基于位置的游戏低代码或无代码编写工具的比较分析

IF 2.4 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Christos Batsaras, S. Xinogalos
{"title":"基于位置的游戏低代码或无代码编写工具的比较分析","authors":"Christos Batsaras, S. Xinogalos","doi":"10.3390/mti7090086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents a comparative analysis of four low or no-code location-based game (LBG) authoring tools, namely Taleblazer, Aris, Actionbound, and Locatify. Each tool is examined in detail, with an emphasis on the functions and capabilities it provides for the development of LBGs. The article builds on the history and purpose of LBGs, their characteristics, as well as basic concepts and previous applications, placing emphasis both on the technological and pedagogical dimensions of these games. The evaluation of the tools is based on certain criteria, or metrics, recorded in the literature and empirical data collected through the development of prototype games for each tool. The tools are comparatively analyzed in terms of the LBG’s constituent features they incorporate, the fundamental and additional functionality provided to the developer, as well as the existence or absence of features that captivate players in the game experience. Moreover, feedback is provided based on the practical use of the platforms for developing LBGs in order to support prospective developers in making an informed choice of an LBG platform for implementing a specific game. The games were created by taking advantage of as many features of the tools as possible in order to have a more fair and complete evaluation. This study aims to highlight the affordances and limitations of the investigated low or no-code LBG authoring tools, enabling anyone interested in developing an LBG to choose the most appropriate tool taking into account their needs and technological background or designing their own LBG authoring tools.","PeriodicalId":52297,"journal":{"name":"Multimodal Technologies and Interaction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Low or No-Code Authoring Tools for Location-Based Games\",\"authors\":\"Christos Batsaras, S. Xinogalos\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/mti7090086\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article presents a comparative analysis of four low or no-code location-based game (LBG) authoring tools, namely Taleblazer, Aris, Actionbound, and Locatify. Each tool is examined in detail, with an emphasis on the functions and capabilities it provides for the development of LBGs. The article builds on the history and purpose of LBGs, their characteristics, as well as basic concepts and previous applications, placing emphasis both on the technological and pedagogical dimensions of these games. The evaluation of the tools is based on certain criteria, or metrics, recorded in the literature and empirical data collected through the development of prototype games for each tool. The tools are comparatively analyzed in terms of the LBG’s constituent features they incorporate, the fundamental and additional functionality provided to the developer, as well as the existence or absence of features that captivate players in the game experience. Moreover, feedback is provided based on the practical use of the platforms for developing LBGs in order to support prospective developers in making an informed choice of an LBG platform for implementing a specific game. The games were created by taking advantage of as many features of the tools as possible in order to have a more fair and complete evaluation. This study aims to highlight the affordances and limitations of the investigated low or no-code LBG authoring tools, enabling anyone interested in developing an LBG to choose the most appropriate tool taking into account their needs and technological background or designing their own LBG authoring tools.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52297,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Multimodal Technologies and Interaction\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Multimodal Technologies and Interaction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/mti7090086\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Multimodal Technologies and Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/mti7090086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将比较分析四种低代码或无代码定位游戏(LBG)创作工具,即Taleblazer、Aris、Actionbound和Locatify。我们将详细研究每种工具,重点介绍它们为lbg开发提供的功能和能力。本文将基于lbg的历史和目的,它们的特点,基本概念和之前的应用,并将重点放在这些游戏的技术和教学层面上。对工具的评估是基于特定的标准或参数,这些标准或参数记录在通过开发每种工具的原型游戏而收集的文献和经验数据中。根据LBG所包含的组成功能,提供给开发者的基本和附加功能,以及在游戏体验中吸引玩家的功能的存在或缺失,对这些工具进行比较分析。此外,我们还会根据开发LBG平台的实际使用情况提供反馈,以支持潜在开发者在选择LBG平台执行特定游戏时做出明智的选择。游戏是通过尽可能多地利用这些工具的功能来创造的,目的是为了获得更公平和完整的评估。本研究旨在强调所调查的低代码或无代码LBG创作工具的优点和局限性,使任何对开发LBG感兴趣的人都可以根据自己的需求和技术背景选择最合适的工具或设计自己的LBG创作工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Analysis of Low or No-Code Authoring Tools for Location-Based Games
This article presents a comparative analysis of four low or no-code location-based game (LBG) authoring tools, namely Taleblazer, Aris, Actionbound, and Locatify. Each tool is examined in detail, with an emphasis on the functions and capabilities it provides for the development of LBGs. The article builds on the history and purpose of LBGs, their characteristics, as well as basic concepts and previous applications, placing emphasis both on the technological and pedagogical dimensions of these games. The evaluation of the tools is based on certain criteria, or metrics, recorded in the literature and empirical data collected through the development of prototype games for each tool. The tools are comparatively analyzed in terms of the LBG’s constituent features they incorporate, the fundamental and additional functionality provided to the developer, as well as the existence or absence of features that captivate players in the game experience. Moreover, feedback is provided based on the practical use of the platforms for developing LBGs in order to support prospective developers in making an informed choice of an LBG platform for implementing a specific game. The games were created by taking advantage of as many features of the tools as possible in order to have a more fair and complete evaluation. This study aims to highlight the affordances and limitations of the investigated low or no-code LBG authoring tools, enabling anyone interested in developing an LBG to choose the most appropriate tool taking into account their needs and technological background or designing their own LBG authoring tools.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Multimodal Technologies and Interaction
Multimodal Technologies and Interaction Computer Science-Computer Science Applications
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信