See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/321726201

Digital Games’ Development Model

Article  in  EAI Endorsed Transactions on Serious Games · December 2017

DOI: 10.4108/eai.8-12-2017.153399

CITATIONS READS

0 761

3 authors:

Tiago Cardoso João Pedro Sousa

Universidade NOVA de Lisboa Universidade NOVA de Lisboa
32 PUBLICATIONS   153 CITATIONS    1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

J. Barata
Universidade NOVA de Lisboa
296 PUBLICATIONS   3,362 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

openMOS - Open dynamic Manufacturing Operating System for Smart Plug-and- Produce Automation Components View project

[Link] View project

All content following this page was uploaded by J. Barata on 12 January 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

EAI Endorsed Transactions
on Serious Games Research Article

Digital Games’ Development Model

Tiago Cardoso1,2,*, João Sousa1 and José Barata1,2

1
Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Monte da Caparica – Portugal
2
Uninova – Centero de Desenvolvimento de Novas Tecnologias, Monte da Caparica – Portugal

Abstract

Nowadays technology follows us everywhere. However, it is often overlooked when dealing with social issues, despite how
easily it might improve the life of countless handicapped individuals. In other words, small pieces of software, under the
form of games, can help the individual remain focus and go through treatments and therapies effortlessly. But game
development is tricky because simply adopting a software development approach is not enough, as it assumes that games as
a software can be developed through the commonly used systematic processes, yet these do have specific requirements. This
paper proposes a new game development model to successfully deliver a quality serious game, towards social causes, bearing
in mind the specific aspects both from games as a special kind of software and from the target players introducing a
therapeutic / clinical perspective in the games development model.

Keywords: Digital Games, Model, Software Development, Game Development, Social Causes, Gamification.

Received on 08 October 2017, accepted on 18 November 2017, published on 8 December 2017

Copyright © 2017 Tiago Cardoso et al., licensed to EAI. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution licence ([Link] which permits unlimited use,
distribution and reproduction in any medium so long as the original work is properly cited.

doi: 10.4108/eai.8-12-2017.153399

of games [1]. Due to this obstacle a new approach was

needed.
1. Introduction Digital games are a form of software, since software is
regarded as any collection of instructions that allows us to
Technology rules over everyday life, anywhere we go we find interact with hardware. In this case, digital games are an
ourselves surrounded by it. In most, one can find devices entertainment-focus software [2]. As such one might think
embedded with software, capable of performing numerous that using a software development model is enough to
tasks effortlessly, designed to satisfy our needs and whims so successfully develop a game, but digital games are not a
that we profit the most out of it. product of pure engineering and therefore cannot be
If one focus on the digital games industry, we find that it developed by a systematic and strict process of engineering.
has benefited from this, and according to the Entertainment Nevertheless, digital games are not pure art either, they are a
Software Association (ESA), an organization formed by combination of interleaving disciplines, from art, music,
multiple game producers, the industry profited twenty-three programming, acting and the management or integration of
and a half billion dollars. ESA also states that there is, in all these [3] - [6]. For that reason, game development requires
average, 1.7 gamers in every house in the USA. But although a specific distinct development process. Nevertheless,
the industry seems to thrive, there’s an obvious lack of software development models still pose as a great resource of
development guidelines and models, to support the creation
*
tomfc@[Link]

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

1 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2
Tiago Cardoso et al.

