Utilizing a validated scale to assess player experience (PX) in video games can yield important findings. Nevertheless, insufficient quantitative data analysis expertise among games user research (GUR) self-taught practitioners, poses obstacles to effectively analyzing and interpreting the data obtained from various measurement scales. Hence, in this paper, we present a guided interface based web platform to support data analysis of the Player Experience Inventory (PXI), following a user-centered design (UCD) process, incorporating insights from Games User Research (GUR) specialists. The interface, extending a current platform for PXI data evaluation, aspires to enable data analysis with a high degree of flexibility, offering explanatory support for both, inexperienced and experienced analysts. The findings from user testing sessions indicated that the platform was perceived as user-friendly. However, findings also suggest that more accessible explanations of the statistical approaches are needed to aid in understanding data analysis and interpretation of outcomes.

Repeated measurements of player experience are crucial in games user research, assessing how different designs evolve over time. However, this necessitates lightweight measurement instruments that are fit for the purpose. In this study, we conduct an examination of the test-retest reliability of the miniPXI -a short variant of the Player Experience Inventory (PXI) , an established measure for measuring player experience. We analyzed test-retest reliability by leveraging four games involving 100 participants, comparing it with four established multi-item measures and single-item indicators such as the Net Promoter Score ( NPS ) and overall enjoyment. The findings show mixed outcomes; the miniPXI demonstrated varying levels of test-retest reliability. Some constructs showed good to moderate reliability, while others were less consistent. On the other hand, multi-item measures exhibited moderate to good test-retest reliability, demonstrating their effectiveness in measuring player experiences over time. Additionally, the employed single-item indicators ( NPS and overall enjoyment) demonstrated good reliability. The results of our study highlight the complexity of player experience evaluations over time, utilizing single and multiple items per construct measures. We conclude that single-item measures may not be appropriate for long-term investigations of more complex PX dimensions and provide practical considerations for the applicability of such measures in repeated measurements.

Questionnaires are vital in games user research (GUR) to assess player experience (PX). However, having too many questions in surveys prevents wider uptake among GUR professionals because of games' rapid production cycles. To address this issue, we present the miniPXI---an eleven-item measure of the popular Player Experience Inventory (PXI)---providing single items for each of its eleven constructs. To develop the scale and examine its reliability and validity, we present three studies, conducted with 15 experts and 628 digital game players across continents. In the first survey study (n=366, 15 experts), single items were selected. In a second survey study (n=232), we explored reliability and validity of the single-item scale. Participants completed both full and single-item (SI) variants in three days. In the last study (n=30), we established the validity and sensitivity via an experimental evaluation of two games. The results are nuanced; SI reliability estimates for PXI constructs range from .51 to .83 with an average of .68, we could confirm the validity for nine constructs. We conclude that the miniPXI can be a valuable tool for PX evaluations where a longer measure is not feasible, and provide practical considerations for its use.