Situation: As the project progresses and the midterm update approaches, the goal for this week is to focus on detailing the game design, giving priority to the more urgent tasks and planning the execution of the remaining ones.
Tasks: First, review the priority map with the other department leads. Then, focus on finalizing the building system design. This includes completing the design of the roads system, documenting the user experience of the building process, deciding on the size of the grid, and compiling an asset list.
In addition, we conducted the second internal playtest using a tool developed by the engineer. This allowed us to track the intuitiveness, fun, and overall serious goals of the prototype.
Activities: At the beginning of the week, the leads and I gathered to discuss the current priority map and determine if any changes or additions were necessary. We restructured some milestones to create a more seamless roadmap. Additionally, we estimated our progress by week 9.
As agreed upon, our first priority was to test the prototype with an audience. To achieve this, we utilized a tool developed by our engineer, which allowed us to create a simplified version of a city neighborhood for people to try out the game. Initially, the results revealed that people were confused about how points were rewarded.
To address this, we created an introductory document that explains the workings of the prototype at the beginning of the game, similar to a tutorial. The playtest results indicate that the concept is interesting (it requires planning as there are no immediate solutions to the issues presented). However, participants found the prototype somewhat confusing due to the presence of numbers on the roads (which they perceived as scores) and it was easy to overlook the planning aspect of the prototype due to the numbers and the low-fidelity visuals.
During the talk with our client, he had an idea of being able to place a limited amount of different types of roads, to promote sustainable road placement. We brainstormed different ways how to use our current building system to place different types of roads as well:
Have a separate road selection system (marking multiple roads and changing their type): This idea solves the problem, but it adds new mechanics to the system, which increases its complexity (both development-wise and player cognitive-budget-wise).
Place the different road types as if they are yet another building type: This idea does not add complexity but it reduces the viability of placing roads (placing buildings has a higher value score-wise).
I also noticed, however, that during playtests very limited number of roads were placed (meaning their value was already lower). So based on this, and discussing the ideas with multiple people, I came to the conclusion, that it would be best to go for the second idea, but separate buildings and road placement limit into 2 separate pools. This would ensure the values of all constructions are balanced.
The next issue we faced was how exactly we visualize the score that houses in range of necessities give. We went through a couple of ideas, like signs, road marking, and color coding but ended up with arealization outlining (the walking range of each necessity - the 3 roads connected to it and the houses that connect to those roads).
With the system now complete, I created a UX flow to iron out any details that might still be missing from the used journey and a guide on how to read and create diagrams.
Results:
Game Roadmap
Playtest
Revised Building System Document
Building System UX Flow
Diagram Conventions Document
Reflection: I think the week was very productive in general, although a bit chaotic in times, as I was pulled in constantly, which distracted me from my work flow, but next week we will discuss how to improve that part.
Kommentare