World Scientific
  • Search
    Quick Search in Journals
    Access type:
    Quick Search anywhere
    Access type:
    Advanced Search
  • My Cart
  •   
Skip main navigation
Close Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

Our site uses Javascript to enchance its usability.You can disable your ad blocker or whitelist our website www.worldscientific.com to view the full content.

Select your blocker:

Adblock Plus Instructions

  1. Click the AdBlock Plus icon in the extension bar
  2. Click the blue power button
  3. Click refresh

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.
Free Access

NO SECOND CHANCE FOR A FIRST IMPRESSION: THE ROLE OF AESTHETICS IN EARLY ACCESS VIDEO GAMES

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919621400028Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)
    Previous
    Next
    This article is part of the issue:
    23rd Special Issue for the ISPIM
    Guest Editors: Joe Tidd, Eelko Huizingh and Steffen Conn

    Abstract

    This paper investigates the impact of aesthetics in early game development based on a quantitative analysis of 367 early access games. We identified the relationship between aesthetic perception in early video games reflected in the user reviews, comments, and subsequent positive and negative video game recommendations over time. We find that customer co-creation in product innovation is increasingly negative feedback over time when the game’s aesthetic early impression is perceived as negative. The implications for innovation management are that aesthetics design impacts the response to customer-ready prototypes. Managers should take the aesthetic design and user perception in early development into account and not delay the attention to aesthetics to a later product release stage.

