315-prototype3


** HYPOTHESIS **


Will players explore without a purpose or look for a purpose? Can object design guide them?


** DESIGN **


Small forest scene with items laying around, some stand out and some don't, some also do things which are part of "the purpose".


** PLAYTEST NOTES **


  • everyone just walked around at first, just enjoying the environment until they found "things" but still just making sense out of things not necessarily looking for anything

  • runes look interactable, look like they serve some purpose but maybe not, players moved on quickly: could be interactable or not, both possible which means that if they try to interact with an object but it doesn't do anything then it's possibly just part of the environment (e.g. it looks like it belongs) then they just move on. Unless the object actually looks like it doesn't belong (cube and building) in which case "it must do something", lots of people circled back to the cube because "it must be the answer"

  • if find cube first > this looks pickable maybe it does something, pick up just in case. Sound indicates something happened, start looking for what happened

  • if find building first > look around for a way to open, explore more, maybe runes do something, or maybe the cube (if found and not picked up) >> there has to be a way to open the door

  • accident: gate meterial made it look like a portal or a TV which confused players, this means that objects design is very important and can grossly misdirect the players


** FOLLOW UP NOTES **


It does seem like when first launched into the environment, the first insitinct is to just look around, many just enjoyed the environment until they found the cube or the bulding. Exploring and finding purpose seem to go hand-in hand. So it's not either "there's gotta be a purpose" or "i'm just walking around for no reason", it's always a little bit of both. Unless indicated that an environement is really just made to look cool, then players will be looking for what to do or accomplish, solve a puzzle, find some items, unlock areas, look for what objects do, etc. When they saw the first items that weren't trees, the first question was always "does this do something?"

Could be context as well. When objects are part of the context, the brain ignores it because it makes sense. In a forest environment, a cube and futuristic building don't belong so there must be a reason they are there. No one bothered trying to see if the trees do anything. However, if we reverse the situation where we put a tree in a sort of lab environment for example, then no one will care about the glowing cubes layed out around, the interest will be on the tree!

In conclusion, games can easily take advantage of human instinct to omit being excplicit with the information. There is enjoyment in figuring things out on your own rather than being explained everything and this plays into that feeling. Surprisingly though, a lot of people kinda "gave up" on the cube if the first 2 things they tried to pick it up didn't work (often forgetting clicking) like trying once or twice and then saying "i guess it doesn't do anything" which was weird to me, but it proves betting on instinct is not foolproof. Mechanics must always cover all the different ways a player may experience the game or offer instructions, which will avoid confusion and frustration.


** FUTURE OF THE GAME **


I would like to make it into different puzzle rooms with different challenges. First we must find the cube/key to unlock the portal, then we pick the sword and we're transported to an environment that fits with the sword, in which we'll have to use the sword to defeat an enemy which will unlock the portal and item to the next level environment, and so on. As we're teleported to the next level, they become more intricate and challenging.