This week in class, we had our group projects playtested by another group, and gathered information from the play session. In our reading of Fullerton’s Game Design Workshop, it was emphasized that playtesting was not just to let others play our games and gather feedback at the end of our game development, but that it is a constant thing that must be performed throughout our game development. This is to make sure that our game meets goals and visions that the team has in mind with how the player experience should be while playing the game. The sample of playtesters to be used is also an important thing when playtesting our game. Fullerton discusses that the ideal playtesters would be people who are the target audience of our game, as we would get more meaningful feedback from people who would actually buy our game as opposed to people who would probably not bother playing our game outside of a playtesting environment.

During our playtesting, we were able to pick up some notable flaws in some of our rules, and opted to change them before our submission. One of the flaws we ran into was the fact that some of the cards did not respond to a lot of cards in the deck, but the number of these niche cards were disproportionately high in the deck. This caused players to have a lot of cards that they couldn’t play for several turns. As a result, we decreased the numbers of some of the niche cards, as well as expanded the functionality of some of them to allow them to react to more cards. Overall, the group that playtested our game liked the gameplay and the overall premise of the game.

However, because our game was an analog card game, we could not get a completely accurate reference for how our game would have done if we could allow the players to play the game in person. This is because we as developers had to constantly be part of the gameplay process, because we used video streaming to allow the players to “play” the game, and we had to constantly explain what each card does because the video quality made the description of the cards too blurry for the players to remember what each card does.

Sources:

Fullerton, Tracy, et al. Game Design Workshop: a Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games.

The main focus of this week was playtesting.  Before being able to host a successful playtesting session, we first needed to understand how playtesting works and why it is so important to game development. In the textbook it mentions that when it comes to developing a game for playtesting, “The goal is to get to a version that people can play without much intervention from you” (279). One great thing about my group’s playtesting session was that everyone was able to play our game without any intervention from us. It took little to no explanation for our play testers to go through and play our game. It was very helpful that we made our game in Twine which is something that our entire class has had an introduction to before, so my group didn’t have to explain the mechanics of the game.  My group also made sure to not give any hints about the meaning behind the game or its purpose.  Instead we made sure to have one of our questions at the end of the session ask what they felt the meaning and theme behind the game was. This let us know that the impact we wanted our game to have on the players came through and was successful.  Since our game is purely narrative based, it was extremely important that players understood what was going on and could even relate to the narrative.

Another important aspect of playtesting is making sure that you playtest with your target audience.  My groups target audience was teens and young adults which was perfect since our play testers were our fellow classmates. Some of the feedback that we got back was that our narrative was relatable, which really helped us to know that we are reaching our target audience.  When writing the playtesting questions, we really made sure to not ask any leading questions.  Instead we wanted the play testers to tell us what they got from the game, if there were any aspects that seemed particular valuable or invaluable.  We wanted to know how they felt going through our game and if they felt that the choices, they were making in the game mattered and effected the narrative.  The answers we got from these questions helped us to understand what we were doing well, and what were the things we still needed to work on. Overall, playtesting was definitely a very helpful part of our game development.

Works Cited

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: a Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. CRC Press, 2019.

 

 

These past few weeks we have been challenged with creating a game in assigned groups and limited to virtual interactions and meetings because of the given situation. This inconvenient situation may have been particularly educational for us given that many real world game designers are working with each other from different parts of the world and face several hardships in the game designing process as a team including but not limited to: coordination issues, language barriers, time zone conflict, travel conflict, technical difficulties in virtual interactions, and many other things that come with working with people that are not in your physical space. We got a small taste of facing such issues during game design with our group projects. One part of this process that was particularly inconvenient given the online only conditions we are forced to abide by was playtesting. 

During playtesting, we split into different Discord groups and played each other’s games. An issue we faced was that there were not enough players present to play our game to its full extent, limiting the “roleplay” effect and feel of our game (on top of the limitations of the virtual interaction which also greatly limited roleplaying abilities). In her section on playtesting, Fullerton wrote “Your role at this point is not that of the game designer but that of an investigator and observer who must give these playtesters access to the game, lead them through a useful playtest, record what they say and do, and, later, analyze their responses  Rather than telling players what to think about your game or explaining how it works, let them play it with no or minimal explanation” (pg 281). In our case, all of the game designers had to be a player in their own game because for our game, we did not have enough players, and for the other team’s game, we did not possess the program (Tabletop Simulator) needed to run their game, so they had to play the game for us on a livestream. While there was a lot of useful feedback from the playtesting session, it would have been much more effective if a) it was not virtual and b) there were more players so the game designers did not have to play their own games. However, given our circumstances, these factors were unavoidable. At least now we are more familiar with the process for future use. 

Works Cited:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

This week we focused mostly on working on our group project. We also got to see iterative design came to play which includes iterative playtests, continual design, and survey for the play testers. In Fullerton’s chapter 9, she writes “The common misconception is that playtesting is simple—just play the game and gather feedback. In reality, playing the game is only one part of a process that involves selection, recruiting, preparation, controls, and analysis“. She also talks about how playtesting is a concept that most game designers understand the least about. If you read further, you can see how playtesting plays a crucial role in our game design process.

