Artefact three was about clarifying whether students respond to combined art/game applications. This idea was brought to my attention through the first two artefacts, as it was evident that students (between 16-18) see their mobiles and the applications within it as a fun, social activity. They want applications that they don’t have to think about too much, are easy to use and can enjoy with their friends.
For the User interface I designed an arty version of Angry birds to test how students respond to bold graphics, bright colours, challenges and prizes earned throughout the game. I discovered that the most vital aspect of a user interface in this context is the bright colours and bold graphics to visually engage the user. Personally, I think that this artefact has been successful because it reflects how important the user interface alone is to the success of an art/game application. It is the first thing that a person sees therefore it will be want grabs the audiences attention or makes them leave the application (especially if it is a free application as there is no money lost).
The bold graphics engage the audience in an eye-catching environment that is unrealistic so it gives people a sense of play. In my opinion art applications can be taken too seriously as people expect them to replicate real life art work but due to the playful nature of the graphics people don’t have these expectations so are willing to be more experimental with it and enjoy it for what it is. For art/game applications to be combined successful I think that the User interface has to lead people to the more serious notes of educational value that people can share through comparisons of scores. Also a way to way the application more realistic in the way that art work is shown is to make the tool be affected by what type of canvas it is being aimed at. The texture will affect both the art- work and the gaming component of the application.