Let’s say you have an idea for your game, but you don’t know how well your idea will convey the problem to players. You specifically need to know the following about your idea:

• Does the interface make sense to play the game?
• Are the graphics aesthetically pleasing?

Describe what your concept testing process would be to obtain feedback for these questions.

The interface should be intuitive and easy to use. A kind of A/B testing would be helpful, but creating one takes time. Therefore, my first concept testing included a storyboard with game elements and a prototype. I had to materialize my ideas with images and words to collect feedback. I used interface gauges, counters, and meaningful labels and titles that aligned well with the game’s learning experience and playing goal. I explained how players would play. I tested whether the interface made sense with family members and by sending a link to our gaming guide. I received feedback, which helped me clarify missing and unclear pieces (GUI and instructions to start the game).

In addition, I designed a classroom activity I could try with my students to collect feedback about my game concepts and ideas from individuals closer to my player persona. How would they work with V-T graphs, data tables, and stories with specific car driving experiences and context? I observed how they used the activity sheet, the questions they asked, and what they struggled with. They enjoyed working with the graphs, but the data tables appeared redundant and useless, so I left them out of the game. I also realized they liked the background stories. Initially, I thought it was unimportant, but then I realized it brought a social and playful dimension to the game idea, so I introduced aliens and other NPCs. Also, it was not intuitive for my students to use negative values in a V-T graph when the situation required it (driving in the opposite direction). Students struggled with reading data, so I included additional puzzles about the velocity direction and its impact on the V-T graph.

Feedback Summary:

• You made great progress on the internal testing in evaluating the graph matching. In the game play, would this idea translate to aligning their behavior with a graph? I think it will be important for the game’s interface to be considered here for the information presented so there isn’t too much distracting information as well for this activity – especially as it gets to the heart of the problem you want your player-learner to associate.
• From the SWOT, this further supports the need to think through how this information is presented so that associations can be made – there are a lot of great opportunities
• I like that you aligned these with the learner-player persona.
• External Testing: I agree the added elements are necessary from your testing and it was good to see that concept testing illuminated where ideas were too complex (at least for the type of implementation you tested).
• I think interactivity will help with clarifying some aspects given the nature of the content with speed and velocity (sometimes this is harder to imagine than it is to view/experience).
• I think as well that connecting the pieces together with a story and potentially a character who acts more like a pedagogical agent could potentially help ease the flow of information they will experience once interactivity is embedded.
• The puzzle testing first was a great start and build up from the graph matching in the internal testing.

Concept Testing Document (PDF format): 4-1 concept testing v2-combinedRedactedReduced