Lastly, the main divergences were found in the production and evaluation steps, with the absence or indication of how the gamified system is produced or implement and how gamification outcomes are measured. The comparison of the frameworks evinced that the most notable convergence between the models is the pre-production phase, which comprises the steps of comprehension and design of the gamified system, which, in general, are more detailed. In addition, the frameworks are divided into pre-production, production and post-production phases. It was found that there are more frameworks to design structural gamification than models to design content gamification. Therefore, the study presents gamification design frameworks selected from the literature review and the results showed two sorts of frameworks: models for structural and content gamification. The research was based on literature review and collected data was compared. This study aims to discuss design frameworks for gamification in education and learning, in order to compare project steps and find convergences and divergences in design processes. These findings reveal a more complex interplay between accessible music-making and competitive gameplay than previously assumed, unearthing new challenges and potentials for interactive composition that I explore herein. The traditional game structures of Chase and Idea were viewed as more engaging overall, yet only EvoMusic engendered interaction that was at once creatively and competitively stimulating. Players did not reflect the literature’s aesthetic opposition to the synthesis of composing and competing, but noted that sufficiently strong game incentives could overpower musical decision-making. The games were evaluated in two mixed-methods comparative user studies to investigate how these divergent approaches influence the compositional experience. Idea then adds elements of progression and victory players manipulate musical motifs to navigate mazes, defeat enemies, and earn new creative resources. Chase introduces notions of danger and defeat, assigning musical outcomes to the player’s attempts to evade a pursuing hostile agent. In EvoMusic, players cannot win or lose, but contest the inexorable growth of an evolving musical population to curate and defend a desired sonic output. My research aims to address this gap through a body of original works – EvoMusic, Chase, and Idea – that explore the potential for competitive human-computer dialogues to support accessible, creatively stimulating composition experiences.Įach work takes a divergent approach to competitive gameplay. Limited research or practice has explored this interplay, revealing a gap for new understandings of musical games and interactive composition. Few of these systems harness competitive game elements, reflecting an assumption that the aesthetic experience and mechanical demands of competitive gameplay are incongruous with musical creativity. Musical apps, interfaces, and installations have opened real-time music composition to non-experts through the use of game-like interactions.

The magic circle gold edition