Maybe some of these gradings could be quantitative instead of qualitative - i.e. energy expenditure could be expressed as an average/maximum number of METS? Also the Safety factor may be better as a lowest age range, or maybe just a pass/fail. Thoughts?

The numeric grading of each component keeps the rating system simple and effective for comparisons, but it is in no means the 'complete' description. In that respect, the MET values are numeric, so they could be easily included in this system.
The rating system, as shown above, is probably best suited to an 'informal' first impressions review. More detailed and comprehensive rating components (such as MET values and more accurate testing for the 1:1 ratio for Game Response Time), could be used for more thorough reviews. Perhaps we could add an additional column for more specific gradings?

As it stands Energy Expenditure will probably relate more to 'perceived effort' rather than MET values as the reviewer will give an 'impression' of how much energy is used/required rather than a calculated or measured energy output. It really depends on who is reviewing the experience (home user or lab testing) but certainly provision should be made for both.

Hi guys I see a big big problem here:
It will not be possible to rate the "fun" factor. Because we have a huge range of end consumer!

You're right Sandra, you can't have one view on a qualitative system... but the more people add a view the more accurate the value becomes.

This is a pretty standard style of research, I'm not an expert here so take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likert_scale which explains the concept far better than I can!

Also note how Brett finds Wii Fit "fun", and I don't - it'll all average out ;)

It still makes me laugh playing Wii fit, the toaster cuts me up everytime (what does that say about my sense of humour :)) Regarding qualifying and rating 'Fun' well it can only ever be subjective. The MET measurement is already an 'average of results' (energy expenditure). To give meaningful results for FUN, we need a large quantity of responses.
The system certainly needs refinement, anyone with statistical skills out there? The idea at the moment is 'proof of concept', is this type of evaluation system worth while or not?

I think this evaluation is worthwhile - it helps define what attributes are desirable for exergames, and ultimately could be a good indicator before someone buys any equipment if it is the kind of exergame that'll get them moving or end up in the cupboard.

We might not have the right categories of the scoring system may not be perfect, but it's a start to educate people about exergames, and I'm all for that.

what about ages: only for kids or for all ages,
and setup

Exergaming methods and products may be very age specific or be designed to be 'age irrelevant' (Wii Fit). The Rating Table is not a means of showing each and every aspect of an exergaming method or product but a way of rating the 'effectiveness of the experience'.
The M60 rating outlines the absolutely essentual components that should be inclusive of every exergaming experience. It is rather unimportant whether the experience was designed to be for a 10 year old or 80 year old or every age, it is more a matter of the experience being fun, engaging, movitating, responsive and informative.
The M60 rating, particularly, needs to be a way of evaluating if the 'exergame experience (product and or service) was successful. To that end, the Rating System must include THE most important components that makeup exergaming, personally, I don't think age is one of those requirements.

I think there could be an important factor in the ease of implementation here from what Sandra has said. If an exergame is very difficult to set up, or takes a lot of time, then the experience would be reduced... however - this would need to make an assumption about the way the exergame was being used, i.e. in a school programme or in a clinic, so for now I agree with Brett that it's not a true attribute of an exergame, but it's certainly something that could be built in later on.

There could be implementation ratings for how appropriate exergames are for seniors, public spaces, rehab, etc. Good ideas coming out here, so let's get the core scoring system relevant and take the next step after this has been proved/disproved and focus on the exergame for what it is, not how it's used.

Motivation and Engagement are a little tricky to pick up on cold I think. Could they be better defined? Those two words say the following to me Engagement: The initial appeal of the exergame, to get someone playing, Motivation: The attachment to the play that keeps a player using the exergame.

I know thats a bit at odds to the definitions above, what's the input here from others?

I've adjusted Motivation and Engagement but I'm not sure I added too much clarity?

Hi Brett,
for me "Immersion" is the key word. But do the other people also know what it is?

Rating:
What is the meaning of 10? Is it compared to only exergames? Or should be compare it with jogging and Step Aerobic? Or personal point of view: we wish for something and the game fits or wishes?

