{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024307900067521943, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003038487508440243, 'mean_word_length': 4.919080919080919, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Challenges of Making Outdoor Augmented Reality Games Playable

History has shown computer technology and society acceptance of that technology has been driven in part by the entertainment computing industry. One "killer application" domain for advanced computing and communicating techniques for wearable information playing will be a form of outdoor augmented reality gaming. This paper will present a number of possible mobile outdoor augmented reality gaming concepts. The paper will go on to explore a number of challenges to make these games a viable in terms of playability, safety, and near-term technology. A discussion of the results we have found from our ARQuake first person outdoor augmented reality game will be presented. 1 Killer Applications I define the concept of a killer application as a piece of software technology that has a rapid up take in the marketplace. Going hand in hand with a killer application, in a number of cases, is a piece of electronic technology. Killer applications are seen as a means of boosting sales of a new cutting piece of electronic technology in the marketplace. I foresee outdoor augmented reality games as a future killer application. In this paper, I will discuss the challenges of making outdoor augmented reality games playable and hence a killer application. 1.1 What is a killer application? A killer application is a market place concept. The attributes of this form of application are as follows: large sales, rapid up take by customers, trendy, fashionable, hip, cool, up-to-the-minute, stylish, chic, in, all the rage, and filling a wanting niche. 1.2 How are they realised? How does one realise and make a killer application? I suspect killer applications are not designed or planned, but they are born. The right time, right place, right market, and right price are luck of the draw. To make one, the application must be designed to be easy to use [8]. The user interface must allow the user to quickly gain expertise to a level they feel they can operate the application in their first experience. They do not have to master the application, but feel like they can operate it a satisfying level. The form factor must allow good affordance to the physical device and its application [4]. The interplay between the physical electronics box and the application is critical. I foresee the use of pervasive computing technologies as a means to producing a killer application. 2 Pervasive computing I define pervasive computing is the nexus between mobile/wearable computing and ubiquitous computing. At the mobile/wearable computing extreme end of this spectrum, the user carries all their computing needs with them. The form factor includes handheld computers and wearable (body worn) computers. On the other end of spectrum lies ubiquitous computing, where the computing is embedded in environment. To achieve this form of computing requires ever-present access to networked resources and a vast array and easy access to display and interaction technology, such as active surfaces. In his seminal article on “The computer of the 21st Century”, Weisser [12] talks about the notion of computing being woven into the backdrop of natural human interactions. Ubiquitous computing relates to a future where computers will become embedded in our natural movements and interactions with our environments (both physical and social). One of the driving factors behind the current trend to pervasiveness is the need to evolve from the use of workstations as the primary human computing interface to environmental or workspace interfaces. In these future environments, keyboards and mice, the main human–computer interfaces for the last couple of decades, will evolve into more human-centric approaches. This will be facilitated by the move from being “cabled and connected” to environments where “wireless and wandering” will be the norm. These trends will allow humans to be decoupled from computers. The new interfaces will be more intuitive, context aware and adaptive. The applications must support the Anys, and these are as follows: anytime, anywhere, anything, anyhow, any device, any who, and any whatever... 2.1 Technology Challenges There are a number of technology challenges to achieving a pervasive computing platform. I highlight three (of many) for discussion here, and these are as follows: electric power, processor power, and communication power. The problem of electric power must be solved by improvements in power storage and/or generation and power consumption. Improvements are required in the short term in battery technology and in the long term in mobile power generation systems, such as solar cells and hydrogen fuel cells. On the other side of power equation is the consumption, and two areas of possible improvements are low power chips and low power displays. Increasing the processor power is leading to the taking of a user’s workstation from their desktop and placing it on their belt. In particular I would like to see increases in processing power for computing, graphics, and sensors. As previously mentioned, networking is critical to making a pervasive computing system. New technologies are required to increase the communication power for the user. In particular increases in bandwidth and connectivity are demanded. 2.2 Usability Challenges Before one can solve the technology challenges, the killer applications must answer the following questions: 1. What do people need? 2. What do people want? The killer application must fill a need and desire from the potential user. The trend for pervasive physical devices is to become smaller and less conspicuous. Users may find a smaller device maybe harder to operate and control. Smaller physical devices mean smaller displays with less buttons and controls. On the plus side, smaller physical devices are more comfortable for people to use in public. They have a lower social weight.