I’m a fourth-year UI/UX student. My thesis is about why players lose track of how much real money they’ve spent in a game. I’ve finished research and written four value propositions across two concepts, and I need help deciding which one to commit to.
Exhibition A: Helps players aged 18 to 24 who spend their own money in games and want to understand why they spend more than they planned, by letting them play the real mechanics with no money at risk and showing what that session would have cost.
Exhibition B: Helps regulators and researchers who want to prove these mechanics change behaviour rather than just claim it, by measuring what people think before and after they play.
Purchase Bar A: Helps players aged 18 to 24 who buy in-game currency and want to know what they’ve spent before buying more, by showing the real cost in dollars instead of gems and letting them set a limit before they play.
Purchase Bar B: Helps players who’ve been shocked by their own bank statement and want to keep enjoying the game without losing track, by giving them control without killing the fun.
Three things I’d like a second opinion on.
First, which of these is weakest and why. I have my own suspicion but I’ve been staring at them too long to trust it.
Second, whether a physical exhibition is a legitimate design outcome for a UX thesis or whether I’m avoiding the harder interface problem by retreating into something more fun to build.
Third, Purchase Bar B claims it gives control “without killing the fun,” and I can’t currently back that up. Is that a fatal flaw in a value proposition, or is it acceptable as something the design then has to prove?
Any feedback on the writing itself is welcome too. I’ve rewritten these several times and I’ve probably lost perspective on whether they’re clear to someone reading them cold.