    References

    • Abras, C, D Maloney-Krichmar and J Preece (2004). User-centered design. In Encyclopedia of Human–Computer Interaction, W Bainbridge (Ed.), Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 445–456. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Google Scholar
    • Ahmad, SN and M Laroche (2015). How do expressed emotions affect the helpfulness of a product review? Evidence from reviews using latent semantic analysis. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 20(1), 76–111. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Alharoon, D and DJ Gillan (2020). The relation of the perceptions of aesthetics and usability. In Proc. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 1876–1880. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Auernhammer, JM and H Hall (2014). Organizational culture in knowledge creation, creativity and innovation: Towards the Freiraum model. Journal of Information Science, 40(2), 154–166. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Auernhammer, J and B Roth (2021). The origin and evolution of Stanford University’s design thinking: From product design to design thinking in innovation management. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 00: 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12594. Google Scholar
    • Baker, MA and K Kim (2019). Value destruction in exaggerated online reviews. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1956-1976. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Banks, J and J Potts (2010). Co-creating games: A co-evolutionary analysis. New Media & Society, 12(2), 253–270. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Benson, J (2013). Steam now selling early access to games, https://www.pcgamesn.com/indie/steam-now-selling-early-access-games. Google Scholar
    • Berger, J (2014). Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(4), 586–607. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Berger, J, A Humphreys, S Ludwig, WW Moe, O Netzer and DA Schweidel (2020). Uniting the tribes: Using text for marketing insight. Journal of Marketing, 84(1), 1–25. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Bhandari, U, K Chang and T Neben (2019). Understanding the impact of perceived visual aesthetics on user evaluations: An emotional perspective. Information & Management, 56(1), 85–93. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Bigné, JE, AS Mattila and L Andreu (2008). The impact of experiential consumption cognitions and emotions on behavioral intentions. Journal of Services Marketing, 22(4), 303–315. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Boyd, RL and JW Pennebaker (2015). Did Shakespeare write Double Falsehood? Identifying individuals by creating psychological signatures with text analysis. Psychological Science, 26(5), 570–582. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Brakus, JJ, BH Schmitt and L Zarantonello (2009). Brand experience: What is it? How is it measured? Does it affect loyalty?, Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 52–68. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Candi, M, H Jae, S Makarem and M Mohan (2017). Consumer responses to functional, aesthetic and symbolic product design in online reviews. Journal of Business Research, 81, 31–39. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Chambers, C, WC Feng, S Sahu and D Saha (2005). Measurement-based characterization of a collection of online games. In Proc. 5th ACM SIGCOMM Conf. Internet Measurement, USENIX Association, p. 1. Google Scholar
    • Chesbrough, HW (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press. Boston, MA, USA. Google Scholar
    • Chevalier, JA and D Mayzlin (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345–354. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Chintagunta, PK, S Gopinath and S Venkataraman (2010). The effects of online user reviews on movie box office performance: Accounting for sequential rollout and aggregation across local markets. Marketing Science, 29(5), 944–957. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Creusen, ME and JP Schoormans (2005). The different roles of product appearance in consumer choice. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(1), 63–81. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Davidovici-Nora, M (2009). The dynamics of co-creation in the video game industry: The case of world of warcraft. Communications & Strategies, 73, 43. Google Scholar
    • Dawkins, D (2020). Cyberpunk 2077 made its polish cofounders billionaires... But the game failed to live up to its hype. Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddawkins/2020/12/14/cyberpunk2077-made-its-polish-cofounders-billionaires–but-the-game-failed-to-live-up-to-its-hype/?sh=7e0df54c380f. Google Scholar
    • Dedehayir, O and M Steinert (2016). The hype cycle model: A review and future directions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108, 28–41. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • del Pilar Salas-Zárate, M, E López-López, R Valencia-García, N Aussenac-Gilles, A Almela and G Alor-Hernández (2014). A study on LIWC categories for opinion mining in Spanish reviews. Journal of Information Science, 40(6), 749–760. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Ehn, P and M Kyng (1987). The collective resource approach to systems design. In Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge, G BjerknesP EhnM Kyn (Eds.), pp. 17–58. Gower Publishing. Aarhus, Denmark, 17/12/2010. Google Scholar
    • Ertimur, B and G Coskuner-Balli (2015). Navigating the institutional logics of markets: Implications for strategic brand management. Journal of Marketing, 79(2), 40–61. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Fenn, J and M Raskino (2008). Mastering The Hype Cycle: How To Choose The Right Innovation At The Right Time. Harvard Business Press. Google Scholar
    • Gemser, G and H Perks (2015). Co-creation with customers: An evolving innovation research field. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 660–665. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gilmore, D, R Trump, V Velazquez, P Coughlan, J Fulton Suri, I Prokopoff and E Saperstein (1999). User-Centered Design in Practice. Paper presented at the User Centered Design in Practice - Problems and Possibilities, Stockholm, Sweden. Google Scholar
