Sprint 2 Proposed Level 2 & 3 Designs User Testing

Process

User testing was completed with 3 participants in order to test the usability of the current game. We have chosen to leave all participants as anonymous. Before conducting an interview on related issues, the interviewees were asked to look at map design for Level 2 and 3 of the current game interface. After that, participants need to answer 4 questions, with regards to the map design and map difficulty.

Responses

Question 1: Were there any major issues you had with the map design for level 2 and 3?

Participant 1: "No. The map was simple to understand and easy to interpret what actions I needed to take in order to avoid obstacle or falling off obstacles."

Participant 2: "The designs were good but I think you could add more varied types of obstacle like ramps or hills so that it's not all straight lines. That might make it more interesting, visually."

Participant 3: "I liked the different types of interactive things that you added, but maybe if I could see them implemented it would be better."

Question 2: Between Level 2 and 3, do you think the difference in difficulty was obvious?

Participant 1: "To me, the levels were similar in difficulty, however, level 3 did feel longer. I think that more interactive elements or more challenging obstacles could be added to make the levels more obviously different difficulties."

Participant 2: "Yes, it was obvious because I think there was a clear incrementation of interactive elements. It looked like there was more interactive elements used in the third level compared to the second."

Participant 3: "I think it was obvious but you could maybe add more types of obstacles. For example, tighter spaces and tunnels, etc."

Question 3: Do you have any suggestions to improve the map designs for these levels?

Participant 1: "You could have multiple buttons close to each other in the map so that it might not be clear which button will open which door. This would create a sense of confusion and make the level more challenging."

Participant 2: "In further levels you maybe make it less linear because it can encourage the player to make their own path rather than jumping on what's right in front of them. This would make the game level paths more varied."

Participant 3: "In a further level, maybe there could be some kind of element that takes you backwards if you fall off an obstacle similar to the idea of snakes and ladders."

Question 4: What other interactable elements would you like to see in the next Sprint?

Participant 1: "I'm not very good at these types of games so, you could add some type of invincible tool, where if the player gets too close to the void, the tool could help them speed up and go through walls. Like giving them a second chance to keep playing."

Participant 2: "I would like some kind of danger element that isn't the void to create more crisis. To accompany the external dangers, you could have some kind of immunity object for the player that would incentivise alternative pathways. Specifically, if there were spikes at the bottom of a pit and you had an immunity item, it could jump pad you off the spikes rather than killing you."

Participant 3: "To make the map for harder level more interesting and different to earlier levels, there could be a blocked path where the only way to get through is via a portal which can be accessed by turning on switch, etc."

Evaluation

From the feedback recorded from the users, it was determined that most of the participants agreed that the map design is good, however the level difficulty is too similar. Some suggested more challenging obstacles or new interactive elements in order to emphasize that the difficulty of the level is increasing.

In order to remedy the difficulty similarities between the two given level maps, users suggested adding elements that more drastically influence the players position in the game, as well as, putting more interactive elements out of the path of the user to make it more challenging. Many participants seemed to agree that this would increase the difficulty and create a sense of urgency as the void approaches.

Participants proposed many potential ideas (shown in feedback) for new interactive elements that could be implemented to increase the level difficulty in these and future levels.