Affective feedback is an extension of biofeedback where the framework presenting the physiological information also influences the user’s physiological state. In their paper Intelligent Biofeedback using an Immersive Competitive Environment, Bersak et al. explain that in affective feedback, "the person is not only affected by the feedback information about their bio-state, but also by the way that it is presented."
This term "affective feedback" is not widely used and the difference between it and biofeedback may be difficult to grasp. According to the paper Affective Videogames and Modes of Affective Gaming: Assist Me, Challenge Me, Emote Me, another distinction between affective feedback and biofeedback is that in affective feedback, the physiological input is uncontrolled. So a game can use affective feedback if the physiological input is totally involuntary, but if the player masters control over this input, then the game reverts to being based on biofeedback. Yet another way of putting it is that in an affective game, the player and the game react to each other's reactions.
The "affective game" in the Bersak paper is a good example of affective feedback. It is a two player racing game called Relax-to-Win, and measures players' arousal levels by galvanic skin response (sweat!). The more relaxed a player is, the faster they go in the race. There is a competitive framework influencing the player's level of arousal, and unless the player can master controlling their arousal level, the physiological response will be largely involuntary.
This term "affective feedback" is not widely used and the difference between it and biofeedback may be difficult to grasp. According to the paper Affective Videogames and Modes of Affective Gaming: Assist Me, Challenge Me, Emote Me, another distinction between affective feedback and biofeedback is that in affective feedback, the physiological input is uncontrolled. So a game can use affective feedback if the physiological input is totally involuntary, but if the player masters control over this input, then the game reverts to being based on biofeedback. Yet another way of putting it is that in an affective game, the player and the game react to each other's reactions.
The "affective game" in the Bersak paper is a good example of affective feedback. It is a two player racing game called Relax-to-Win, and measures players' arousal levels by galvanic skin response (sweat!). The more relaxed a player is, the faster they go in the race. There is a competitive framework influencing the player's level of arousal, and unless the player can master controlling their arousal level, the physiological response will be largely involuntary.
Games with Affective Feedback
Nevermind - a horror game which uses affective feedback to change difficulty dynamically according to a player's heart rate and heart rate variability, or facial expressions. Either input method is detected as a level of fear and the more "scared" the player is, the more difficult it is to navigate the environments in the game. Without using any physiological sensors, the game tries to approximate affective feedback from how frantically the player makes inputs on a traditional controller. |
|
Champions of the Shengha - a card battling game for mobile devices similar to Hearthstone, where heart rate variability determines a player's "Magic Power." Players are encouraged to do deep breathing in order to focus their emotions. The competitive framework makes this affective game similar to Bersak's "Relax-to-Win" game. |
|
Affective feedback in games is part of a larger philosophy of affective design. Affective design is defined in the paper A Review of Affective Design towards Video Games as design choices that are meant to recognize or predict players' emotions in order to reduce frustration and maintain pleasurable levels of immersion, challenge and fun. Physiological input is not necessary for good affective design, but certain choices should be made while developing a game to keep players compelled and affective feedback happens to be a novel, intelligent approach.
A game's ability to enter a state of "flow" can be attributed to the success of a game's affective design. Jones says players enter flow when they have clear goals, the ability to focus on the task deeply, immediate feedback, mastery of the control system, concern for self disappearing, and an altered sense of duration of game time is altered. The following video describes a pseudoscientific version of flow accomplished by the affective design decision of giving Resident Evil 4 a dynamic difficulty system.
A game's ability to enter a state of "flow" can be attributed to the success of a game's affective design. Jones says players enter flow when they have clear goals, the ability to focus on the task deeply, immediate feedback, mastery of the control system, concern for self disappearing, and an altered sense of duration of game time is altered. The following video describes a pseudoscientific version of flow accomplished by the affective design decision of giving Resident Evil 4 a dynamic difficulty system.