Measuring the Impact of Game Controllers on
Player Experience in FPS Games
Kathrin M. Gerling, Matthias Klauser, Joerg Niesenhaus
University of Duisburg-Essen
Forsthausweg 2
47057 Duisburg, Germany
+49 (0) 203 379 1150
{kathrin.gerling, matthias.klauser, joerg.niesenhaus}@uni-due.de
ABSTRACT This is a major challenge for interaction designers since usable
An increasing amount of games is released on multiple platforms, game controls have to be implemented without altering game
and game designers face the challenge of integrating different mechanics—although sometimes the game design is adjusted for
interaction paradigms for console and PC users while keeping the input controls and output rendering provided by the respective
core mechanics of a game. However, little research has addressed gaming system. Different input controls may also affect player
the influence of game controls on player experience. In this paper, experience, depending on how the available input device suits the
we examine the impact of mouse and keyboard versus gamepad game mechanics. This issue is not only important for player
control in first-person shooters using the PC and PlayStation 3 performance, but also for the individual, personal experience
versions of Battlefield: Bad Company 2. We conducted a study while engaging with games, largely referred to as user experience
with 45 participants to compare player experience and game [1] or player experience [12]. With the recent interest in
usability issues of participants who had previously played similar evaluating user experience in games, which lead to the
games on one of the respective gaming systems, while also development of questionnaires investigating player experiences,
exploring the effects of players being forced to switch to an new survey measures are available to examine relations between
unfamiliar platform. The results show that players switching to a hardware interface and player experience [2, 6].
new platform experience more usability issues and consider In this paper, we aim to examine the impact of hardware game
themselves more challenged, but report an equally positive overall input controls on player experience. Because differences are likely
experience as players on their comfort platform. to be especially prominent in games which rely heavily on mouse
control, we present an evaluation of the first person shooting
Categories and Subject Descriptors (FPS) game Battlefield: Bad Company 2. In our study, the game is
H.5.2 [User Interfaces]: Ergonomics, Evaluation/methodology; either played on a regular PC using keyboard and mouse or on a
K.8.0 [Personal Computing]: General – Game. Sony PlayStation 3 using the dual-shock 3 wireless game pad,
because those two input controls represent the most common
interaction paradigms for games of this genre.
General Terms
Measurement, Experimentation, Human Factors.
2. INTERACTION IN FPS GAMES
Keywords 2.1 Control in PC and Console FPS Games
When it comes to hand-eye coordination and reaction time, first-
User experience, player experience, player engagement, usability,
person shooters are one of the most demanding game genres. The
first person shooter, game controls, multi-platform development.
orientation of a player in a FPS game requires methods to control
both the position and the direction of view of the player in the
1. INTRODUCTION game world [8]. Early first-person shooters like Wolfenstein 3D
Over the past years, multi-platform development has become and Doom offer only horizontal orientation due to the lack of real
increasingly popular in the video games industry. Many games are 3D environments. Later first-person shooters added the possibility
being simultaneously released for the PC, major console platforms of changing the focus into all directions, a technique referred to as
as well as mobile devices. Besides technical limitations during the mouse-look [4]. Additionally, cursor keys were replaced by the
development process, different platforms are also associated with WASD-keys for better ergonomic use of combined keyboard and
fundamentally different interaction paradigms or input control. mouse controls. This control scheme is still a common setup for
PC-based FPS games. On consoles, FPSs had their breakthrough
with Sony's PlayStation home console in 1994, which offered dual
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for analog sticks. In most games, the left analog stick is used for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are forward and backward movement as well as strafing, while the
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that right hand analogue stick is used for the free look in order to
copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy
adjust the movement and fire direction, also many games offer
otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists,
requires prior specific permission and/or a fee.