guidelines, ideas and methodologies, but lack on the specifics Waterfall Model (WFM)
of game development.
Moreover, the creation/development of games as a mean The waterfall model was developed in the fifties, as a result
of improving the life of people with disabilities is not a new of the experience gained during the development of an aerial
idea, but is a “noble” one that has, so far, counted with some defense system called SAGE (Semi-Automated Ground
efforts following an ad-hoc approach instead of a systematic Environment) [8]. This model has multiple version but all
one guided by a recognized and well documented creation versions are linear, broke down into stages and take special
and development process attention to documentation.
The Social Tech Booster ([Link] is an The difference between each version lays on the stages and
example initiative that has been developing distinct “serious” their amount. The models usually have a requirement stage, a
games and systems towards this cause, by teaming up design stage, a development stage, a test stage and a
institutions with engineering students in their final year. The deployment stage, but there can be more or less stages,
students are offered an opportunity to positively impact the depending on the type of software to be developed, like a
life of numerous individuals through their master thesis, maintenance or evaluation stage [2], [9].
while the institutions are granted additional resources,
tailored to their needs, effectively changing the life of the Rapid Prototyping Model (RPM)
ones that really need it [7].
The problem lays on a fact stated previously, the absence The rapid prototyping model appeared in the sixties and
of a development model, particularly, one capable of “shifted the paradigm”. Instead of following a strict, with
conducting successful design and development of a game for heavy documentation, staged-based approach like the
this purpose [3]. Furthermore, the way the STB initiative waterfall model, it focuses more in interacting with the client.
works provides even more obstacles to the development, To do so, it makes constant use of prototypes. These are a
since the limitations of both parties involved in the process. result of a quick planning and design, and are extremely fast
Factors like, lack of time from the students who have only 9 to develop, since some features don’t have to be fully
months to develop the game, lack of resources from the functional, they just have to send the message across [2], [10].
institutions and the knowledge gap between the parties The prototypes allow the client a wider understanding of the
constitute an issue to overcome. project, therefore enabling him or her to know exactly what it
The goal of this paper is to propose a game development required, what is wrong and how to achieve it and correct it.
model capable of successfully deliver a good quality game, Each time a prototype is delivered to the client, the
taking the STB initiative as the baseline. developer waits for feedback. Based on the feedback a new
prototype is created and the cycle repeats itself until the client
is satisfied with the prototype. The last prototype is then used
2. Related Work to create a definitive version of the program [2], [9].

2.1. Software Development Models Iterative and Incremental Model (IIM)

Software development models are composed by processes, The iterative and incremental was created around the same
methods and tools that are used to develop software. These time as the previous one and consequently, shares some of its
models try to describe how to successfully develop software, ideology. The focus remains in interacting with the client, but
each with a different approach. without the usage of prototypes. Instead the project is divided
into smaller sub projects, each consisting of at least a feature
or requirement and is treated as a separated project. Since
each sub project is regarded as a separated project and the
Code-and-Fix Model
client is required to actively participate in each one, the
interaction between developer and client is greater when
This model is the simplest one. For this reason, it is also the
compared with the waterfall model.
fastest and most common one, particularly among new
These sub projects are implemented one at a time, by order
programmers/developers. It consists of three simple tasks:
of relevancy and importance. Each time one subproject is
 Code, where the software is coded. completed, it is added to the remaining finished projects, this
way there’s always a functional program. For each iteration,
 Test, related to a stage of tests, usually performed by the
the project is incremented with new features and therefore,
development team.
closer to completion [2], [9].
 Fix, where every error found on the previous stage is
emended and redone until the client is satisfied.
Spiral Model (SpM)
These three tasks are done by order until the result is
satisfactory. There isn’t any regard for design nor planning The spiral model was proposed by Barry W. Boehm and is a
[8]. combination of the previous two models, the rapid
prototyping and the iterative and incremental models, with
the waterfall model. From the iterative and incremental model

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

2 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2
 Digital Games’ Development Model

