Investigation into Mobile Development Tools and Technology for Mobile Games and Application
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
MetadataShow full item record
Other TitlesProceedings of CGAMES’2006
AbstractMobile devices have come a long way with the advancements in terms of processors, memory etc. This has brought about flexibility for development of platforms and different applications far more superior to older ones used and has prompted research into better methods of deployment and use of mobile device capabilities. This paper looks at different technological advancements in progress and also proposes a plan for future work evaluates current and future developments.
CitationIn: Mehdi, Q. and Elmaghraby, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of CGAMES’2006. 8th International Conference on Computer Games: Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Systems, 24-27 July 2006, Louisville, Kentucky, USA
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Towards Suitable Communication Protocols For Mobile Multiplayer Games on Heterogeneous Mobile DevicesSalim, Aly; Mehdi, Qasim (The University of Wolverhampton, School of Computing and Information Technology, 2007)Currently research into communication protocols with regards to multiplayer gaming requirements has been sparse. There are a number of surveys on multicasting in mobile device communication which addresses latency reduction, density and traffic. Moreover, these studies have not addressed multiplayer gaming issues. Recent research in the area of mobile devices has focused in mobile communication and distribution systems for homogeneous devices but they have not fully addressed communication between heterogeneous devices. This work investigates suitable communication protocols for mobile multiplayer games on heterogeneous mobile devices. In particular issues such as scalability, reliability, bandwidth and data transportation time of communication systems and content distribution of mobile heterogeneous devices will be addressed. This paper proposes a hybrid protocol solution that addresses communication issues related to heterogeneous mobile devices as existing MANET protocols seem to lack the capability of solving these issues collectively.
Mobile Learning: The Philosophical Challenges, Problems and Implications of Defining and TheorisingTraxler, John (Unisa Press, 2018-01-08)This essay uses the popular and perennial topic of definition as a way to explore differing perspectives and expectations amongst the various communities whose interests and activities overlap in what has come to be called mobile learning, and to discuss the role and choice of theory in mobile learning. The purpose of the paper is to add to the academic foundations of mobile learning. These communities continue to make progress and continue also to make mistakes; the researchers continue to provide ideas and examples for practitioners, policy-makers, activists and developers, but often on assumptions, logic and inferences that are not transparent or robust. This is the problem being addressed. Here we seek to add greater critical rigour to the language and expectations being deployed. The essay is by nature not definitive, but seeks merely to expose some of the lack of clarity when mobile learning is discussed and promoted.
The role of subjective quality judgements in user preferences for mobile learning appsUther, Maria; Ylinen, Sari (MDPI, 2018-12-24)This study investigated whether subjective quality judgements on sound and picture quality across three devices (iPhone, iPad, and iPad mini) affected user preferences for learning applications. We tested 20 native Finnish-speaking users trialing generic audio clips, video clips, and two kinds of learning apps that were heavily reliant on sound. It was found that there was a main effect of the device on perceived sound quality, replicating earlier findings. However, these judgements did not impact on the users’ preferences for different devices nor on their preferences for different applications. The results are interpreted as indicating that perceived quality and affordances are less important for users in these contexts than other considerations (e.g., convenience, mobility, etc.).