additional setup options like an inverse z-axis. Although first-
MindTrek'11, September 28-30, 2011, Tampere, Finland. person shooters are now a common sight on consoles and part of
Copyright 2011 ACM 978-1-4503-0816-8/11/09....$10.00. the biggest franchises of the gaming industry (Halo, Call of Duty,
Killzone, Battlefield), critics often blame console controllers for video games were identified, namely Flow, Imaginative and
their lack of precise game control. Also, the fact that a lot of Sensory Immersion, Competence, Suspense, Negative Affect,
console FPS games offer additional and/or optional player Control and Social Presence. Based on these Nine UX
assistance like auto-locks and target snapping to overcome control Dimensions, the Game Experience Questionnaire [6] was
issues suggests that console hardware is less suitable for FPS developed, which we apply to measure PX in Battlefield: Bad
games than a keyboard/mouse setup on the PC. Company 2. Further research on PX by Nacke and Drachen [12]
highlights the temporal and contextual component of experience;
2.2 Studies of Player Performance in Games for example, the impact of previous experience on PX which is
Natapov et al. [14] compared user’s performances with especially important in the context of our study.
Nintendo’s Wii Remote and the Classic Controller for the task of
pointing using Fitts’s Law. A standard mouse was used as a 3.2 Studies of Player Experience in Games
baseline condition. In comparison to the mouse both console Game metrics data is not only used for balancing and bug-
controllers performed poorly in terms of throughput, speed and tracking, but also to define play-personas, which are modeled
error rate. A similar study by Klochek and MacKenzie [8] used a representations of how players interact with the game and can
three-dimensional environment to compare an Xbox gamepad provide a deeper understanding of how players experience a game
with a standard pc mouse for the tasks of tracking a moving target [18]. Questionnaires like the Game Experience Questionnaire
with and without acceleration over several seconds. While both (GEQ) [6] or the Game Engagement Questionnaire (GEnQ) [2]
tested devices performed equally well in tracking the target’s are used individually or are combined with other methods to
velocity, the mouse allowed users to accelerate faster in order to measure player experience. Nacke & Lindley [13] used
correct errors in position. Isokoski and Martin [7] measured the questionnaires and psychophysiological methods to measure the
performance of a wheel mouse, an Xbox360 gamepad, a keyboard player experience in a FPS game. In another empirical study [13],
with a standard mouse and a trackmouse in the task of FPS target participants played a FPS game modification based on Half-Life
acquisition. All settings using a mouse for aiming performed 2, in which sound and music were manipulated (on/off), while
better than the Xbox360 gamepad. Another study developed a psychophysiological recordings of electrodermal activity (EDA)
prototypical two-handed game input device for FPS games and and facial muscle activity were recorded in addition to the Game
compared a prototype with a standard mouse and joystick. Experience Questionnaire (GEQ). Results indicated no major
Participants performed targeting tasks, scoring best with the impact on EMG and EDA, but showed significant effects on all
experimental controller followed by mouse and joystick [9]. dimensions of the GEQ. Nacke [11] compared the Wii Remote
controls with a PS2 gamepad within the game Resident Evil 4 by
3. PLAYER EXPERIENCE IN GAMES measuring the psychophysiological responses, as well as spatial
During the past years, different approaches towards describing presence and the player experience using questionnaires.
and measuring player experience in games have been made. The Although significantly different physiological results were found,
term player experience is derived from the phenomenon of user game play was experienced equally well with both controllers.
experience (UX), which is defined in ISO 9241-210, describing Likewise, Limperos et al. [10] explored the impact of Wii Remote
how a person perceives and responds to the interaction with a and PS2 gamepad on player experience in Madden 2008, and
system, highlighting the subjective, psychological nature of the found that the using the PS2 controller was subjectively perceived
phenomenon and focusing on the interaction process. Bernhaupt as more enjoyable. A study by Drachen et al. [5] indicates a
[1] underlines that player experience (PX) is dependent on significant correlation between psychophysiological arousal (i.e.,
subjective experiences evoked by games and phases of play they EDA and heart rate) and self-reported gameplay experience (i.e.,
offer, and that interaction paradigms of games may influence PX. GEQ) while playing three different FPS games.