comes the iterative nature, while from the rapid prototyping  Quality – quality of the generated code,
model comes the usage of prototypes. That being said, each  Speed –time required until achieving a functional or
iteration corresponds to a small waterfall project, during the completed project.
early iterations a prototype is generated, only on later iteration From this study and analysis some conclusion where drawn
it’s generated a more definitive version of the program. Since out:
each iteration is a waterfall model, we get a well-documented
development while still benefiting from the interactions and (i) The code-and-fix model simple approach poses huge
feedbacks from the clients, due to the usage of prototypes and drawbacks, there’s little to no planning, meaning it’s
multiple iterations [8]. almost certain to let details unnoticed or
misunderstand what the client wants, although its
Agile Processes Model (APM) development times are the shortest of all models.
(ii) The waterfall model sacrifices the simplicity and the
The agile model is the most recent of all models presented. speed of the code-and-fix model, in order to obtain a
This model follows five basic principles: communication, higher quality code and better documentation and
simplicity, feedback, courage and respect, and is generally therefore, insure an also higher rate of client
divided into four basic activities, planning, design, code and satisfaction.
test [12]. (iii) On the other hand, the rapid prototyping model
During the planning activity, the client shares experiences, approach focus on interacting with the client and less
stories and wishes, describing the software requirements. in documentation, and with the usage of prototypes
Then, the developers and client rate each story and decide and multiple iterations it achieves a higher agility
which ones have priority. This way a document is generated without sacrificing so much speed nor simplicity.
with all requirements, their development time, release date (iv) The iterative and incremental approach provides an
and development order. This document or plan is flexible so, even higher interaction with the client than the
if during any activity, an alteration to the plan is needed, it is previous model, to insure client satisfaction,
immediately executed and dealt with [11]. compensating the extra wasted time on documentation
The next activity is design, where simplicity is key. In this with a higher quality code.
activity, both developers and clients figure out how to (v) The Barry Boehm’s spiral model increases the
develop the program the simplest way possible and how to documentation generated but sacrifices too much the
test the program [11]. simplicity, and the interaction with the client.
The following activity is code. The first action is to (vi) Finally, the agile model comes close to perfection, but
generate the set of scenarios or test units required for the next lacks speed and reduces the quality of the code in order
activity. The next action is to start programming the software to simplify the whole model. The fact that it doesn’t
in groups, so some can code while the others focus on make use of prototypes and relieves heavily on the
ensuring the code’s quality and refine some design details. client, might pose some problems towards finding
All the code and design adjustments must be documented and gaps and error in earlier stages but its agility should
integrated daily [11]. The last activity is test. This activity solve most of the setbacks.
consists in executing the set of test units generated previously.
These activities are redone until the client is satisfied or A rating for each model, product of this analysis can be
runs out of stories [11]. viewed in the table below (Table 1). With zero being the
lowest possible value and five the highest, Table 1 illustrates
the performance of the models in each of the key parameters.
2.2. Existing Models Comparison
CFM WFM RPM IIM SpM APM
Each model has different characteristic, philosophies and Documentation 0 5 3 4 5 4
therefore, different pros and cons. In order to properly analyse Interaction 1 2 3 4 3 5
and compare all software development models, some key
Agility 0 0 4 3 3 5
parameters must be set in place. These were defined after the
study of the same models to be analysed and attempt to Speed 5 3 4 3 3 4
illustrate their weak and strong points. The key parameters Quality 0 3 3 5 5 4
are: Application 5 0 4 4 3 5
OVERALL 1 3 3 4 4 4.5
 Documentation – the attention put into documenting all
actions,
 Agility –ability to quickly deal with unexpected
obstacles and difficulties,
 Application – easiness in following the model’s 3. Challenges in Game Development
guidelines and stages
According to Pretillo[5] in a recent data gathering, only 16%
 Interaction – the attention given to the client, so that it of project are completed on time and on budget. It’s also
can be involved actively in the project, possible to observe from the data gathered that the problems

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

3 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2
Tiago Cardoso et al.

with greater occurrences (over 50%), are due to bad project Coping with this can prove hard if the wrong technology
management and poor requirement gathering. is chosen.
The challenges present in game development are plenty  Team Organization – Keeping all team members in
and the results are disastrous, but many have been solved check, thinking the same and working to the same
already by the software industry. To solve problems, as with common goal is a challenging task.
most issues, these must be recognized and understood so that  Development Process – Choosing the right process can
a solution can be found. The main challengers, as stated by determine the success of the project. Understanding the
Christopher M. Kanode and Hisham M. Haddad, [4] are: process is also crucial.

 Diverse Assets – Games are a result of integrating many These problems can also be present on the STB initiative and
different expertise. Handling all these poses a challenge must be taken into account when developing this new model.
as the project grows. Although Christopher M. Kanode and Hisham M. Haddad
 Diverse Assets – Games are a result of integrating many have come up with some solution, those don’t fit the STB
different expertise. Handling all these poses a challenge initiative. However, knowing the existence and importance of
as the project grows. these problems is enough to draw conclusions and prepare the
 Scope – Lack of a plausible, viable design and planning, model to deal with them.
means that the project is constantly increasing as
features are added. Evermore the addition of feature
without a care thought, may lead to the addition of
unrealistic features. 4. Digital Games’ Development Model
 Publishing – Bringing the game to the industry can be a
This article proposes a new game development model,
challenge due to the lack of investment or outdating
capable of overcoming the STB above mentioned issues. In
technologies, since the game industry is a very
other words, developing successfully quality games, through
competitive and fast-paced industry.
a systematic process instead of an ad-hoc approach, aimed at
 Management – Dealing with so many assets and keeping
improving the life of individuals with disabilities, through the
the project on the right track requires great
partnership of child-care institutions and undergraduate
communication between all members and an excellent
students.
oversight.
Using the knowledge acquired from the software
 New Technologies/Third party – The constant development models and the common problems with games
competition of the gaming industry leads to a never- development while keeping in mind the entities involved in
ending development of new exciting technologies. the STB initiative, the following game development models
composed of 5 stages is proposed (Image 1).

