Playtester:
Same as last time (see other notes), CS coterm student.
During Playtest:
- Playtester liked the “improved” assets
- Player tried to “break” the experience much more (as it was her second time playing it)
- This is definitely something to keep in mind once game is implemented in an actual game engine
Post Playtest:
- Player said that while the improved assets helped the experience compared to the plain boxes, the format of the playtest ruined the immersion
- I showed the playtest a very rough scene in RPG maker to see if they thought that the RPG maker controls would increase immersion, and they didn’t really like it and found controls confusing. This made me decide to swap to Unity, as I have a basic top down tileset game with rough dialogue functionality already built, and it will be easier to just adapt off of that as opposed to trying to learn RPG maker in 2 weeks.
- Also reinforces that I need to have a minimum viable product for my text playtests.
- Didn’t feel different enough to give very good feedback
- Player said that despite already being familiar with the twist the game offers, she felt the emotional stakes of the pre-disaster portion of the experiences felt heightened since she knew she would not be able to do it all.
Other Notes:
- I was traveling this weekend and wasn’t able to do this playtest until Sunday night (and I had to use the same playtester I used last time), so while I’ve started the Unity implementation, and have the player’s room done, the protoype for class is very similar to the protoype used for this playtest.