It was cool to see different survey methodologies this week and to choose the best one that fits our game design the best. Last week, our team designed the prototype of the game, but the game still had elements that were unbalanced. The only thing that can check if the game is balanced is playtesting. Sometimes the actual the game does come out as good as the theoretical design that we have in mind. After playtesting our monopoly-like table top game, we realized that there were elements that were not useful or too overpowered. Playtesting also does more than just checking the balance of the game. It can check other aspects such as how long it takes for players to learn about the game, how clear the rules and instructions are, and the overall enjoyment of the game. We used the information we got from the survey questions that we sent to our playtesters on Thursday to redesign our game better.

With our current schedule and situation, I think most of us do not have much time to playtest the game as much as we want to. I think if we keep playtesting our game, I think we will find the ideal balance of the game.

Works Cited:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

The usage of playtesting helps bring light to many issues within games. As described by Fullerton, we had group playtesting, where multiple people were involved and we were capable of having an open discussion.  Since it was impossible to know what point of the game that the player was at, we could not ask many questions during their gameplay and had to wait for their responses at the end. In regards to finding issues within games through testing, this can be seen through the class playtesting from Thursday. To give some context, our group project has multiple stories, which were written by different people and so there are discrepancies between each story as they may have a unique feel for each one, due to our separate writing styles. One of our stories was preferred by many of our playtesters due to the realism that was put within the story through the addition of names. Through the responses in our questionnaire, we were able to realize this helpful piece of information and begin to expand upon the other stories that lacked in the aspect of realism and relatability. 

Other important factors were mentioned. Some questions brought up the idea of lack of choice, which was felt by the player. However, the lack of choice can be beneficial in our case as it helps push the idea that toxicity will happen regardless of what you do. Even with choices, sometimes you cannot change the outcome. It is also important to note that not all people can be accounted for during a playtest depending on your audience. If your playtesters all dislike reading long paragraphs of text, they might not enjoy our twine game. Some responses wanted us to add more images to immerse the player more. This is a great example of easy feedback that can be easily implemented.

Overall, feedback can be very eye opening for a game. It’s challenging to view your own game from an outsider’s perspective, which is why playtesting exists. Sometimes your thoughts cloud judgement that could help benefit and improve your game. In the end, your playtesters are there for the benefit of your game and they will improve it further.

Works Cited

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: a Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. CRC Press, 2019.

As Fullerton mentioned in her chapter on playtesting, it is the most important part of game design. Playtesting shows how the players engage in the game and what parts are balanced or not balanced. I really enjoyed Fullerton’s model for iterative game design on page 278 that shows the different phases of design. There’s the concept phase, where designers generate and formalize ideas. Then as it continues to the preproduction phase, the production phase and the QA phase, the developers constantly test their ideas, evaluate results, and revise their product for launch. This is similar to the GDC talk about iterative design, particularly the image of the design process of the car. It first starts out as a skateboard, then a scooter, then a bike, then a motorcycle, then a car. Each of these designs are iterative and work separately, but build off of each other. I have been involved in a few playtesting experiences. I was a pre-alpha tester for Spellbreak, a fantasy battle royale developed by Proletariat, Inc. I playtested the abilities and mechanics of the game, and also tried to find any glitches or faults in the map. After testing, I had to complete a survey about what I thought about the game and it’s mechanics. I also playtested a game called Karlson, an indie first person parkour shooter from a developer and youtuber named Dani. This playtest was a lot less formal, since it was conducted by one developer instead of a team of developers, but I was still able to provide feedback and eventually have it greenlit on Steam.

Sources:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

For this response I will be talking about chapter nines: Playtesting from the textbook Game Design Workshop, by Tracy Fullerton. Playtesting is a very crucial part of making a finished game. Playtesting games help provide important feedback to the developers so they know what will work and what does not work. There are many kinds of playtesting, such as self-testing, playtesting with confidants, playtesting who you do not know, and playtesting your target audience. Self-testing is when you playtest the game yourself and see if it works. While this is the easiest kind of playtesting, it may not be the most effective because you already know what game it is about and how it works. Playtesting with confidants has to do with people you know playtesting your games. This option should give you better feedback on how the game plays. One suggestion about having people you know playtest your own game is that their opinions may be biased due to them knowing you. Playtesting people who you do not know is exactly what it sounds like. In my opinion, this is one of the best kinds of playtesting, because the people who are playing the games will be more honest about what they play due to not connections with the creator of the game. Playtesting your target audience is also a good option if you want the best feedback for your game. The only problem is that it will be hard to target other audiences to play that certain game. For instance, a company that is targeting first-person shooter players to play this game will have a hard time convincing people who love third-person shooters to play their first-person shooter game.

I believe playtesting games is one of the most important things that a game developer needs to utilize the most. Playtesting is when you or other people get to physically play the game and see if it works or not. Playtesting should be used right until the deadline hits or until the game developer/s are satisfied with the game. I remember asking my parents to playtest my Pokémon board game from the beginning stage right until the final due date of the project. This helped me better tweak my game throughout the making of my game.

