Comparing Data from Iterations 1 and 2

With the second load of data through from my survey, I'm ready to start analyzing my findings to inform my research.

I created two versions of the same game. The first featured level organisation to the best of my ability. I designed this iteration to have a steady progression of difficulty that would gradually introduce the game's mechanics, and the strategies that players would need to overcome them. I then sent this version of the game out to playtesters, who provided feedback on each level in the form of survey ratings. Of particular interest to me was the 'difficulty' and 'fun' rating of each level.

The second version was made in response to these results. I found that players weren't enjoying the first two levels at all, and that many were rating the second one as less difficult than the first. I also found that the third level was rated as the most enjoyable, and the fourth as the most difficult. Ideally, the game would have been enjoyed throughout its duration, and the final level would have been the most difficult.

Iteration 1 Experience Graph

For the sake of research, I decided to make drastic changes to the game, creating significantly more difficult levels and introducing them in a quicker amount of time. This opposed my original views on progression design - I had been lead to believe that a game needs to ensure that players are very comfortable with its progression long before introducing any challenge. But I wanted to push the limits on what I thought was acceptable game design, and see the change in results.

Below are the results from my second iteration.

Iteration 2 Experience Graph

Achieving a "Tense and Release" Oscillation
Keep in mind that I was aiming to generate a single 'crest' of pace oscillation; introducing a new type of challenge, building up, and reaching a climax. If the game was longer, I'd be able to induce multiple oscillations, and the overall difficulty curve might look like this:

Ideally, the difficulty curve would show a steady rise. But, as can be seen in my two experience graphs, this was not quite the case.

It's unclear which, if either, of the two iterations come close to accomplishing this curve. It seems clear, however, that Iteration 2's level 3 is easier than level 2.

(Iteration 2: Level 2)

(Iteration 2: Level 3)

I placed the two puzzles in this order because:

• Level 2 elaborates on puzzles using 1 colour of gem.
• Level 3 introduces a puzzle with two gems.

Clearly, this was a misguided decision. It may be best to introduce complexities one at a time, such that 2-gem puzzles aren't touched until the player has mastered 1-gem puzzles. But, for whatever reason, Level 2 was perceived as much more difficult than Level 3. With this in mind, I'd consider swapping the two puzzles around. But I'd be more inclined to scrap both puzzles altogether; Level 2 is too difficult for a 2nd puzzle, and calls for strategies that have not yet been developed in the player, while Level 3 introduces two-gem puzzles too easily. That said, since it may be best to introduce 2-gem puzzles very carefully, the transition to these puzzles may merit a pacing-oscillation of their own, such that:

• Levels 1 - 5 are entirely about single-gem puzzles.
• Levels 6 - 10 introduce multiple-gems, where Level 6 is comparatively simple.

This did occur to me during development, but I decided against it for two reasons:

1. Creating interesting puzzles with just one gem is actually quite difficult. Generally, it's easy to find the solution to these puzzles without much effort, since you don't need to worry about which order the gems need to move in.
2. Creating 10 puzzles was beyond my time limit.

Apparent Difficulty

Notice, also, that Iteration 1's (now referred to as Iter-1) Level 5 is the same puzzle as Iteration 2's (Iter-2) Level 4:

... which I'll now refer to as the "Complex Primer" puzzle. Iter-1's difficulty rating of this level averages to 3.2. Iter-2 averages 4.

Meanwhile, enjoyment ratings for this level are 3.2 for Iter-1, 3.75 for Iter-2.

Complex Primer was both apparently more difficult (averaging at 4 - "Difficult" - on the scale) and better enjoyed in Iter-2 than Iter-1, despite being the same puzzle.

Why is this? I can think of two possible reasons. The first is that Complex Primer - though one of the more difficult puzzles - might not be difficult enough to stand as the finale-puzzle following 4 other puzzles, each raising the player's skill and understanding of the game. In Iter-1, by the time the player reached Complex Primer, Complex Primer may have been below their capabilities, this steering them too close to the "Boredom" section of the Flow graph. Levels 1 - 5 - introducing concepts of order, movement, patterns, and interface - may have prepared the player too well for the final trial, making it less of a challenge and ruining the Oscillation's crest. In Iter-2, meanwhile, it was only the 4th puzzle, and remained challenging to the slightly less practised player.

Alternatively, it could be that Complex Primer is judged in the context of its previous puzzle. In Iter-1, this was Level 4 (hereby called "Intersection Primer"):

Intersection Primer was rated as the most difficult puzzle of Iter-1. I still can't explain why this is the case. The puzzle only reiterates what has been taught in Iter-1's 3rd puzzle (the concept of order-priming), and I assumed it would actually be quite boring for players. The rating, however, is only .25 above its previous and following puzzles.

Nonetheless, here is a puzzle perceived as quite difficult by the average player. The following puzzle - Complex Primer - is consequently rated as slightly easier (again, only by .25 / 5). Similarly, in Iter-2, Complex Primer follows a puzzle with a lower rating; this puzzle being Level 3 in Iter-2's experience graph. Are these ratings partially informed by comparison with the previous level?

The bottom line is that difficulty is not just the product of a Level's singular design. Difficulty is perceived in context of the Level's order in the game, and the player's experience. A level plucked from the 3rd section of a game - complete with new mechanics and complex puzzles - and placed immediately after the game's interface tutorial, will be perceived as unfairly difficult. If left in its correct place, however, any players reaching this point will be experienced enough to describe the level as "only slightly difficult". The same level can be perceived quite differently, due to changes in level order.