Re: How to write user stories for usability at release and sprint level
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "imaginethepoet"
> As to including your "UI" in the definition of done. ThisMy son just bought Civilization 4, and it comes with a video of the
> can cause problems. I'm still working through this one
> myself and I don't think the UI is ever done untill
> the finished product is about to roll out.
lead designers talking about how they developed it over a 3-4 year
Just as you write, he says essentially the same thing.
For cost reasons, they built a working game with simple graphics in
the first 3 MONTHS, and deferred detailed graphics until the last 1/3
of the project (when they had many artists working on detailed
The talk is fascinating from many perspectives, analyzing what they
did early, what they deferred, where they were obliged to backtrack
(having to simplify the graphics was the biggest surprise to me),
If you can get hold of this talk (they gave it at some gaming
conference also), it's well worth watching two or three times to get
some deeper sense of how their approach addresses discussions in this
- I'm a bit new to Agile but don't really see the problem with this
vision thing. I use the Cooper Goal-Directed Design Method.
We interview users to learn their goals and understand their tasks and
we do that up front, perhaps as a sprint rather than anything
We produce personas, from the interview data, and goals. And we
produce high level context scenarios, which start making basic
references to concepts that will exist in the design.
From the context scenarios we can almost underline the parts which
indicate user needs.
Then we take out a whiteboard pen and write a storyboard wireframe
(which Cooper used to call the Design Vision and now call in
Interaction Framework). We elaborate a bit on the design hinted at in
the context scenario and produce a key path scenario, which describes
in more detail how the user will interact with the design. This whole
exercise lets us outline the anatomy of the design and to understand
how to play it.
When we are happy with that Design Vision, we can jump into iterations
and do a bit of 'just in time' detailed design.
The Vision, is the Design Vision. It is justified through
understanding the users typical day and their typical needs. It
probably won't change much since it is quite high level.
I'm not sure where the problem is with a vision like this. perhaps,
the only drawback is that you have to do a bit of work in front of the
iterative cycles to get a good understanding of the users and what
they do to enable you to get this vision pinned down.
i'd be interested in comments on this.