The Gamer’s Dilemma challenges us to justify the moral difference between enacting virtual murder and virtual child molestation in video games. The Dilemma relies for its argumentative force on the claim that there is an intuitive moral difference between these acts, with the former intuited as morally acceptable and the latter as morally unacceptable. However, there has been no empirical investigation of these claims. To explore these issues, we developed an experimental survey study in which participants were asked to reflect on imaginary video game scenarios as part of a 2 (undertake virtual murder or molestation) X 2 (against an adult or child) X 2 (in a high or low realism virtual environment) factorial design. We found that there was a significant difference between people’s views about virtual murder and virtual molestation. Whether the virtual act was performed against an adult or child was non-significant in most conditions, whereas whether it was performed in a high or low realism virtual environment was significant in most conditions. Gender did not impact these results, whereas perceived gaming experience, hours of video game play per week, and integrity did. These results provide an empirical grounding for future discussions of the Gamer's Dilemma.

This paper outlines the theory-driven design and development of Puppy Island, a serious game for children aged three to five who are living with the chronic illness cystic fibrosis. Puppy Island differs from typical serious games, as its central learning and design objectives relate to long-term wellbeing and empowerment rather than short-term knowledge transfer. The Early Years Learning Framework and Self-Determination Theory informed the design and development of the iPad prototype, while domain experts from industry, academia and the broader cystic fibrosis community were consulted to establish user requirements and evaluate the iterative designs. We analyse the development process, domain expert feedback, and how the game's features relate to core theoretical pillars in order to highlight key lessons that can be applied to future work on serious games with comparable aims or target audiences.

The study examines the relationship of challenge-skill balance and the player experience through evaluation of competence, autonomy, presence, interest/enjoyment, and positive and negative affect states. To manipulate challenge-skill balance, three video game modes -- boredom (low challenge), balance (medium challenge), and overload (high challenge) -- were developed and experimentally tested (n = 45). The study showed that self-reported positive affect, autonomy, presence, and interest/enjoyment differed between the levels. The balance condition generally performed well in terms of positive player experiences, confirming the key role challenge-skill balance plays in designing for optimal play experiences. Interestingly, the study found significantly lower negative affect scores when playing the boredom condition. Greater feelings of competence were also reported for the boredom condition than the balance and overload conditions. Finally, some measures point to overload as a more enjoyable experience than boredom, suggesting possible player preference for challenge > skill imbalance over skill > challenge imbalance. Implications for design and future research are presented.