Lorna gave us 15 minutes at the start of the lesson to get ready. In this time, a few tutors were walking around and we were lucky enough to ask a nice one about the codes for showing users if their answers to clicking an image was correct or incorrect. This surprisingly took less time to accomplish than expected. So we actually DID have something for users to give feedback on. Oh the feeling of possible passings. China and I stayed to explain to other users about our game while Soobin and Bill left to test other applications.
China and I wrote down things while we observed our users work through our game and asked a set list of questions to each user. Everything was written down.
We asked everyone:
1) Should we include the incorrect/correct display to let users know if theyre wrong (as well as using the lives system) or display the lives system only?
2) Were the instructions useful?
3) Were the hints (articles) useful?
4) What did you dislike about the game and why?
Our pages of feedback. Not really readable but i wrote everything under this anyway.
Our responses:
Person 1:
1) Have both, both are useful, should also include progress bar (well obviously, person 1)
2) Disliked the instructions. Was impatient and wanted to get on with the game. Said may be useful if people had time. Said most people like him only came to play
3) At times, yes. Needs to be rendered because sometimes it would not pick up the words and display weird symbols. Said main problem was the spelling mistake
4) Likes its simplicity, it was interactive and easy. Disliked that were was too much reading (as in the instructions page and articles), and disliked that some articles didnt make sense
Person 2:
1) Liked the correct/incorrect display
2) Instructions were useful but were too much (too many words)
3) Some useful, some hard because didnt make sense
4) Wanted more interactive instructions - the user will be taught how to play on their first try so its more interactive and theyll have fun
Person 3 & 4 (together):
1) doesnt matter, both good together, both on their own is good too
2) instructions were long but overal useful
3) some articles were not useful, not relavant
4) didnt like that the hints were irrelevant. Suggested that explain to users maybe in instructions that the blanks (___) in the articles denoted the animals name (well no one reads the instructions anyway though? ?)
Person 5 (Lorna) (this was so nerve wracking for us):
We didnt ask her the questions, instead she gave us feedback:
1) keep track of the random articles generated, or get rid of each one as they were used in the array so that the list will shorten each time
2) read over the articles, and rid all the weirdly written ones
3) we can add a date range to our sources to filter out any strangely dated things (e.g. weird images or strangely written articles)
Person 6 & 7 (together):
1) Likes both however suggested that pop ups would work too in informing the user if they got a question right or wrong
2) liked the instructions, when asked about tutorial instructions, said that that could work too. Said both are definitely useful, doesnt mind which one
3) most of the time, articles were useful but sometimes they were strange
4) Should change the display of the incorrect/correct to match the style of the rest of the game (of courseee we will, we only just added in that function like 10 mins ago)
Observations from everyone:
1) No one (seriously, no one), read all of the instructions properly. I admit i wouldnt have too, to any game
2) Most understood the game straight away and didnt need to be told what to click
3) A majority surprisingly got most answers right when guessing animals from the articles
4) No one mentioned anything about the design so i assume its good. I asked users anyway what they thought about all the buttons, interface etc - all liked it but suggested changing the non-styled incorrect/correct display to match the appearance of the game (again of course we shall, thank you for such advice)
After this, I think time was over for user testing/everyone got bored because China and I didnt get a chance to test any. We exchanged information to Soobin & Bill and took photos of our game to post future references. We also took photos of ourselves for our portfolios/blogs.
China and I smiling happily away
Bill and Soobin, also smiling happily away
In the last few 20-30 minutes of the class, a tutor came to us and showed us an example in deco1800 uqcloud's list of examples. Underneath shows the example he showed us and how it was relevant to our game.
This is our game that other users were testing, with the incorrect/correct text display shown in the blue rectangle. Yes, i am aware of the incredibly poor photo quality.
No comments:
Post a Comment