Playtest Two

Playtest Two Setup

Machines

Within the cubicle, we had four laptops set up for playtesting. Two Windows laptops, one Mac, and one Linux. Each laptop had a controller plugged in, and two had a mouse plugged in as well. The game was set up to be played with a controller, but the mouse was available for those who preferred it. In order to prevent sonic overload, one laptop had headphones plugged in, while the other three had their sound muted. Each machine had a different setting of the Post Processing Shader, in oder to get feedback on which one was preferred.

Cubicle decorations

Around the cubicle, we had a few posters and some concept art on the walls. We also had a few chairs set up for the playtesters to sit in. Some drinks, cups and snacks were available for the playtesters, and of course ourselves.

Survey

During the playtest, we asked the playtesters to fill out a survey. The survey was created using Google Forms, and was shared with the playtesters via a printed out QR code, hanging on various walls in the cubicle.

Questions

1. What did you think of the animations within the game?
   Rationale: Understand player impressions on animation quality, fluidity, and how it contributes to game feel and immersion.

2. Were the ability icons clear and easy to understand?
   Rationale: Evaluate the clarity and recognizability of ability icons to ensure players can quickly identify and differentiate abilities during gameplay.

3. What did you think about the length of each arena fight?
   Rationale: Assess whether fight durations feel appropriate. neither too short to be unsatisfying nor too long to become tedious.

4. Did the game feel balanced overall? If not, what aspects felt unbalanced?
   Rationale: Identify any gameplay elements, such as combat difficulty, enemy behavior, or player abilities, that may require tuning to improve fairness and challenge.

5. How intuitive did it feel to navigate through the UI?
   Rationale: Gauge the ease of use and user-friendliness of menus and interface flow, focusing on player experience and accessibility.

6. Did the UI feel good to you? If not, which aspects of the UI (both in-game and the Poultry menu) did not feel good or could be improved?
   Rationale: Collect specific feedback on visual design, layout, and responsiveness of all UI elements to enhance usability and aesthetic appeal.

7. Which items (abilities or weapons) did you enjoy using the most?
   Rationale: Discover which gameplay tools players gravitate toward, highlighting fun or effective mechanics that could be emphasized or expanded.

8. How would you describe the current difficulty of the game?
   Rationale: Understand player perception of the game’s challenge level to inform balancing decisions that suit the target audience.

9. Is there anything else you’d like to add?
   Rationale: Offer an open-ended opportunity for players to share additional thoughts, suggestions, or concerns not addressed by previous questions.

Feedback

Verbal Feedback Summary

• Item descriptions are too lengthy; consider making them more concise and visually engaging, similar to familiar games.
• Item costs require balancing. Items of different power levels should not have the same price.
• Add or extend a countdown before rounds start to give players time to prepare.
• Storytelling could be more explicit, possibly through a tutorial that introduces core mechanics like sacrificing for power.
• Add confirmation for shop purchases and clarify shop functions with segmented, concise explanations.
• Arena visuals could be enhanced with more texture or a “dirtier” look.
• Prioritize a tutorial area with clear, minimal explanations for abilities and items.
• Ensure the hurt state does not override the death state for characters.
• Address balancing issues, dialogue interaction bugs, and shorten in-game texts for clarity.
• Improve input blocking during dialogue and fix controller compatibility in shops.
• Some traps do not damage certain enemies; investigate and resolve these bugs.
• Address mouse and controller focus issues, especially when switching between input methods.
• Some enemies or abilities are overpowered or unpredictable; improve telegraphing and balancing.
• Fix clipping issues with certain enemies that can cause players to fall through the floor.
• Consider swapping default ability buttons for better ergonomics (e.g., left/right trigger mapping).
• Some visual effects, like avalanche, block player vision too much and may need adjustment.
• Prevent overlapping menus and actions during dialogue to avoid confusion.
• Add a damage indicator for the player to improve feedback.
• Reduce weapon usage time and review ability damage for better pacing.
• Address shading and normals issues on the chicken model for smoother visuals.
• Allow ability rebinding to different keys for improved accessibility.
• Fix calculation bugs for certain abilities (e.g., Sea of Flames damage).
• Adjust visual feedback, such as making light flashes faster.
• Make enemies react to taking damage, possibly with a mini stun or retreat behavior.
• Reduce the number of traps and move them to the arena’s edge for better flow.

Survey Results

Overview

A total of 14 responses were collected from playtesters. The survey covered topics such as animation quality, UI clarity, game balance, and overall enjoyment. Below is a summary and analysis of the key findings:

Animations

• Most ratings for animation quality were between 2 and 5, with the majority giving a 3 or 4. This suggests the animations are serviceable but could be improved for greater impact and polish.
• Several comments mentioned that attack animations and hitboxes were unclear, and that animation pacing could be improved.

Ability Icons

• Nearly all respondents found the ability icons clear and easy to understand, with only two indicating otherwise. This indicates the iconography is generally effective.

Arena Fight Length

• Most playtesters rated the length of arena fights as appropriate (mostly 3s and 4s), with no strong consensus that fights were too short or too long.

Game Balance

• Feedback on balance was mixed. Some found the game balanced, while others noted specific issues:
  • The minigun and fireball abilities were frequently cited as overpowered.
  • Melee weapons were often described as weak compared to ranged options.
  • Some players found the game easy to exploit with certain abilities, and a few mentioned difficulty spikes or unclear enemy behavior.

UI Navigation & Feel

• Most players found the UI intuitive and fitting for the game, with ratings generally between 3 and 5.
• Some feedback highlighted controller compatibility issues and a desire for more polish, especially in weapon selection and the Poultry menu.
• A few noted that the UI style felt a bit empty or inconsistent in places.

Enjoyable Items/Abilities

• The minigun and fireball were the most frequently mentioned as enjoyable or powerful.
• Ground pound, sword, and feather abilities were also highlighted by several players.

Difficulty

• Most respondents rated the difficulty as 3 or 4, indicating a moderate challenge. A few found it too easy or too hard depending on their setup or equipment choices.

Additional Comments

• Players requested more polish, additional weapons, and improved controller support.
• Art style and visual consistency were praised, though some noted mismatches in shading and style.
• Suggestions included adding more effects, improving feedback for attacks, and clarifying equipment permanence.

Conclusion

Overall, playtesters enjoyed the game and found the core systems engaging, but there are clear areas for improvement:

• Refine and clarify animations, especially for attacks and hitboxes.
• Balance abilities and weapons, particularly ranged vs. melee.
• Continue polishing the UI and address controller compatibility.
• Add more visual feedback and polish to enhance game feel.

Feedback GDD

• The Game Design Document (GDD) covers most required topics, but some sections are too superficial and need more depth.
• Review the grading criteria for each track (production, sound design, FX/shaders) to ensure all expectations are met.
• The shaders and AI sections should be expanded with more detail and include visual aids where appropriate.
• The game programming chapter must not rely on external links. All required information should be included directly in the document to meet grading standards.
• Overall, the document is progressing well but requires additional detail and polish before the final submission.