Some games would get a 10 because they have what I wish. But compared to Step Aerobic it would be a 8.
(Well some games have something I was dreaming about and I never expected it in real :-)
But this is the point of view of a gamer)

When evaluating a game/exergame, you do not need to compare that game to any other! There are 12 components (at the moment) to create an exergaming experience evaluation of every game/exergame. For example, let's consider the 'Motivation' component. If you believe Wii Fit's gameplay and game mechanics are superb, without fault and therefore perfect, then you should give the WiiFit a rating of 10 for 'Motivation', a perfect rating - (very unlikely).
There are NO perfect exergaming experiences available today, none! But there are some games/exergames that may get a rating of 10 for some of their components.

A good example of a component that may receive a perfect rating is for 'Game Response'. If you believe when playing a game that there is no delay at all in your actions between using your wiimote and your avatar moving on the screen, then this component may well receive a perfect score of 10. Isn't the motion plus supposed to give the Wiimote a 1:1 ratio? But does this work perfectly in every game? Not to my knowledge.

I think that's clearer Brett and I think immersion is a key concept in exergaming (it's common enough word for most too, Sandra)

By the way, I've had a suggestion that "Rock Band" be included n the list of exergames in the beta test, what's the feeling here? I think it'd throw up some interesting scores.

Using a rating system based on a maximum score of 10 probably isn't ideal. Statistically a system based on 5 or 7 would be more reliable. Using 10 at this point was to indicate how divergent our opinions were not how similar they are. The Rating System requires lots of scrutiny so please, keep 'scrutinizing' until something breaks or holds steady, either way is fine.

Well I would give some games 10 points because:
* there are what I am looking for
* there are compared to others amazing
* I love the gameplay and I love the exercise
They do not need to be perfect to get a 10.

For me 10 is something like: Wow, great, fantastic, unbelievable, ... Of course no game is perfect. But do they have to be perfect? Special when we look at Game Accessibility points. Then most of the games would fail. The gamplay is the key. When I love the game and the gameplay, then I would like to give it 10 points.

I would like to have besides skill level also the column: Intuitive Gameplay: how much do you have to learn to play.
I think Wii Fit is some kind of difficult. you have to look what button to press next: A or B or whatever.

Tony Hawk Ride is amazing: just go on the board and drive :-) You can have lots of fun, also when you do not know the tricks.
"One Button start" would be also a nice criteria.

10=perfect in your experience. There's no reason why you can't rate a particular aspect of a game 10 is that's what you think. Of course, rating every category 10 makes no sense. Like you say, nothings perfect.

Out of interest, we discussed the "one start" button on a previous skype call. It's often thought a desirable function for fitness centres and schools it turns out in practice to take quite a bit away from the game and make it less fun. i.e. people like to choose the car/character.

Well, it looks like you misunderstand what "one button start" means :-)
That is very very important for:
* Arcade Play
* Game Accessibility
* Clubs

You can start the game with just one button. Of course you can select lots of things. :-)
The otherway is more disturbing: imagine you want to play and you have always go to the whole option menu. That is very boring and annoying. We tried SSX3 at a game event and people did not like it, because it was not intuitive.

No, don't misunderstand. Did you miss the conversaion on the call about gamecycle? With it's macros for one button starting?

Basically

>> "one start" button on a previous skype call. It's often thought a desirable function for fitness centres and schools it turns out in practice to take quite a bit away from the game and make it less fun. i.e. people like to choose the car/character.

That is not what the IGDA GA-SIG means with "one button start" :-)

I think we've lost a very important factor moving through to this version - that's sustainability over time. This must be a key factor in exergaming that sets it aside from "January Gym Members" and gives the genre's biggest benefit to the user

I'm just new to this conversation....sorry if this question has been discussed off-line or on skype. Has any consideration been given to the appropriateness of a games inclusion in an educational environment? Perhaps a scale that identifies an appropriate level to which a game is recommended?

Hi Dwayne, yes we've thought about this and you're more than welcome to jump onto the skype calls and participate. The thinking is that we look at the exergame experience in it's own right as a first pass then we overlay applications (i.e. educational setting, arcade setting, home setting, rehab setting etc etc) as a second pass.