Users vs. designers: The road to UX hell is paved with good intentions
The great battle of our time. The Eternal Conflict. No, I’m not referring to the battle over Sanctuary in Diablo IV. We’re talking about users vs. UX designers.
Design is an intricate dance between intention and interpretation. When a designer creates a product, they have a specific vision in mind. They carefully craft each element and think through every possibility to guide users towards a particular goal or experience. And then they miss a use case and scream at the users through their screens,
“NO. NOT LIKE THAT. NOT LIKE THAT AT ALL.”
In my design classes, I was taught to think about how a user from any background, any age, any skill level, any educational level would interact with whatever you’re designing. As you can imagine, it’s hard to think through that many scenarios and backgrounds. Another reason having a diverse and inclusive team is important. Shameless plug for my brilliant cofounder Nisha Iyer’s talk on Products That Count.
These varied backgrounds mean users bring their own perspectives and understanding to the table, which can lead to unexpected outcomes. Sometimes an unanticipated interaction between a designer’s intent and how users misinterpret leads to alternative ways of usage, and more importantly better product design.
Designers should recognize the value of user feedback and actively seek to understand how their creations are being perceived and used.
The Power of User Interpretation
One of the captivating aspects of design is the unpredictable ways users can engage with a product or interface. They bring their unique experiences, assumptions, and problem-solving strategies into the equation. Sometimes these interpretations align with the designer’s intent resulting in a seamless user experience and sometimes not so much.
However, there are instances where users misinterpret the intended design, yet manage to accomplish their objectives in alternative ways.
In a recent Twitter video, user @kowkarot5 shared a comparison of how two Twitch streamers solved a puzzle in the new Zelda game, Tears of the Kingdom.
In it, one takes a moment to look at the surroundings and complete the puzzle by what we can assume was the level designer’s intent. On the other hand, we see the second streamer interpret the same exact scenario in a completely different way. He interprets this puzzle as overly complicated and time consuming, and gets angry about it.
This is an example of a conflict between a designer and a user. While the level, and game as a whole, allows the user open ended freedom in their choices to solve these puzzles, the tools given to them clearly point to an intended solution archetype. The designer gives the user all the necessary tools to complete the puzzle, and has an intention on the best way.
Designers shouldn’t stop anticipating and accommodating different user interpretations, but should embrace the users that really want to use their product “wrong“ and learn from it.
Now, I’m not here to debate game design, a gamer’s ability, or the philosophy of telling gamers explicitly what to do next to progress through a story. But what this does show us is how a user may potentially interact in unexpected ways with anything that’s been designed, whether it be games or other mediums.
An Interpretation of the Interpretation of Misinterpretation and How to Interpret a User’s Feedback
Instances like the above Zelda video highlight the misinterpretation phenomenon that can occur between designers and users. Users may not adhere to the expected usage patterns outlined by the designer, but instead find their own creative solutions. While this may initially seem like a failure on the part of the designer or even the user, it can also be viewed as an opportunity for designers to explore and discover alternative approaches and solutions.
These experiences shed light on user behaviors, needs, and expectations that may have been overlooked during the design process. By actively listening to user feedback and observing their interactions, designers can refine their products, reducing the likelihood of misinterpretation while fostering a more intuitive user experience.
It’s also important to remember that no one is wrong in either scenario. All design is an iterative process. Through our failures we find the right solutions and through our successes we find the right shortcuts to get to failures faster. Designers shouldn’t stop anticipating and accommodating different user interpretations, but should embrace the users that really want to use their product “wrong“ and learn from it.
The interplay between a designer’s intent and user interpretation is a fascinating and complex dynamic. While users may sometimes misinterpret a design, their unique perspectives and approaches can lead to surprising outcomes and innovative solutions. Designers should recognize the value of user feedback and actively seek to understand how their creations are being perceived and used. By embracing flexibility and adaptability in design, we can bridge the gap between intent and interpretation, ultimately creating more engaging and user-centric experiences.