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: a Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. CRC Press, 2019.

In Fullerton’s chapter about playtesting, she discusses how playtesting is the single most important activity a designer can engage in.  The purpose of playtesting is to ensure that the game is achieving your player experience goals. It’s important to, as discussed in class on Tuesday, ensure there is balance throughout the game and that there aren’t too many or too few components.  For example, if you’re creating a 2 v 2 card game, you need to make sure both teams have the same advantage to win the game, or else it would be unfair. Additionally, if you have a card game like Uno, you’d need to make sure you have enough variety of cards to keep the game going.  You also want to make sure the time played isn’t too long or too short (depending on what you’re going for). Initially, you should playtest your game yourself in the early stages and then recruit more people. This reminds me of our team’s process of creating our board game on Tabletop Simulator; we started by having all of us get into the game and test the components.  After we realized one member was completely powerless and was at a disadvantage, we increased that characters’ abilities to make sure the game was more fair. Next, we will be recruiting groups to playtest our game, which is exactly what Fullerton suggests. In this environment, it is a lot harder to have our game be playtested by total strangers, which is also what Fullerton suggests so that you can gain a new perspective from people you don’t know who all have differing opinions.  However, it would be interesting to do that someday with our game. It is important to recruit testers who are actually interested in your topic, however; you will get far more relevant feedback than someone who would not wish to even play your game. This reminded me of when we had a board game day in class and our group was playing The Fury of Dracula.  I have never really been super interested in long games that require knowing a lot of rules, so my feedback that day was biased.

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

In the Fullerton chapter from this week, she writes “The interface for a digital game is a combination of the camera viewpoint of the game environment and the visual display of the game status and controls that allow the user to interact with the system” (pg 260). This week we talked more specifically about viewpoints and perspectives in video games. They determine a huge part of the overall experience in video games. Game designers choose certain viewpoints to achieve certain experience. For example, most story games will usually have either 1st person or 3rd person perspective, unless it’s a text based game. On the other hand, top-down perspective are used for MOBA games or strategy game. However this is just a generality. Pokemon uses top-down viewpoint but it’s not a strategy game. Top-down viewpoint allows the player to see a wide area. This is useful when the game designer wants the player to control multiple units at the same time which is the case in most strategy games. On the other hand, 1 person or 3rd person perspective allow the player to be closer with the character.

One game that I find interesting is the old Resident Evil sequels. The game shows a static angle at a time and when a character goes to another section of the room, the angle changes. This design really increases the horror and surprise elements. For example, due to the fact that players sometimes can’t see ahead, players have to listen to sounds. There are rarely any games like this. We also have games that uses side view perspective such as Night in the Woods that we played on Tuesday. The side view allows the designer to use 2D arts to achieve the overall mood of the game.

So in general, it’s important to think about what kind of game that we want to make. We need to choose the best perspective to achieve the effects that we want. Not to mention that how the mechanics and the kinesthetics work in that perspective also matter a lot.

Works Cited:

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

This week, we talked about perspective in video games, as well as nostalgia, using the game ‘Night in the Woods’ as a framing of both. To begin, perspective is crucial in games, as it determines the nature of gameplay as well as setting up what role you, as a player, take in the game itself. For example, If you are playing a game like “The Legend of Zelda”, you control Link throughout his adventure from a third person perspective. While you play no part in the story, you are controlling a character that the story revolves around, making the player an omniscient guide to victory for Link. Originally, when the playable character was being designed for “The Legend of Zelda”, many different names were considered, but Link was chosen in the end because originally, the character traveled to the past and future, becoming the “link” between time. Shigeru Miyamoto also designed Link to relate to all players and “have the opportunity to be heroes like the character”, making him the “link” between the player’s imagination and the game. Another example of perspective in games is the “first person” perspective, where you see the events of the game unfold in front of you, and characters around you address the player as if they are the protagonist. For example, the recent “Doom:Eternal” sees players take the role of the “Slayer”, a gun wielding super-being bent on eliminating the invading forces of  Hell. Throughout the vast majority of the adventure, you see through the eyes of the Slayer, are referred to as the Slayer, and more or less become the Slayer through customization options, whether that be decorating your ship or decorating the Slayer himself. Perspective can differ greatly not only from genre to genre, but from game to game as well. A good example of this is with battle royale shooters such as with “Fortnite”, in which you control an avatar of your choosing from a third person perspective, and with “Apex Legends”, in which you play from the first person perspective of a fleshed out champion with special abilities and voice lines. The second part of this week focused on nostalgia, and its prominence in our everyday lives. “Night in the Woods” plays on a different form of nostalgia, one that is deeply personal. The game plays on the setting of a small mining town in Pennsylvania, giving nostalgia to those with that very specific past, such as the developers. That would be like if I made a game about suburban Buffalo life, it’s something that I remember fondly, but something that gives others completely different feelings. Nostalgia for a time period is certainly seen a lot now, but this subtle form of nostalgia feels much more inviting, like a look back through a window of time you never saw before.