3.1 Models of Player Experience 4. EVALUATION: BFBC2
Player experience in video games describes the individual
perception of the interaction process between player and game. 4.1 Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Among others, the GameFlow model by Sweetser and Wyeth [17] Battlefield Bad Company 2 was released in 2010 by Electronic
describes player enjoyment in games based on Csikszentmihalyi’s Arts and is one of the most popular first-person shooters on the
idea of Flow, which describes an experience evolving from the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 consoles as well as the PC. It sold
optimal alignment between challenge and personal abilities. They almost 6 million copies and has a metacritic score of 87 (PC) and
introduce dimensions such as challenge, skills or immersion, 88 (PS3/Xbox360). The game offers solid and predictable single
which are associated with criteria for enjoyment in games. player mode and provides players with a typical single player
Calvillo-Gámez [3] present the CEGE model, which aims to campaign experience. BFBC2 uses common keyboard and mouse
provide an instrument for the evaluation of gaming experience controls on the PC. On both consoles, the analog stick controls
based on an examination of Core Elements of the Gaming are consistent with the common control patterns of both sticks.
Experience, Video Games and Puppetry. Similar to the GameFlow Users can change the controls in the setup according to their
model, the CEGE model is based on an extensive analysis of preferences, yet during the study subjects were only allowed to
psychological phenomena associated with player experience. inverse the z-axis.
Likewise, Poels et al. create a model of Nine UX Dimensions
[16]. It is based on brainstorming sessions with players, which
4.2 Methodology and Hypotheses
We applied a 2x2 between subject design with the independent
were held to gain insight into individual experiences while
measure of participants being either comfortable with playing on a
engaging with digital games. Additionally, expert reviews were
PC or on console platforms. To determine a participants’ comfort
introduced to further investigate aspects which might influence
platform, a short questionnaire on prior gaming experience was
player experience. Thereby, nine dimensions of enjoyment in
Figure 1. Mean GEnQ ratings for each platform (CI: 95%). Figure 2. Mean GEQ ratings for each platform (CI: 95%).
applied. The dependent measures player experience, perceived significantly better if players were using their comfort platform
usability and efficiency were collected as follows: The Game (cf. Table 1). Influence of the hardware interface (1): Three
Experience Questionnaire (GEQ) first introduced by Ijsselsteijn et MANOVAs were calculated to examine if a particular hardware
al. [6] measures the seven dimensions Competence, Flow, interface led to different levels of player experience, player’s
Negative Affect, Positive Affect, Challenge, Tension, and efficiency, or perceived usability. No significant results were
Immersion. Furthermore, we applied the Game Engagement found. Influence of efficiency on player experience (2): The
Questionnaire (GEnQ) by Brockmyer et al. [2], which was number of deaths shows a positive correlation with the
designed to explore player engagement in video games and dimensions GEQ-Negative Affect (r=.428, p=.004, N=43), GEQ-
examines the dimensions Immersion, Presence, Flow and Tension (r=.314, p=.040, N=43) and GEQ-Challenge (r=.338,
Absorption. ISO-Norm Questionnaire 9241/10 was included in p=.027, N=43). Influence of the comfort platform (3): Three
the evaluation to investigate usability issues, which might MANOVAs were calculated to examine if prior experience with
potentially affect player experience. Additionally, we recorded the hardware interface led to different levels of player experience,
basic player performance metrics, tracking how many times efficiency, or perceived usability. For player experience, the
players died throughout the evaluation and investigating which following significant differences were found: Participants who did
parts of the level they completed. The following three main not use their comfortable device felt more challenged (GEQ-
hypotheses are examined: The hardware interface influences the Challenge (F (41, 1) = 12.806; p = .001, ηp² = .238) than those
player’s experience and efficiency (1), player efficiency has an who used their comfort device. Additionally, players felt more
impact on player experience (2) and using one’s comfort platform engaged (GEnQ-Absorption (F (41, 1) = 5.017; p = .031, ηp² =
will influence player experience (3). .109). Besides that, no significant results regarding player
efficiency were found. However, differences in perceived usability
4.3 Participants and Procedure were observed: Players using a new platform reported higher
Forty-five adults participated in the evaluation (N=45, 38 male), values for Error Tolerance (F (41, 1) = 8.502; p = .006, ηp² =
their mean age was 24 years (SD=3.5). Most participants were .179) and on Individualization (F (41, 1) = 7.868; p = .008, ηp² =
recruited at a local university. All subjects were familiar with FPS .168).