    • Green, J and H Jenkins (2009). The moral economy of Web 2.0: Audience research and convergence culture’, In J HoltA Perren (Eds.) Media Industries: History, Theory and Method, pp. 213–25. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar
    • Grissemann, US and NE Stokburger-Sauer (2012). Customer co-creation of travel services: The role of company support and customer satisfaction with the co-creation performance. Tourism Management, 33(6), 1483–1492. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gulliksen, J, A Lantz and I Boivie (1997). User centered design–problem and possibilites: A summary of the 1998 PDC & CSCW workshop. SIGCHI Bulletin, 31(2), 25–35. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Hayes, AF (2017). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Guilford Publications. Google Scholar
    • Hennig-Thurau, T, KP Gwinner, G Walsh and DD Gremler (2004). Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Herstatt, C and E von Hippel (1992). From experience: Developing new product concepts via the lead user method: A case study in a “low-tech” field. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(3), 213–221. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Homburg, C, M Schwemmle and C Kuehnl (2015). New Product Design: Concept, measurement, and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 79(3), 41–56. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Houde, S and C Hill (1997). What do prototypes prototype? In Handbook of Human–Computer Interaction, 2nd Edition, MG HelanderTK LandauerPV Prabhu (Eds.), pp. 367–381. North-Holland. Cupertino, California, USA. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Humphreys, A and RJH Wang (2018). Automated text analysis for consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1274–1306. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hunicke, R (2005). The case for dynamic difficulty adjustment in games. In Proc. 2005 ACM SIGCHI Int. Conf. Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, pp. 429–433. Hunicke: Valencia, Spain, June 2005. Jennings: Hershey, PA. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Ivory, MY and MA Hearst (2001). The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 33(4), 470–516. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Jennings, SC (2016). Co-creation and the distributed authorship of video games. In Examining the Evolution of Gaming and its Impact on Social, Cultural, and Political Perspectives, pp. 123–146. IGI Global. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Karami, A and B Zhou (2015). Online review spam detection by new linguistic features. In iConf. 2015 Proc. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/73749/448_ready.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y. Google Scholar
    • Katz, J (2001). Analytic induction, In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, NJ SmelserPB Baltes (Eds.), pp. xii, 13937–4605. Amsterdam and Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Kim, J and P Gupta (2012). Emotional expressions in online user reviews: How they influence consumers’ product evaluations. Journal of Business Research, 65(7), 985–992. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Kohler, T, J Fueller, K Matzler, D Stieger and J Füller (2011). Co-creation in virtual worlds: The design of the user experience. MIS Quarterly, 35(3), 773–788. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Korfiatis, N, E García-Bariocanal and S Sánchez-Alonso (2012). Evaluating content quality and helpfulness of online product reviews: The interplay of review helpfulness vs. review content. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 11(3), 205–217. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Krippendorff, K (1989). Product semantics: A triangulation and four design theories. In: Vakeva S (ed) Product Semantics ‘89: Proceedings from the Product Semantics ‘89 Conference. 16–19 May, 1989, University of Industrial Arts, Helsinki, pp a1–a23. Google Scholar
    • Krippendorff, K (2007). Computing Krippendorff’s alpha-reliability. Annenberg School for Communication Departmental Paper 43. Google Scholar
    • Krippendorff, K (2010). On Communicating: Otherness, Meaning, and Information, F Bermejo (Ed.). New York: Routledge. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Krippendorff, K and R Butter (1984). Product semantics-exploring the symbolic qualities of form. Departmental Papers (ASC), 40. Google Scholar
    • Kumar, N and I Benbasat (2006). Research note: The influence of recommendations and consumer reviews on evaluations of websites. Information Systems Research, 17(4), 425–439. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lajoie, EW and L Bridges (2014). Innovation decisions: Using the Gartner hype cycle. Library Leadership & Management, 28(4), 1–7. Google Scholar
    • Lavie, T and N Tractinsky (2004). Assessing dimensions of perceived visual aesthetics of web sites. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 60(3), 269–298. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lin, D, CP Bezemer and AE Hassan (2017). Studying the urgent updates of popular games on the Steam platform. Empirical Software Engineering, 22(4), 2095–2126. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lin, D, CP Bezemer, Y Zou and AE Hassan (2019). An empirical study of game reviews on the Steam platform. Empirical Software Engineering, 24(1), 170–207. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Liu, Y (2003). Engineering aesthetics and aesthetic ergonomics: Theoretical foundations and a dual-process research methodology. Ergonomics, 46, 1273–1292. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lui, HK and X Guo (2012). The effect of online consumer reviews on new product sales. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(1), 39–58. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lundvall, BÅ (2016). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. In The Learning Economy and the Economics of Hope, p. 85. Anthem Press, London (2010). Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Marzocchi, G, G Morandin and M Bergami (2013). Brand communities: Loyal to the community or the brand? European Journal of Marketing, 47, 93–114. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Maslow, AH (1955). Motivation and Personality: New York: Harper & Brothers, 1954. 411 pp. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 24, 447–448. Google Scholar
