Our next game, Oubliette, is entering the blind play testing phase...sending the game out to people to see if they can play it without the designers coaching them. I created a evaluation form through jotform.com to get feedback from the play testers. The evaluation is geared to take them through the entire process from looking at the box, to examining the components, to setting up the game, to playing it and beyond.
I would appreciate the opinions of the BGDF members about the form itself. Adequate? Foolish? Thorough? Intimidating? Pipe-Dream? Let me know what you think.
http://www.clevermojogames.com/oubliette/evaluation.html
.
Comments
More than play testing
I hate filling out long forms and would shy away from lengthy questionnaires like this one. You may have a better completion rate if you culled the questions to those pertaining to the game play itself.
it didn't seem that long- if
it didn't seem that long- if they're filling it out online. if they had to manually write it out, i'd absolutely agree, but all those radio button questions are just a few seconds, so i think the extra market questions are fine.
what is long?
After you fill in your personal information there are 47 items, 21 of which are text fields.
Some people may not mind this but others will get tired of it and either quit or check off answers at random.
Just something to keep in mind.
Thanks for the feedback
Dralius and Truekid...Thanks VERY much for the feedback on my play tester evaluation questionnaire.
Yes, taken as a whole, it is long. However, the way I tried to work it was step by step...take a look at the box and answer a few questions...look at the components and answer a few questions...set the game up and answer a few questions...play the game and answer a few questions.
Maybe it's more of a measure of my own inexperience and insecurity that I want to gather so much detailed feedback.
maybe the solution is to put
maybe the solution is to put the game specific stuff first, and the market data later- so it's the part that's more likely to be flaked on?
I don't think I would mind
I don't think I would mind filling out a form like this. Sure there are several questions, but I think you are going to get quite a bit of valuable information from those who complete the whole thing. I was asked once to be a taste-tester for some KFC products, and the feedback I had to give on food was TWO times as long. Here are a couple of my thoughts, questions, and critiques.
First, I'm assuming you will have a nearly finished product to present to your play-testers based upon "marketing" type questions. Yet you state the primary purpose is blind play testing. With this in mind, how valuable are the marketing questions going to be? If major issues come up with play testing OR the look/feel of the game, how likely are you able to make significant changes? It seems that you might want to save the marketing questions for a later date until you KNOW you've got a great game in the box. Once you know you've got a great game, then get a second group together to ask the marketing questions. I say this at the same time acknowledging that sometimes the components and look of the game are a huge part of making it "great."
Next, here are a couple of suggestions on getting better information from your survey:
- Price questions. Don't set the price for them, let them set the price for you. In other words, ask how much they think a game like this would be priced at a store and then give them ranges of prices ($10-12, $12-14, $14-16, etc.) to check instead of suggesting the $15 price point. You'll get better information this way.
- You might consider asking the questions of how many card games / board games have you purchased in the past 12 months as an alternative to your top question.
- I thought it interesting that your questions about printing were all about light/darkness. How about questions about layout / design / legibility / etc. One of the things I hear most from critics is that the cards are illegible because of the color contrasts or the size/type of fonts.
- Do you expect all players to read the rules before the play testing? This could be a time consuming process in a play testing session. You may need to consider providing one copy for each player to speed this part up, or just plan on only one of the players to read the rules and explain it to the others. The other option is to create a modified version of the questionnaire for the non-rule-reading players.
- I like the open age range question - that will give you good information. You might also ask what is the youngest age they think would be able to play and enjoy the game. (You may need to carefully rephrase your instructions at the top, ie, getting at least one player between 8 & 15 to play, so that you don't bias your play testers before asking this question. I'm not sure if I have a better suggestion, but just something to think about fine-tuning before proceeding.)
- Your last pricing question is pretty good. Again, you might want to rephrase it to ask, "Would would you expect the retail price to be if this were a board game."
I think that's all. Hope this is helpful to you. I don't know if you could afford this, but you might also consider giving your play testers a copy of your final product in addition to or instead of credit in the rule book. Seth Godin talks about finding "sneezers" - people who will spread your product like a virus. Play-testers could be this type of group when you think about marketing.