Planning Design Development Evaluation Deployment

 Early ideas  Client insight  Results

 
Early
 Concept
Weaknesses
Requirements
 Prototype
 Strong Point
 Pre-Plan
 Game Design Docs.

Figure 2. This is a legend. Caption to go below figure

the ideas for features must be compiled and a market

research done, towards eventually finding similar or
4.1. Planning Stage related already existing games.
(ii) Meetup, the second activity, is related to meeting
The goal of this stage is to prepare for the development of the “client”. In this case the child care institution.
the game. The first step is to create the concept of the game. The objective is to allow the student and institution
To do so three main activities are suggested: to present all ideas, hopes and features.
Documenting all aspects of this meetup is vital
(i) Brainstorm, the first activity, is related to the
development of the concept of the game, where all

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

4 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2
 Digital Games’ Development Model

towards the remaining of the game development development, determining if the game is still on “good
process. tracks”.
(iii) Set-up, the last planning activity, relates to the
refinement of the game according to the results
gathered from the previous activities and the 4.4 Evaluation
preparation to start the development of the game.
Therefore, all features that will be implemented to The evaluation stage aims at assessing if the game performs
the game must be thoroughly documented and the as designed, both in the functional aspects as in the fun
schedule of the development specified, starting with context. This stage consists on a series of simple tests,
the core features. This documentation should be where both functional and fun aspects are evaluated. The
kept in a portfolio to allow for a clear supervision of tests are made in three phases, each resulting on evaluation
the whole project. sheets.
The first involves only the development team and
members that know all the aspects of the project, the
second phase involves members that hardly know or don’t
4.2. Design Stage know the project at all and lastly, the third phase involves
people that fit inside the desired target, members of the
The Design stage involves not only the creation and child-care institution that don’t know the project and other
revision of the game design but also the creation of the first professionals.
prototype. Similar to the previous stage it consists of three
main activities:
(iv) Appointment, the first activity, tackles the gap 4.5 Deployment
between institution and students, diminishing the
knowledge gap and preventing communication This stage is responsible for the “deployment to the
failures while also enabling the student to gather masses” and the institution. The development team must
vital information. It consists of one or more go- opt by a method of deployment easily accessed by the
along visits to the institution, where students follow institution taking into account the resources available to
the members of the institution on their normal day them. The deployment should be made in two phases, first
and gather information concerning the resources targeting the institution and secondly the general public.
available to the institutions and patients, and
understand the limitations of their target audience.
(v) Prototype, the second activity, consists in the 5. Validation
development the initial prototype, including all
instances of the game and adjustment of the The proposed model was used in the development of two
planning made on the previous stage to take into games from the STB initiative for validation purposes.
account the addition or removal of features. Comparing the success in deploying these games with
(vi) Re-evaluation, the final activity, consists in the previous games it turned possible to determine the validity
creation of documentation with the final design of the proposed model.
(Game Design Documents), including all features, The games are “Bê-à-Bá” and “Falar pelo Cotovelos”.
planning and the initial prototype. It is important to The development of these games lasted 9 months. “Falar
note that all generated documentation from all pelos Cotovelos” went through only one full cycle, while
stages should also be kept in a portfolio. “Bê-à-Bá” went through two.
“Falar pelos Cotovelos” is a game targeted to children
4.3 Development Stage who struggle to say a few words, often because they don’t
know its meaning (semantics), leading to difficulties in
The Development stage is the core process which revolves socialization, this condition is usually called autism.
around the creation of the game. This stage applies an During the planning stage, the development team drafted a
iterative approach to game development. In each iteration, simple game with extra features besides the main core
a new feature is added, tested and evaluated. activity, aimed at turning the game more stimulating and
First the feature is developed and added to the already enticing. However, on the appointment activity during the
implemented project, then it’s tested. The tests, at this design stage, the child-care institution made it clear that the
stage, are performed by the development team and should game should be as simple as possible, with no extra
only reflect the functional aspect, not the fun aspect. features other than the core gameplay. The idea was to
After performing the tests, the already implemented replace and provide a new way of performing a specific
project is subject to an inspection. The inspection is therapy. In this case, the simplicity of the game was a must
performed, primarily by a professor and then by the so that this children with already difficulties in
institution. The first inspection serves to determine if the understanding basic instruction don’t get lost in actions
institution is required to clarify some details and either other than the ones that will improve their status,
confirm or refute the decisions made along the deteriorating all the work done. The result was a very

