Data from First Survey

I've sent out my game and survey to be completed by fellow students. I've received 9 responses. This isn't a spectacular sample of data, but it's enough for me to start reviewing my game's progression.

Google Forms can be exported into a handy excel sheet, where I'm able to compile the data into graphs.

Here are the graphs I've compiled.

 (Level difficulty, enjoyment of the level, and the level requiring skills taught in a previous level, rated 1-5 by players)

This graph is very valuable. It illustrates the kind of experience curve I've created with the way I've lined up my game. The most important factors here are difficulty and enjoyment, with skill preparation being difficult to make sense of. In previous posts, I've talked about how the ideal difficulty progression of a game should be a gradual increase. More specifically, a game should start by matching the player's skill level, then gradually approach a "test" level, where the skill level somewhat exceeds what the player can easily accomplish. This level of challenge should push the player out of their comfort zone, but not out of flow; the player should still feel up to the task, and any challenges should be ones that they have a fair chance of overcoming. Immediately after a test, the game should return to the low-end of flow.

In the above graph, we don't see this pattern. Where difficulty should be steady (due to the player being roughly capable of completing each new level), but should have a slight rise towards the final levels, we instead see the 4th level being considered the most difficult (by a fraction of an integer, however). Levels 1 and 2 are considered exceedingly easy - these are the levels that introduce mechanics rather than challenge the player with puzzles - and Level 2 is the least enjoyed. This indicates that having two congruent levels with poor puzzle quality is a shortcoming of the game's quality. It risks losing the player's attention early in the game. But at the same time, it's important to make sure that the player understands the mechanics taught in these levels.

Level 3 is the most enjoyed level. I think this is because it's the first level featuring a real puzzle element, and it does this at a comfortable pace that still challenges the player. In fact, it's my first real "crest", where this was supposed to be Level 5. After that, difficulty and enjoyment plateau.

(Types of skill required to complete each level, and time taken to complete levels)

These graphs show less interesting data. Once again, however, Level 3 shows a surprisingly high reception and quality among players (where planning can be considered an important attribute of any puzzle), while the previous two levels are disturbingly low, requiring "not much effort". The scaling of completion time, however, shows the general uniformity that I'd expect.

As I prepare for my second round of tests, I'll need to focus on:

- Making the first two levels less boring, without getting rid of their tutorial quality.

- Moving the 'crest' to where I need it to be, and following it with another crest if possible.