Most of my experience was positive, and there were really only two points to note that I can associate with negative feelings. While I was initially intrigued by the topic and excited to learn something through a game, I soon found out that I was not in fact playing a game. Perhaps I did not read the description and simply assumed all options were games based on the context of the assignment as well as the phrase "play and learning" emphasized in the Explorable Explanations description. I soon found out that the "game" was an interactive lecture. The screen was divided with a speaker on one side and a visual aid on the other that the speaker referenced and that the user could interact with by clicking to manipulate the image, which was a malleable model of the virus strain under discussion. The interactive part was fun, and the lecture was clear and engaging.

 

The only other instance that I associated with a negative feeling was a bit of frustration when the video resumed automatically as I was still interacting with the virus model. The speaker would let the user know when to interact with the model, place the lecture side of the screen on hold, and then resume the lecture after some time. It is worthy to note that at a certain point the speaker anticipated that some users would want more time with the models and suggested them to manual pause the video if they wanted more time.

 

After adjusting to a couple of "hick-ups" with expectations and timing, the rest of the experience was very positive. It was fun and engaging, and I learned a lot about viruses that I did not know and in a very fluid and easy manner, without any sense of frustration or stress. 

​

It may be worthy to note a point of contrast here as I initially explored the game "Adventures in Cognitive Biases," which for me was an intriguing topic. However, the experience was overwhelming negative, such that I clicked out of the game before finishing. The game went from clicking through text and associated images to clicking through more text by answering questions. I can't say I learned a whole lot, and I believe it was because the game was driven by text as its primary feature, as it made it difficult to process information on what is a fairly abstract concept. This design choice was in stark contrast to "Virus: Beauty of the Beast" which, while not a game per se, was driven by audio and interactive visuals. The ease with which I learned in comparison is noteworthy. 

​

Overall, I found this to be a valuable exercise. Putting myself in the place of a user and paying attention to the ups and downs of the emotional journey of using a technology product can inform very significant choices in design, which would perhaps not be noticed otherwise.