Version 1 to Version 2
After playtesting in class, I wanted to incorporate one main piece of feedback and expand on the story in one key way.
The piece of feedback that I hoped to include was incorporating a clear instructions folder into the game. In order to facilitate this in my Google Docs prototype, I gave the player only a single folder when they first opened their “workspace”. This folder contained a rundown of the basic game dynamics. When the player was done, they could navigate “back” which brought them to a screen with more options.
The expansion I hoped to add was to add a branching factor to the story. In a very small way, I tried to include the aspect of “tuning” future choices to the player’s previous choices through this branching mechanism.
Updated introduction section for Version 2
Playtest Results (10/18)
Description of player:
The player is a college-aged woman and does not have experience with IF games, She did, however, grow up playing video games (like Plague Inc.) She does enjoy mystery movies/TV shows/etc., which I’m treating as an indicator that the “semblance of choice” I’m planning on incorporating into my game (since there is only one true plotline running in the background) won’t be a deal-breaker in terms of frustration with the game. She did not playtest version one.
Description of playtest:
This playtest only took the player about four minutes to play through, since most of the additional story elements I added from version 1 were branching, so any one play through didn’t get significantly longer. She played through the game twice and ended up in a different branch for both.
What worked:
The player was interested in the topic and had a lot of questions about where the story might end up, even after only playing once. This was a positive sign, since it showed that the first few prompts were engaging enough that they were already invested in the game’s world. She also enjoyed noticing on the second play through how the options changed based on her selections—a mechanic that she clearly understood because of the instructions folder at the beginning. She was also able to glean basic information about the character she was playing (a historian studying a futuristic society, etc.).
What needs work:
The main feedback I received was simply that the current version is too short to really tell if you will feel immersed into your character. The playtest noted the concern that the prompts are too impersonal, and you won’t learn much about yourself through the game as a result. It is also difficult to fully judge the mechanics when the game is still in transcript form—the player noted that the [inaudible] sections seem too strategically placed and as a result don’t feel authentic. This is a key mechanic in the game, so it had a large impact on their buy-in for the game’s world.
Future changes:
For my next playtest, I would like to have generated at least a few audio files to test the user’s response (and test my ability to make certain sections strategically inaudible). I also need to generally add more length, a component which the other assignment due today was very helpful in moving me towards! I also want to spend more time making a detailed character sketch for the playable character to decide what type of information the player should discover about them throughout the story. It’s hard to check how immersive different components are with such a small set of prompts, so I really want to front-load the writing to be able to investigate how players interact with the world I am building. I can always go back through and fix different prompts, so I need to stop being a perfectionist about the ones I include!
