Testing for Map Implementation

To guide the implementation of the map functionality, user-testing was performed to see how the users would want the map to feel and behave. The users tested in this section were between the ages of 16-21, and ranged from school students to university students.

Background

A focus of Sprint 3 was to ensure that the users felt comfortable on the map, and the map behaved how they expected it to behave. This would allow us to guide the overall design and functionality of the map. In terms of map design, we wanted to make sure that the user could identify the design of the map as a sunken island to validate the emotional goals of the game, as well as ensuring that they felt as if they had enough room to play on the island. A specific piece of functionality that was tested was the interaction between buildings and rising water levels.

Testing Method

1. Skip the prologue of the game, such that the user could give us a clear indication of what they thought they were looking at
2. Give the user a basic explanation of how to play the game
3. Let the user upgrade the island, and ask them to note their observations
4. Ask the player to place a building on the new land they acquired, and then ask them to only avoid enemies at night
5. Once the island shrinks, as them what they thought was going to happen/should have happened.
6. Ask them to fill out the google form provided Link

Results

Six users tested this functionality. These are the overview of the results:

Expansion on previous question:

• for example, if you have to touch a mine to get the stone it's produced, then if it's out of reach of the player, then that's already an effect in itself. but I would also want there to be some sort of change to the building visually, cause it would look weird for it to just be floating on the water.

• It doesn't make sense for a building to be left standing if it's sunken lol. I think you should be able to get some of the resources back that you needed to make it when the building is destroyed. This could be done with like a scrap pile or something? or even just adding the resources back to the players inventory.

• if the building was left standing, then on the next night, theres no way to stop enemies from just destroying the building so theres no difference. might as well destroy the building when it gets flooded. i couldn't get any more materials so i'd want to get the materials i used to make the building back. but maybe not until i upgrade the crystal again

• repairable ruins/maybe you could make an upgrade that allows the buildings to float? kinda in place so that they aren't destroyed if the water rises but in this state they are more susceptible to damage.

• After the water has risen, tall buildings should still be partially visible, whereas smaller buildings (e.g. certain resource collectors) should be completely submerged, only becoming visible again once the water has been lowered to its initial level.

• A building which has been fully or partially submerged should show signs of damage (e.g. cracks in the walls, broken windows), and should not function until the water has been lowered to its initial level.

• From a gameplay perspective, if and when a building becomes fully visible again after having been submerged, it should be in a damaged but repairable state, such that player interaction is required to return it to working order. (I'm thinking "Clash of Clans" here.)

• if building get destroyed, nth should be left on the tile.

Evaluation and Analysis

Unfortunately, the overview of the results yields a fairly even split between left standing/in a repairable state, and destroyed. As such, more testing is required.