games, playing them on a regular basis using a PC or a gaming
console (PS3 or Xbox 360), yet none of them had played BFBC2 Table 1. Mean ratings for significant questionnaire results.
before. After a short introduction to the experiment, participants Comfort Platform New Platform
were asked to provide information on previous gaming
experience. Then, players were evenly assigned to one of the M SD M SD
following four settings: (1) PC player assigned to PC condition, GEQ-Challenge 2.21 0.59 2.90 0.68
(2) PC player assigned to console condition, (3) console player GEnQ-Absorption 1.61 0.39 1.87 0.39
assigned to console condition and (4) console player assigned to Error Tolerance 4.51 0.84 3.76 0.81
PC condition. Participants were asked to play the second level of Individualization 4.61 1.07 3.65 1.12
the single player campaign of BFBC2, being told that their goal
would be to reach the end of the level. Depending on the setting, 4.5 Discussion
either game pad or mouse and keyboard had to be used to The results show that player experience in BFBC2 is only
accomplish this task. After twenty minutes, the session was partially affected by gaming controller hardware. In this context,
aborted if players had not finished the level. Then, participants the most interesting observation is that although players felt
were asked to answer the GEQ, the GEnQ as well as the ISO- significantly more challenged by the game if they were not
Norm questionnaire. allowed to play on their comfort platform, GEQ ratings for
Positive Affect remained similarly high throughout all groups
4.4 Results while Negative Affect ratings were relatively low. This suggests
The results of the evaluation suggest that the participants of this that if a certain level of usability is kept, a change in gaming
evaluation experienced an above-average gaming experience (cf. platform is not followed by a significant decrease in player
Figure 1 and Figure 2). Additionally, overall results of the ISO- experience when engaging with BFBC2. This is supported by
Norm questionnaire suggest a low level of usability issues, yet player performance metrics: Although player deaths seem to
ratings of perceived error tolerance and individualization were influence the ratings of the game in general, and players who die
more frequently rate the game as more challenging, stressful and [3] Calvillo-Gámez, E. H., Cairns, P., & Cox, A. L. 2010.
report a higher level of Negative Affect, no interrelations between Assessing the core elements of the gaming experience. In:
comfort platform and this effect could be observed. However, Bernhaupt, R. (Ed.): Evaluating User Experience in Games.
perceived usability is affected by a platform change, as the results Springer, London, UK.
show that player ratings are significantly lower than when playing [4] Cummings, A.H. 2007. The Evolution of Game Controllers
on a comfort platform. This issue may be caused by a lack of and Control Schemes and Their Effect on Their Games. In
familiarity with interaction paradigms on different gaming Proceedings of MC07, Southampton, UK.
platforms, or by users paying more attention to the interface as a
result of being forced to play on an unfamiliar gaming platform. [5] Drachen, A., Nacke, L.E., Yannakakis, G. & Pedersen, A.L.
2010. Correlation Between Heart Rate, Electrodermal
However, the choice of controllers within this study bears certain Activity and Player Experience in First-Person Shooter
limitations regarding its implications for the future development games. In Proc. of the 5th ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on
of multi-platform games: While designing for gamepad and Video Games. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 49-54.
keyboard/mouse setups represents one of the very basic problems
in multi-platform game design, challenges associated with the [6] Ijsselsteijn, W.A., de Kort, Y.A.W., & Poels, K. (in
recent focus on whole-body interaction in games (e.g. Microsoft preparation). The Game Experience Questionnaire:
Kinect and Sony PlayStation Move) are likely to affect games on Development of a self-report measure to assess the
a lower level. In this context, the implementation of controller- psychological impact of digital games.
specific game mechanics may be required to fully reveal the [7] Isokoski, P. & Martin, B. 2007. Performance of input
potential of motion-based gaming rather than mapping different devices in FPS target acquisition. In Proceedings of ACE
control schemes to similar mechanics across multiple platforms. 2007, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 240-241.