    • Mauri, AG and R Minazzi (2013). Web reviews influence on expectations and purchasing intentions of hotel potential customers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 34, 99–107. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Moshagen, M, J Musch and AS Göritz (2009). A blessing, not a curse: Experimental evidence for beneficial effects of visual aesthetics on performance. Ergonomics, 52(10), 1311–1320. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Newzoo. Global Games Market Report (2020). https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoo-games-market-numbers-revenues-and-audience-2020-2023/. Google Scholar
    • Noble, CH and M Kumar (2010). Exploring the appeal of product design: A grounded, value-based model of key design elements and relationships. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27, 640–657. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Norman, DA (2004). Introduction to this special section on beauty, goodness, and usability. Human–Computer Interaction, 19(4), 311–318. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Nyer, PU (1997). A study of the relationships between cognitive appraisals and consumption emotions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 296–304. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • O’Leary, DE (2008). Gartner’s hype cycle and information system research issues. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 9(4), 240–252. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Pandir, M and J Knight (2006). Homepage aesthetics: The search for preference factors and the challenges of subjectivity. Interacting with Computers, 18(6), 1351–1370. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Piller, FT, C Ihl and A Vossen (2010). A typology of customer co-creation in the innovation process. Available at SSRN 1732127. Google Scholar
    • Prahalad, CK and V Ramaswamy (2000). Co-opting customer competence, Harvard Business Review, 78, 79–87. Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Prahalad, CK and V Ramaswamy (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Rangaswamy, A and S Gupta (2000). Innovation adoption and diffusion in the digital environment: Some research opportunities. New Product Diffusion Models, 1, 75–98. Google Scholar
    • Richins, ML (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 127–146. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Rihova, I, D Buhalis, M Moital and MB Gouthro (2015). Conceptualising customer-to-customer value co-creation in tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research, 17(4), 356–363. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Rogers, EM (1962). Diffusion of Innovations, 1st Edition. New York: Free Press of Glencoe. Google Scholar
    • Rosson, MB and JM Carroll (2002). Usability Engineering: Scenario-based Development of Human–Computer Interaction. Morgan Kaufmann. San Francisco, CA, USA. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Smith, RE and WR Swinyard (1982). Information response models: An integrated approach. Journal of Marketing, 46(1), 81–93. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Sonderegger, A and J Sauer (2010). The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: Effects on user performance and perceived usability. Applied Ergonomics, 41(3), 403–410. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Srinivasan, V, WS Lovejoy and D Beach (1997). Integrated product design for marketability and manufacturing. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 154–163. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Steam, DB (2020). Counter–Strike: Global offensive, https://steamdb.info/app/730/graphs/. Google Scholar
    • Steamspy (2021). Games released in previous months, https://steamspy.com/year/. Google Scholar
    • Thüring, M and S Mahlke (2007). Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human–technology interaction. International Journal of Psychology, 42(4), 253–264. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Tractinsky, N, AS Katz and D Ikar (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13(2), 127–145. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Tractinsky, N and M Hassenzahl (2005). Arguing for aesthetics in human–computer interaction. I-com, 4(3), 66–68. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Ullah, R, N Amblee, W Kim and H Lee (2016). From valence to emotions: Exploring the distribution of emotions in online product reviews. Decision Support Systems, 81, 41–53. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Urban, GL and E von Hippel (1988). Lead user analyzes for the development of new industrial products. Management Science, 34(5), 569–582. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Vereijken, P, F Wijnands and W Stol (1995). Designing and testing prototypes (No. 2). AB-DLO. Google Scholar
    • Verganti, R (2008). Design, meanings, and radical innovation: A metamodel and a research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(5), 436–456. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Valve (2021). Steam & Game Stats, https://store.steampowered.com/stats/. Google Scholar
    • Walker, M, L Takayama and JA Landay (2002). High-fidelity or low-fidelity, paper or computer? Choosing attributes when testing web prototypes. In Proc. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 46, No. 5, pp. 661–665. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Washburn Jr, M, P Sathiyanarayanan, M Nagappan, T Zimmermann and C Bird (2016). What went right and what went wrong: An analysis of 155 postmortems from game development. In Proc. 38th Int. Conf. Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 280–289. IEEE/ACM. New York, NY, USA. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Zablocki, A, K Makri and MJ Houston (2019). Emotions within online reviews and their influence on product attitudes in Austria, USA and Thailand. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 46, 20–39. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Zhu, M, X Fang, SS Chan and J Brzezinski (2013). Building a dictionary of game-descriptive words to study playability. In CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1077–1082. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Zhu, F and X Zhang (2006). The influence of online consumer reviews on the demand for experience goods: The case of video games. In ICIS 2006 Proc., p. 25. Google Scholar
    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Be inspired by these New Titles in Business and Management