Feedback

FEEDBACK from group E5 (the new group) We presented our star prototype, STHLM Pub Crawl to the group E5. Below is their feedback, with the analysis we made about each point

• Roaming costs?  How can you use the map without Internet connection? Definintely a valid point. The app needs to be accessible. The ability to download a map and then rely only on GPS can be added to our concept. Another thing to consider is the project to remove roaming fees in Europe. which would make roaming a lot easier for most backpackers in Sweden.
• It could be hard to add a drink when you’re drunk. Perhaps you can pay with your phone and then collect data from there. True, but it’s not a primary feature of the app. We will look into that after the main features are a bit more defined
• If somebody wants to join a pub crawl, and the leader decides to change pub, every member should get a notification (10-15 min before moving to next pub) so the new members ends up in the right pub. But also so the members have time to finish their drinks. Good idea, would help members on their way, but could be unused, if you don’t check your phone during the pub crawl. If we don’t have this, people who are joining a certain pub crawl will run the risk of not knowing when the crawl-group is leaving for the next pub, but if the joiners miss them, the next pub will be at a walkable distance and the direction will be shown in the app.
• Perhaps you as a member could vote for the next pub, or is it the leader who decides where to go? We decided that voting is not something we want to add, because we want to encourage interaction with people. You can vote orally, it's better!
• The history is a little unclear, can you see old “public” crawls? Can you use feedback of old crawls? The history tab will contain your own previous pub-crawls with history of the pubs you visited on the crawl, a map of the route, time of arrival, and also drinks you have drunk and your alcohol level. We have decided that you can not see or search for other peoples crawls. This would require the app to have functions such as sharing a pub crawl after it’s finished, and it would be hard to find the one you are looking for. Instead, we are offering the user a way to see which pubs are good by a rating system, as well as the “use the force” function that guides you to the best pub near you.
• The “PROMILLE” scale don’t say too much if you don’t know how promille works. Perhaps you could use something like: — You’re sober — Can you walk straight? — You’re drunk, GO HOME! We thought this was a really good solution for making the app less competitive, less encouraging for users to drink too much, and also making it more fun. This way you’d also get your alcohol level described in words instead of digits, which says more for most users.
  

---

Feedback to group F2
We got to discuss and review another groups chosen concept; a website that would offer tourists in Stockholm an easy way to plan a sightseeing-sort of trip around the city. It was a great way for us to apply the knowledge we have so far learned in the course and really got us discussing it with an experience-focused HCI perspective. Earlier during the state of the art analysis we got some training in this, but now was the first time we encountered something completely new to analyse from scratch, in a way that could also influence the future of it. So with some help from the discussion guidelines we discussed the things that were / weren’t working well with this concept. We also looked at its similarities to our own concept, which have probably occurred as a result of how this course has taught us about user friendly design, and about how to construct ideas and approach problems. An example of this was the simplicity, minimalism and efficiency of their website, with the purpose of adding to the user experience, instead of driving users away with a complicated interface, too much information and too many unnecessary choices. Then we came to realize that although this was a good design, it would leave some people to desire more functionality, which would lead them elsewhere on the internet. This would then counteract with one of the concept goals; to make it time-efficient.

Our main suggestions were:
This website-concept could just as well work on other platforms such as smartphones, tablet or would even be great as a service on an information booth (considering its simple interface which would work with a touchscreen and the need of a printer that could then be built in).

• Include a function to send the pre-planned information to your smartphone or tablet (suggestedly as a PDF so no internet would be needed while using it) so that there won’t be an issue if you can’t find a printer.
• Make the “activity list” and map static elements to make system status always visible for the user (maybe in a corner?). This way you always have an overview of your route and destinations, and always know where to find this information.
• Make the search feature more coherent, consistent: Searching from the text box and searching by selecting categories shouldn’t have such a different outcome. There shouldn’t be two different and incompatible ways to do the same thing.
• Add a description on the start-page that shortly describes what the website actually does. The user who’s unfamiliar with the website may get confused. After clicking a link to get to the website, a new user should know in a few minutes what to expect from it and how to use it.
• Focus the map more on the destinations than the routes to them and maybe only give “suggested routes”. This way the user can feel more in control, less bound to the service and wander off a bit wherever they feel like.