[8] Klochek, C. & MacKenzie, I.S. 2006. Performance measures
5. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK of game controllers in an three-dimensional environment. In
In this paper, we briefly examined how player experience in first Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2006, Toronto, Canada.
person shooter games is affected by the available gaming
hardware using the example of Battlefield: Bad Company 2. The [9] Kwak, M. & Salem, B. 2009. Designing a Game Controller
results show that although players do experience usability issues for Novice HALO3 Players. In Proceedings of ICEC’09.
and feel more challenged when faced with a new gaming Springer Verlag, Berlin, 325-326.
environment, their overall experience can be positive if the game [10] Limperos, A.M., Schmierbach, M.G., Kegerise, A.D., &
is well-designed. Given the fact that BFBC2 is a rather popular Dardis, F.E. 2011. Gaming Across Different Consoles:
game and reviews indicate a generally good gaming experience, Exploring the Influence of Control Scheme on Game-Player
this suggests that platform-related interaction problems have no Enjoyment. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
significant impact on overall player enjoyment. Thus, rather than Networking, 14(6), 345-350.
trying to further adjust FPS games to a particular platform, game [11] Nacke, L.E. 2010. Wiimote vs. Controller:
design efforts could be focused on creating generally enjoyable Electroencephalographic Measurement of Affective
game mechanics. Further research is necessary to establish Gameplay Interaction. In Proceedings of FuturePlay 2010,
common interaction paradigms, which might also support game Vancouver, BC. 159-166.
designers when creating multi-platform games. In future work, we
aim to examine interferences between gaming hardware and [12] Nacke, L.E. & Drachen, A. 2011. Towards a Framework of
player experience using different gaming hardware. For example, Player Experience Research. In Proceedings of EPEX’11 at
impact of player experience on physical activity using novel game FDG 2011, Bordeaux, France.
controls such as Microsoft Kinect. Additionally, the exploration [13] Nacke, L.E. & Lindley, C. 2009. Affective Ludology, Flow
of the impact of player experience in different game genres as well and Immersion in a FirstPerson Shooter: Measurement of
as the impact of different gaming platforms on less enjoyable Player Experience. Loading, 3(5).
games might provide further insight into the impact of controller
[14] Napatov, D.,Castellucci, S.J., & MacKenzie, I.S. 2009. ISO
hardware on player experience.
9241-9 evaluation of video game controllers. In Proceedings
of Graphics Interfaces 2009, Toronto, Canada.
6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS [15] Pagulayan, R., Keeker, K., Wixon, D., Romero, R.L. &
We would like to thank Lennart Nacke, Jennifer Klatt and Oliver Fuller, T. 2003. User-centered design in games. In: Jacko,
Daems for their feedback on this paper. Furthermore, we thank J.A. and Sears, A. (Eds.) The Human-Computer Interaction
Tobias Reinartz and the participants of the evaluation for Handbook, New York, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
supporting our research.
[16] Poels, K., de Kort, Y., & Ijsselsteijn, W. 2007. ―It is always a
lot of fun!‖: Exploring Dimensions of Digital Dame
7. REFERENCES Experience Using Focus Group Methodology. In
[1] Bernhaupt, R. 2010. User Experience Evaluation in Proceedings of FuturePlay 2007, Toronto, Canada.
Entertainment. In Evaluating User Experience in Games.
Springer, London, UK. [17] Sweetser, P. & Wyeth, P. 2005. GameFlow: a model for
evaluating player enjoyment in games. Computers in
[2] Brockmyer, J.H., Fox, C.M., Curtiss, K.A., McBroom, E., Entertainment, 3(3).
Burkhart, K.M., & Pidruzny, J.N. 2009. The development of
the Game Engagement Questionnaire: A measure of [18] Tychsen, A. & Canossa, A. 2008. Defining Personas in
engagement in video game-playing. Journal of Experimental Games Using Metrics. In Proceedings of FuturePlay 2008,
Social Psychology, 45, 624-634. Toronto, Canada. ACM, 2008, 73-80.
