Caillois, R. 1958 [2001]. Man, Play and Games. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Cera, A. 2013. Loops, Games and Playful Things. Contemporary Music Review 32(1): 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, S.-M. and Wu, C.-T. 2017. Designing Music Games and Mobile Apps for Early Music Learning. In Ma, M. and Oikonomou, A. (eds.) Serious Games and Edutainment Applications: Volume II. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K. 2009. An Introduction to Procedural Music in Video Games. Contemporary Music Review 28(1): 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corcos, A. 2018. Being Enjoyably Challenged is the Key to an Enjoyable Gaming Experience: An Experimental Approach in a First-Person Shooter Game. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology 8(1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, C. 1984. The Art of Computer Game Design. Berkeley, CA: Osborne/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Dolphin, A. 2014. Designing Sound Toys: Play as Composition. In Collins, K., Kapralos, B. and Tessler, H. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Interactive Audio. New York: Oxford University Press, 45–61.Google Scholar
Gillespie, S. and Bown, O. 2017. Solving Adaptive Game Music Transitions from a Composer centred perspective. Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Musical Metacreation. Georgia, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Gimenes, M. 2018. Experiments on Collective Decision-Making and Musical Metacreative Performances with Audience Participation. Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Musical Metacreation. Salamanca, Spain.Google Scholar
Hedges, S. 1978. Dice Music in the Eighteenth Century. Music and Letters 59(2): 180–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurka, T. and Tasioulas, J. 2006. Games and the Good. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, 80(2006): 217–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juul, J. 2005. Half-Real: Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kassabian, A. and Jarman, F. 2016. Game and Play in Music Video Games. In Kamp, M., Summers, T. and Sweeney, M. (eds.) Ludomusicology: Approaches to Video Game Music. Sheffield: Equinox, 116–32.Google Scholar
Lüneburg, B. 2018. Between Ludic Play and Performative Involvement: Performance Practice in Gamified Audiovisual Multimedia Artworks. eContact! 20(2). https://econtact.ca/20_2/lueneburg_gamifiedmultimedia.html (accessed 12 May 2019).Google Scholar
Moseley, R. 2016. Keys to Play: Music as a Ludic Medium from Apollo to Nintendo. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prechtl, A. 2016. Adaptive Music Generation for Computer Games. PhD thesis, The Open University, UK.Google Scholar
Roesner, D., Paisley, A. and Cassidy, G. 2016. Guitar Heroes in the Classroom: The Creative Potential of Music Games. In Austin, Michael (ed.) Music Video Games: Performance, Politics, and Play. New York: Bloomsbury, 197–227.Google Scholar
Rowe, R. 1993. Interactive Music Systems: Machine Listening and Composing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. 2003. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Scirea, M., Togelius, J., Eklund, P. and Risi, S.. 2016. Affective Evolutionary Music Composition with MetaCompose. Genetic Programming and Evolvable Machines 18(4): 433–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sluchin, B. and Malt, M. 2011. Play and Game in Duel and Strategy. Proceedings of the Xenakis International Symposium. London: Goldsmiths, University of London.Google Scholar
Studley, T., Drummond, J., Scott, N. and Nesbitt, K. 2018. Designing for Stochastic Game-Based Composition with Max & Unity. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australasian Computer Music Association. Perth, 87–94.Google Scholar
Sullivan, G. M. and Artino, A. R. 2013. Analyzing and Interpreting Data from Likert-Type Scales. Journal of Graduate Medical Education 5(4): 541–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Summers, T. 2016. Understanding Video Game Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, G. 2016. Game Design for Expressive Mobile Music. Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression. Brisbane: Griffith University, 182–7.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

GAMES AND MEDIA

Audiotool. 2012. Pulsate. App [Android]. Version 1.4. 31 January.Google Scholar
Björk. 2011. Biophilia. App [iOS]. 19 July. Second Wind Apps Ltd, One Little Indian Ltd.Google Scholar
Develoe, LLC. 2010. Soundrop. Game [iOS]. 1 April.Google Scholar
Eno, B. and Chilvers, P. 2008. Bloom. App [iOS]. 7 October. Opal Ltd.Google Scholar
Epic Games. 2017. Fortnite Battle Royale. Game [Xbox One]. 26 September.Google Scholar
Harmonix. 2005. Guitar Hero. Game [PlayStation 2]. 8 November. California: Red Octane.Google Scholar
Indieszero. 2005. Electroplankton. Game [Nintendo DS]. 7 April. Kyoto: Nintendo.Google Scholar