Game Title
Short description of the games concept
Rate each section out from -2 to 2. -2 being poor, 0 average, 2 good.
1. How clear is the concept? Did you understand what you had to do?
2. How clear were the interactions? Could you easily see what options you had?
3. Implementation - Did the game feel smooth? Was it easy moving to where you wanted to go?
4. Playability – Was the game fun/interesting/compelling. Did the user look like they were enjoying it?
5. Visual – Were the graphics good? Could you tell what everything was supposed to be?
6. Feedback – Did the game give you feedback on your actions? Did you know what was happening when you interacted with things?
7. Contextual Gameplay – How did you find the interfaces for interaction?
Overall score
-14 to -10 - Extremely Poor
-9 to -4 - Poor
-3 to 3 - Average
4 to 9 - Good
10 - 14 - Extremely Good
Games Crit Sheet 1
Game Title
4 of Clubs
Short description of the games concept
A soldier loses money in a card game, has a drink and then decides he has to kill the 3 people he was playing cards with quietly and without being found out. To do this he must find the right weapons and distract the appropriate people.
Rate each section out of 5. 1-poor 3 average 5-excellent
1. How clear is the concept? Did you understand what you had to do?
2, the concept is easy to understand, although not particularly interesting
The whole concept in a sentence. After being forced to watch a long, text based cut-scene.
2. How clear were the interactions? Could you easily see what options you had?
-1, wasn’t obvious where all exits were or what could be interacted with at times. After selecting an option, you always went back to the walk option, making the game slightly annoying
You are told you cannot leave the room, for a reason that you later find out is pointless. You must click on the rifle and find out you are not allowed to use it, before carrying on with the game.
3. Implementation - Did the game feel smooth? Was it easy moving to where you wanted to go?
-1, the game didn’t feel smooth, it looked like it took too long to do certain things. Some of the interactions didn’t feel smooth and seemed awkward.
4. Playability – Was the game fun/interesting/compelling. Did the user look like they were enjoying it?
-2, the player did not get far into the game before becoming bored with it. An error occured twice during testing. Both errors led to the game having to be restarted.
The error message after a second unknown problem
5. Visual – Were the graphics good? Could you tell what everything was supposed to be?
0, didn’t stand out as being terrible, you could tell what was what, but there was nothing impressive about the graphics
6. Feedback – Did the game give you feedback on your actions? Did you know what was happening when you interacted with things?
0, the game gave appropriate feedback for some situations, but not all. Sometimes further explanation could have helped.
7. Contextual Gameplay – How did you find the interfaces for interaction?
-2, tabs were easy to find, but always went back to the walk command after use. Making the game frustrating
Overall score
-4. The game is poor. Nothing stands out as being particularly good. The only thing you could claim as being good was the story not being too had to follow. I do not think the crit sheet worked well for this game, this is because although it did show that the game was poor, -4 still seems like a generous mark to give the game. This is because it was just as easy for the game to gain marks on less important things such as grpahics, than it was to lose them on thinkgs such as playability.
To fix this next time, I would consider weighting the questions, so that more marks can be lost or gained on sections such as playability.
Games Crit Sheet 2
(Please Note: Whenever I attempted to take screenshots for this game they came out completely black with some white outlines to a few things, so screenshots could not be provided for this game.)
Game Title
6da
Short description of the games concept
Your character is about to receive some very important information from someone, when they are shot by a sniper. You must make your way around the room to retrieve equipment without being shot.
Rate each section out of 5. 1-poor 3 average 5-excellent
1. How clear is the concept? Did you understand what you had to do?
1, the user understood the basics of what to do. But did not understand what the actual aim of the game was. Was it to escape? Was it to kill the sniper? Was it to find out the important information?
2. How clear were the interactions? Could you easily see what options you had?
2, the interactions were not obvious, but once you found them they were not hard to use. The game is supposed to be a puzzle, so if you could see all the interactions easily, the game would not be a challenge.
3. Implementation - Did the game feel smooth? Was it easy moving to where you wanted to go?
1, most things about the game felt smooth and that they worked well. But one problem was when you observed things in the room, the character would speak. Sometimes he went through 2 or 3 blocks of text, making the game break up a bit.
4. Playability – Was the game fun/interesting/compelling. Did the user look like they were enjoying it?
1, the game was fun at first, but was very difficult. If you get stuck at the start of a game, it makes you want to continue less. So the game could have been improved with a better learning/difficulty curve.
5. Visual – Were the graphics good? Could you tell what everything was supposed to be?
0, the graphics were good enough to help the user understand what was what and what they could interact with. They didn’t stand out as being anything special though.
6. Feedback – Did the game give you feedback on your actions? Did you know what was happening when you interacted with things?
2, if you tried to interact with something that you shouldn’t, the character explained why he couldn’t do it. If you picked something up, the character made a comment. It was generally easy to understand what was going on.
7. Contextual Gameplay – How did you find the interfaces for interaction?
1, it was easy to see which interactions did what. The exit logo could have been better though. The user clicked it more than once wondering what it does.
Overall score
8 - The game is good.The only real problem with the game was that it started off a little too difficult. I believe the crit sheet was okay for evaluating this game, but could have done with another section about difficulty within the game. But this could have been covered in the playability section anyway.
What I have done
To complete this task I have created my own crit sheet based on the crit sheet we used in Lecture 9. Since the crit sheet is being used for the same type of thing, there is not much difference. Although I did add in an extra section about the game giving feedback, since this is usually a very important part of games, especially ones with limited graphics capabilities.
To fill in the crit sheet I asked someone else to play the game, while I took notes. I then asked some basic questions after about what they thought. I then played through the games a little to take screen shots and see if I felt the same way about the game as them.
I used the same rating system for my crit sheet as the the one from the lecture because, it is simple and easy to use. The positive and negativ results help show whether a game is good or bad.
This studio helped me realise what sort of things need to go into an AGS game to make it more enjoyable and succesful. It also helped me realise what sort of things you should be looking for when analysing a game, and helped me realise what ele would need to go into a crit sheet if I were to do this task again.
No comments:
Post a Comment