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

5 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2
Tiago Cardoso et al.

simplistic prototype which was approved by both child- [6] Adams, E., Fundamentals of Game Design, 2nd Ed. (2010)
care institution and professor. The development stage [7] Cardoso, T., Santos, V., Santos, C., Barata, J., Transferência
consisted of four iterations. In the first iteration, the core de Tecnologia para Causas Sociais através de VideoJogos
gameplay was developed with only one level of difficulty (2015)
[8] Boehm, B., A Spiral Model of Software Development, IEEE
and few words. The following iterations increased the Comput., no. 1, (1988)
amount of difficulties and words, all according to [9] Ghezzi, C., Jazayeri, M., Mandrioli, D., Fundamentals of
specifications provided by the child-care institution and Software Engineering, vol. 5961 (2002)
their therapists during evaluations and previous meetups. [10] Tripp, S. D., Bichelmeyer, B., Rapid prototyping: An
The evaluations were made, firstly by the professor and alternative instructional design strategy, Educ. Technol.
students within the STB initiative, then by members of the Res. Dev., vol. 38, no. 1, p. 31-44 (1990).
child-care institution and only after that by patients. The [11] Beck, K., Extreme Programming Explained, 2nd Edition
results showed a very simple game, with little to no depth (2004)
but it suited the institution. The deployment only targeted [12] Martin, R. C., “Agile Software Development, Principles,
Patterns, and Practices,” Book. p. 529 (2002)
the institutions since it was a very focused game, but some [13] Cardoso, T., Santos, V., Santos, C., Barata, J., Games Social
changes are planned in order to make the game accessible Tech Booster, International Conference on Serious Games,
to the public. Interaction, and Simulation, pp. 119-126 (2015)
“Bê-à-Bá” is a game aimed at aiding in the early stages
of learning how to read, targeting children within 3 to 6
years of age. In the planning stage, a direct, simple and
enjoyable game was drafted and planned. The prototype
created in the design stage appealed, both child-care
institutions and professor. The development stage was
very similar to the game discussed previously, with four
iterations, but during the latter iterations the evaluations
made during the meetups showed some signs associated to
a lackluster experience. The evaluation stage clearly
pointed it out, making it obvious that a new cycle was
required. Therefore, the game went through a new design,
development and evaluation stages. The design stage
needed to tackle the blankness of the game. The problem
laid in the lack of meaning and rewards for a good
performance, so a new feature was added. This feature
made it possible to unlock content every time the player
beats a new level. The idea was simple but ideal when
dealing with children. To develop this feature, it was
necessary to iterate two times during the development
stage, to insure the final result was functional and worked
as intended. This time, the evaluation stage provided much
more satisfying results and the game is currently in
deployment both to public as to the child-care institution.
The application of the proposed model to “Bê-à-Bá” and
“Falar pelo Cotovelos” showed that it can successfully
provide and create good quality games towards the STB
initiative, namely according to the specialist of the
involved child-care institution.

References
[1] ESA, Essential facts about computer and video game
industry, vol. 2016, pp. 1–3 (2016).
[2] R. S. Pressman, Software Engineering A Practitioner’s
Approach 7th Ed - Roger S. Pressman (2009)
[3] Ramadan, R., Widyan. Y., Game Development Life Cycle
Guidelines, (2013)
[4] Kanode, Christopher M., Haddad, Hisham M., Software
Engineering Challenges in Game Development (2009)
[5] Petrillo, F., Pimenta, M., Trindade, F., What Went Wrong?
A Survey of Problems in Game Development (2009)

EAI Endorsed Transactions on

6 Serious Games
12 2016 - 12 2017 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e2

View publication stats