Testplan/
initial tests

Small edit: I forgot to add a ruleset. Very important

SCROLL TO THE RIGHT FOR MORE INFO >>>

Test Subject: Half-Korean expat. She prototyped the APP ONLY

ADOBE XD PROTOTYPE LINK:
https://xd.adobe.com/view/4c5b7e9a-3e4a-46f4-8a28-c10c2befd87b-1908/

TEST 1:

TEST 2:

Test was VERY useful. She found a lot of gaps, non-functioning buttons, broken userflows. She gave advice about the design of the app (colors, mostly). There is a lot of work to do.

However, I was not very prepared for a test like this. Next time I should be prepared better and record my screen and her voice (or mine)

Jotting down notes made test subject feel uncomfortable. I shoud find a more comfortable way to do this.

I should add more to the app to make it feel more complete: submissions, functions of the app (the game itself, adding friends, making a lobby)

CONCLUSION

This time I tested the app on 2 people and tested the game on 4 people. The two participants that tested the app are app designers.

This time I tried to record my own screen, but for some reason my iPhone refused to record my screen. I did however make a voice recording

I also tested the challenges and the game instead of just the app.

ADOBE XD LINK: https://xd.adobe.com/view/cbd4715e-9a5f-4c13-9d70-d618cc63fc2b-9e87/

So this went much better. I tested the interface on multiple people and they understood it much more. That said, they were app designers and studying computer science so their knowledge might have been much more intuitive.

"the app does what it should do" was the main point of feedback. They mentioned the "how to" menu was iffy.

They also said the X button in the lobby section was very unclear. They kind of felt stuck there, so it should be more clear for them that is an actual action instead of a pictogram.

I should now focus on the leaderboard, gallery and chat function as that is a function I have not properly tested and worked out yet. Curious as to what that could lead to.

CONCLUSION

Testing the game

So this time I playtested the game for the first time. I tried the Wizard of Oz strategy.

First I let the users test the app as if they were going to play the game from the app. They were a little confused if it was a real functioning app with infrastructure or if it was just a prototype without any "real" function.

After they successfully joined and created a game I ripped of the bandaid of trickery and used the messaging app SIGNAL to send the challenges to the participating teams.

I told them the rules and how to play. I was also going to test the duration of the rounds.

Round 1

I gave both team captains the challenges at random using Signal. Duration of this round was 10 minutes.

Round 1: feedback

Feedback was mostly positive. The team was enthusiastic

They thought 10 minutes was a perfect amount of time for doing the small challenges and ramping up the tempo of completing them.

3 people said 10 minutes was fine. 1 said it was too short.

Challenges were fun

Round 2: start

This time the duration of the game was 20 minutes and I sent the complete list of challenges to the participants to see how they would complete them if it isnt random.

Round 2: feedback

The second time I was hosting the game the game lasting 20 mins felt too long for the participants.

I also noticed that giving them the list changed the game completely. Playstyles changed as Team 1 tried to do the hardest challenges for the most points, but taking a long time and Team 2 did the easiest challenges and scored the most points by doing them all quick and easy.

Team 2 won by a long shot.

Their added feedback:
Create a chat function
Make an account and add friends
Badges/achievements
Get a third party to verify pictures (google ai)

The most interesting bit was the creativity of the players. Some interpreted the challenged as very differently like 'flower crown'. This eventually became an exercise of creativity.

conclusions

The players were very creative in solving their challenges. I should add a creativity score to break the ice even more.

They also really enjoyed looking at each others (and their own pictures.) I should add a photo/gallery mode and maybe they can talk to each other that way.

I should also keep it random and not give players a list, otherwise they get a completely boring experience for a single time only

interaction station sketch

TEST 3:

or version TREE I tweaked a bunch of things for usability's sake + almost everything from my previous tests. Such as:

- Chat function
- Creativity scores
- Login in system
- Single player mode
- Find new people mode
- App store mockup
- Different colors per team
- Improved gallery and leaderboard

Use it yourself:

https://xd.adobe.com/view/38ae0fa3-65f7-471b-a84c-1a6994427fe4-6dfd/

Test 3

got feedback on my latest version. The biggest point was that the app looks very static and unplayful. The 'fun' and 'game' element is missing from this otherwise fun and playful game.

Megans feedback was to make the screens more interactive. Less static.

In user testing I received similar feedback: The app is static, text is too big colors are too similar.

Test 3

How to play is unclear. Wording seems incorrect. READY? Is unclear. Player is used to seeing brown pop-ups and not the green one. “Readying 2 times doesn’t make sense”

Win screen aanpassen (interactiever) design vriendelijker en leuker worden

Voorbeeld foto’s voor challenges

Tekst invoer lijkt op de knoppen

Punten gaan misschien niet werken. Reacties werken misschien beter als punten. Timing We heeft ‘m als eerst

Add verification to the app. Login and reporting. I don't want to meet strangers.

conclusions

The menu does look very static and there is no way around it. Final tweaks should include..

- A redesign to make it more fun and gamelike
- clearer more different buttons for different functions
- more dynamic movement in the app
- play with the scoring system more.
- Change the color palette

feedback