Week 13: Readings

Why Should Indie Devs Care About Video Game Usability Testing?

In this article, three methods of usability testing are described as the various ways the designers can use them appropriately in order to get the most out of their usability testing sessions. With effective usability testing, the designers can receive useful information in which can help them to further improve the game and get the game closer to the goal. Before moving forward onto conducting the test, however, the designers must first define who their target players are. This is because, in the end, they will be the ones who will actually be playing/buying the game. By conducting usability testing with people who don't match the target audience, the designers are wasting time and resources in obtaining information that would not be useful or signinficant in further interating the game.

Guerilla Testing

This method requires asking potential target players in public spaces to play and test out the game for a short period while recording their reactions. It is recommended that this method should be used as early as the mechanic of the game is fully (or almost) finished, but it doesn't have to be complete with all of the levels or art. Rather than any physical/space peparations, this method only require that the game should always be ready to go, so that the players wouldn't have to wait. However, it does require good communication skills, in which the designers should be able to explain what the players would have to do as straightforward and concise as possible, so that the players' don't feel like they are wasting time. In addition, there's bound to be players who don't fit the target audience, as well as people who decline to play.

In my opinion, I think that the short survey shown in the article is a very effective and quick way to decide whether or not a person is part of the target audience.

In addition, I think that another short survey to give the players after the testing session might be effective in obtaining more useful information too. The most important (and challenging part) to me for this method seems to be the communication to the players, and immediate problem solving if we are to run into any problems during the session. I think that having a brief script regarding how to go about asking people to play the game, as well as explaining the game, is something the designers shoudl prepare prior to the usability testing, so that they seem professional, which in turn influences the players to seriously think about the game and their feedbacks.

On-site Testing

This method is when the person testing the game is placed in the same room as the designers who will observe first-hand the reactions and also possibly conduct a brief, informal interview for futher feedbacks afterwards. The screen in which the player is playing on, as well as their face, would be recorded as well. It is recommended that the game should be almost in its finished state for this type of usability testing. However, the designers can pick certain levels or the player to play through, as well as setting certain objectives (reach this level, earn this many points, ...) for the players which would help determine the length and the focus of the session. This process would require setting up the area before the actual test, for example: finding a room, tables, and chairs. Moreover, the designers will have to explain concisely what the players are doing. Then, they would observe and note down the reactions.

In my opinion, it is very important that the players vocalize their thoughts throughout the gameplay, since it will help clarifies what they are thinking so that the designers can compare that to what they wanted the players to think when encounetring certain things in the game. In addition, I think that this method can allow for many observations and feedbacks that there should be more than one person taking notes throughout the process. When using this method, I found that sometimes the only note take can find it difficult to write down both the vocal responses as well as the facial expressions of the player and the actions they are doing in the game at the same time. Therefore, I think it would be more effective to have one person observing and noting the player's actions and reactions to the game, while the other person can note the vocalized thoughts of the player as well as answer any questions that might come up.

Making Users Evaluate without Them Knowing

This method requires no physical space to be set up, or even direct comuunication between the designers and the testers at all. Rather, the players will play the games by themselves, and when that happen, the designers can receive the feedbacks and information via several ways. For example, the players can play the beta version of the game in which they have an option to give feedbacks through a survey form in exchange for some kind of reward in the game. Additionally, the desginers can use analytics and statistics to track the players' behaviours in the game without having the players to do anything beside playing the game at all. They can see where the players tend to click, as well as how long they spend on one puzzle, for example, through this method.

Although I've never conducted this type of usability testing before, I think that this method allows for very straightforward and helpful feedbacks from the players. By making the survey form for the feedbacks anonymous, the playtesters can give direct feedbacks that they may have refrained themselves from if it is a face-to-face conversation. On the other hand, it could also result in the players not really giving much thoughts into the survey and them just doing it for the rewards from completing the survey. Therefore, I think it is also important to design the survey they would take in a way that is both concise, but also inspiring for the players to really evaluate what they were thinking about whilst playing the game.