So, this was my first project that involved something digitally instead of the DnD maps that I have become accustomed to this semester, but it felt good to be progressing. For this project, I was assigned with making a maze using assets, mechanics, and goals given to me. All I had to do was make the level. I was able to garner around 4 different playtesters, who all gave me differing feedback.
To start, my level starts from the lower left of the map, and the maze goes around the church where a coin is stored. Then, they need to backtrack a little bit to "escape" through the farmer's fields. Out of the 4 playtesters that I garnered, 3 of them were able to complete the level successfully with the coin collected, while the other playtester finished the game without collecting the coin. I was particularly interested in what this 4th playtester had to say. However, I'll dive into it later. For the playtesters, they thought that it was a good challenge and they thought that the map really felt like a maze even though it didn't look like a maze at all, which they felt was a great part about the level design. All of the playtesters were able to complete the map all around 1-2 minutes time, with the shortest being under a minute (without collecting the coin).
One of the design choices that I made for this map had mixed thoughts, some playtesters thought it was cool and some thought it was just annoying, and that was the fact that I put the coin in sight of the player within the first few steps of the map. One of the playtesters I had thought it was such a funny and unique way of placing the coin since it shows you the prize that you so desperately want, yet you know you have to work to get it, which made some of my playtesters become more enticed in the level than when they originally came into it.
However, one of my playtesters wasn't too keen on that, or my map design almost entirely. My 4th playtester said that there were a few parts of the map where it was almost near impossible to get through, mostly due to broken game mechanics which isn't necessarily the designer's fault, but I definitely took what he said into consideration, as well as the other playtesters. The 4th playtester went down to the level completion zone without trying to go for the coin first, causing him to not be very intrigued with the game, which is what a lot of my other playtesters suggested too. They said that with that end goal placement, they would ask the question of "Why would I go all the way around for a coin when I could just finish the level right now?" which is something even I thought was something huge that needed to be changed within my level.
Now, my map included a so-called "mechanic" where once you went around the outside, you were able to "climb the fence unseen" (according to the immersion factor), but all my playtesters were a little confused about this factor, originally thinking that there wasn't actually a way of getting the coin until they tried to go through the fence. I wanted to make something out of much more simple mechanics, making it something that honestly didn't really fit with the level (especially since the actual player character would go under the fence and graves of the church asset), and they felt that it was a little immersion/game-breaking, even if the game isn't a super immersive game in itself. They felt that the level design overall was good, but maybe could use some widening (again because of the blockers being so big), as well as some more incentives. One playtester told me that they felt it was too tedious and too long of a task to get only one coin, making them feel a little bit ripped-off by the level. They felt that with some more coins, as well as some possible secrets, my level could be a lot better than it is now.
Overall though, they felt it was a good start, but with just a bit more polish and the immersion-breaking mechanic being thrown in the garbage, I feel this map could do a lot better than before.
No comments:
Post a Comment