So, I've been wandering aimlessly through my "stack of stuff" to play. I revisited Mass Effect, and it scratched a few gaming itches I've had for a while now. I'm embarassed to have let it collect dust for so long. I've also played Stardock's "Sins of a Solar Empire", which is a fine 4X indie title and well worth the money I spent on it.
In fact, I was so impressed with Sins, that I figured I would give Galactic Civ II a try, what with Stardock earning some repute with Sins, and the 9/10 scores Galactic Civ II earned on some review sites.
It was after playing several turns of Galactic Civ that I realized that "Fun" must come in many complex flavors. I was far from hooked and was a little perplexed at the critical acclaim the game received. I'm sure I'll be giving it some more time to find the fun in the game.
I think this notion, "finding the fun", is where great games lose so much of their potential audience. Gamers and game review sites lament the great titles that never found success. How many of those titles required players to "find the fun"? We are video game developers. We SELL fun. In a Box. For Money. Would you buy a car from a salesman that simply tossed you some keys and told you to go find the car? Maybe you'll find a Citation, maybe you'll find a Tesla Roadster, maybe you'll tell the salesman to stick those keys where nobody will find them....
Game design wonks and academics argue constantly over what defines "fun" for video games. Sadly, there are far too many shops that don't even bother to take any metrics about how much "fun" their games provide. You don't need a formal definition to pursue a "fun-formula" and churn out a "AAA title".
Sit people down and ask them to play it. Ask them, "are you having fun right now?" If the answer is "no", then the odds are, they aren't having fun! That begs a more difficult question: Why aren't they having fun? Again, academics and design wonks spend a LOT of time debating this issue as well. Oddly, the same approach to a solution is so rarely pursued it makes me want to cry.
Sit people down and ask them to play the game. When they aren't having fun, ask them "Why?" Answers usually describe emotional states: "I'm frustrated," "I'm confused," or "I'm bored."
See a pattern here? Actually play-test the game and get some feedback. "Why are you frustrated?" "Why are you confused?" "Why are you bored?"
Play-testing is so underutilized (in my experience anyway) that I'm not surprised that I feel like I'm wandering through a gaming wasteland trying to cherry-pick some entertainment for the $40 or $60 I gamble on one title or another. Most games only get coverage from QA departments, and not even the developers actually spend much time playing them! QA is essential to ensuring a title ships with few bugs, but you have to remember, these are the people that are playing the same content, over and over for months (sometimes years) on end, just praying for a build that doesn't crash or will run at a decent frame rate.
Play-testing rule #1 : Eat your own dog food. Developers (artists, designers, programmers) MUST play-test the game at least once a week. These people are responsible for their work. To understand any other play-test feedback, they need to be in the trenches with the players and QA. They are already in the trenches for development!
Play-testing rule #2 : Each milestone/sprint (whatever your methodology is), get some fresh blood in to play the game. These are the people that will be spending their money for the fun you are trying to package up and sell them. If they aren't having fun, you aren't selling what they want!
Play-testing rule #3 : Only listen. Never talk back to the testers. Telling them "Oh, that's fixed in the next build" or "you just have to play through this part to get to the cool stuff" won't improve the quality of the feedback. Whoever is doing the listening can filter the feedback and prioritize accordingly.
Play-testing rule #4 : take the feedback seriously. If all of the developers are hard-core gamers but want the rest of the population to enjoy what they made, they have to understand that not everyone is willing to go "find the fun" in some epic search through the game.
Fun.
In a Box.
For Money.
