#asg3

In week 11, my job as a gameplay programmer sort of came into focus because we were progressing forward with the level 1 miniboss fight. While most of the team focused on developing the visual, narrative, and even some game design, I remained focused on developing the mechanics to create a challenging and readable encounter for the player. I was ultimately working to make combat feel responsive, fair, and in line with the pacing and stakes in the game.

The main challenge of the week was tuning the skeleton AI and combat logic for the miniboss. In early play testing the miniboss was spamming attacks in an unmanageable way, abruptly increasing difficulty for the player with no corresponding degree of player skill. The hitboxes did not match the animation whatsoever, which didn't contribute to clear damage-on-hit messages and made it unclear to the player what they were expected to do. Using Fullerton's (2018) principles related to meaningful choice and player feedback, I redesigned the miniboss to have clearly telegraphed attack patterns that have cooldown windows and wind-up animations (both in animation and design) to allow players more time to react.

I also rewrote how melee hitboxes are handled altogether, timing them, as closely as possible, with the frames in animation to provide a responsive feel with predictable input. This alone addressed a large body of negative feedback in playtest sessions and resulted in a more fluid combat loop.

Along with improving the feel and adjusting the polish from the feedback we received, I also added subtle mechanics to give players some tools in terms of countering the boss attack. For instance, providing several frames of invincibility immediately after taking damage allowed a player to not be stunned continuously, and improved recovery animations helped re-establish player agency in and around combat. While these observations might seem like game bugs to address, they focused on the player overcoming skill-based challenges in lieu of randomization or luck.

Full ownership over the miniboss logic, AI, etc allowed me to actively explore how player emotion is intricately related to gameplay systems. Even seemingly benign bugs in timing or movement can result in unexpected player frustration, or lack of intent. However, after many iterations, I feel I am getting closer to a fight that rewards strategic positioning, timing, and acceptable levels of risk—all values we wanted our protagonist to confront on their journey.

Reference:

Fullerton, T. (2018). Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. ProQuest Ebook. Retrieved from: https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/qut/reader.action?docID=5477698

Taking into consideration feedback from the playtesters and Fullerton (2018), we made some big changes to implemented in the next build.

Core Fixes:

Synchronization of Melee Animation: Players felt as through their attacks were visually incorrect or not hitting at all. We will be arranging our hitboxes this time, in time with the timing of their animations, visually confirming the hits.

Boss Behaviour: The miniboss currently has attacks that are spammable, and ultimately, no way to prepare or reasonably predict the attacks. In this build, we will implement a wind-up delay and a cooldown system between attacks, making it more readable and fair; Fullerton refers to this as clarity of interaction.

Player Feedback: There was no visual effect to indicate players taking damage. Next we intend to add a red flash to the character, in addition to a sound effect, to make hits distinguishable.

New Features (Planned):

Spell Casting System: Spells were visible in the players HUD that players controlled, and in this build were not usable. The next build will advance options for alternative playstyle by incorporating mana-based ranged attacks.

Intro Scene / Tutorial: Players were lost after being dropped in for the boss battle, mid-fight. We will create a simple training area before entering the boss level that will orient players on movement and attack.

Enemy Variation: Currently, the level has only one type of enemy. We are trying to add smaller enemies or traps - just to lay a framework for variance, and make the level feel a little less static prior to the minisboss fight.

After we put together the first prototype of For the Princess, we ran our official playtests. The current build had a singular floor where a player must defeat a skeleton miniboss using melee combat and complete the goal before the countdown timer runs out. So our aim was to test if this boss-centered gameplay felt fair, fun, and intense.

We followed Fullerton’s (2018) suggestion to try for player-led tests - users play without help while we observe. One important takeaway is that players enjoyed the tension, especially with the ticking countdown timer. However, there were hit detection issues and untelegraphed attacks that left the fight feeling frustrating occasionally. One player said "I kept slashing but I didn't feel like I hit anything," which played into our worry that our melee animation was not perfectly synced with the hitbox logic.

Another tester reported confusion for not having an intro/tutorial. They were essentially just dropped into the fight with no controls or goals and started spamming buttons. As Fullerton points out onboarding is an important element of usability. So it is safe to say we will need an early-game prompt or tutorial scene that teaches players controls before they get thrown into the gauntlet.

All of that being said, players seemed to like the miniboss design, and the spell ui and especially the sense of pressure. The skeletal boss animations helped make the scene feel "alive," and people were curious about spells that were not yet implemented.

Reference:

After creating our first prototype of For the Queen we have had our official playtests. The current build contained a single floor in which players needed to defeat a skeleton miniboss using melee combat in order to beat a time countdown and test if the boss focused play was fair, fun and frantic.

We took Fullerton's (2018) suggestion of conducting user-centric tests and allowed users to play as normal while we observed them, without any assistance. One key insight was that players enjoyed the tension, especially with the timer counting down, although a couple of players had issues with hit detection and didn't have enough cues to signal when they were being attacked which made the fight felt bit frustrating. One player said, "I kept slashing and it didn't feel like I was hitting anything" which matched our concern about having the melee animation not closely tie into the hitbox logic.

In addition, another player felt confused that there was no intro/tutorial where they were just dropped into the fight without knowing the controls or the objective of the game. As Fullerton (2018) mentions onboarding is an important aspect of usability. Clearly, we need an early game prompt or tutorial scene that teaches controls before presenting players with the real challenge.

Aside from the bugs, players liked the miniboss design, spell UI, and sense of pressure. Players also indicated that the skeletal boss animations made the scene feel a bit more "alive" and were interested in spells that had not yet been implemented.

Reference: