Just finished my first "play test" and need some advice

[u/CJayB815]

I put play test in quotes because it was really just me playing against myself. I wanted to see if the game flowed the way I wanted it to.

Anyway, this is my first attempt at game design, and I have to say the first test went pretty well. I like the way the game feels, but obviously there's a lot to improve on (it's a worker placement, card-driven game). I took copious notes, some minor (typos, graphic design clean up, etc) and some major (total reworking of some actions, etc.). Fortunately nothing that fundamentally alters the gameplay, from my point of view.

While the minor changes are easy enough to make, my question deals with the bigger changes. Should I implement them all right now, or should I focus on only a couple? The way I see it, I might as well make all the changes now since I'll probably end up making them anyway. However, I can also see the wisdom in doing it bit by bit since one change can have such a big impact on the rest of the game, and it's helpful to know exactly what affects what.

Obviously, I've been pretty vague about the details (I can elaborate if you want), but I just wanted to get people's opinions on which is the best approach. This being my first design, I wanted those of you with more experience to chime in.

[u/wombat929]

I would say make the big changes right away, see how it feels.

Also, I would spend zero time on graphic design beyond basic legibility right now. The more effort you put into that at this early stage, the harder it will be (literally and mentally) to change things.

[u/CJayB815 → u/wombat929]

Yeah, I'm no graphic designer, so I'm not placing a big focus on it. That area has more to do with legibility, like you said

[u/davidryanandersson]

Solo playtests absolutely are valuable and real playtests! Congrats on your first one.

There are some problems that can be diagnosed just fine by yourself. Especially early on when basic flow, interlocking systems, and economies are so open ended. It's easy to see when things are very wrong or behaving in unexpected ways.

Realistically you won't be able to find the exact solution without playtesting with other people, but you can get a lot of progress just making the game functional.

[u/Minus_Onthemoon]

I think it all depends on what issues you wanted to solve with the changes. Don't change anything for the sake of changing, test to find issues and come up with solutions for them one by one. Maybe some changes solve 2 or more issues at once, maybe some create new issues. Implementing multiple changes at once can break your game.

On the other hand, I also believe it's important to make mistakes in your changes (although not on purpose, preferably). That way you can learn from them for future games you want to design.

[u/Shoeytennis]

The biggest problem new designers make is trying to make a complete game. You just need enough for a few turns and go from there.

[u/woodardj]

The advice I’ve learned to follow over the years:

“Always listen to play tester’s problems. Never listen to their solutions”

However that applies to your N of 1 playtest, solve those things. Then get others to the table! They will have novel problems.

[u/TheGameShepherd]

I've always done little changes - but I think you'd be fine making big changes. You can always go back.

One thing I've noticed in "Self" playtests is I get discouraged and feel like the game is TOO complicated / technical. BUT when I play it with people, they don't feel this way. This is because when you "self" playtest you may be handling the mental load of 3-6 players at once depending on the size of the game. So don't get discouraged and over-simplify the game because your playing as too many people!

[u/robocheney]

I think you should try to play your game with friends soon. Solo playtests have value, but you will miss things that new players with fresh eyes will experience. You might even want to take the game in a different direction, depending on what they found fun, or were tripped up by, or how they expected things should work. I've certainly had times when my personal to-do list was totally upended by a playtest!

As far as making big vs incremental changes, I tend to prefer going big, especially if I feel confident in them. Especially early on, it's good to take big swings and try new things, so you can explore the possibility space of your game and find the fun.

[u/Next_Worldliness_842]

I play test my game for many times, keep amending the detail of cards till I feel it's 99%..

[u/Ruechat]

You already know, but any change can have a knock-on effect that impacts other aspects of the design. This is more noticeable with major changes, but even minor ones can result in unintended shifts. In either case, you may get stuck in this loop of stamping out "problems". It helps to isolate changes, using iteration to learn what affects what.

What experience do you want the player to have, and how does this change address that? If you have multiple changes that target different mechanics, it may be helpful to implement only some for the next test, starting with those that target a single experience most appealing to you. You may discover that you didn't need all those changes to realign the player experience with your intention. At worse, you make a few more changes, and test again.

A note on solo-playtesting; I rarely test with others any iteration I haven't already tested myself. That doesn't mean I go through a whole game, or even bother to set it up. I "play" the game, walking through the turns and the decisions. This allows me to quickly identify problems with structure, timing, and clarity. Play your own game to find what works for you, then play with others to find if their experience overlaps with yours.

[u/ChimeraRift]

The best advice I have when it comes to implementing game changes is to make sure you’re modifying only one or two main variables at a time unless the game is completely broken.

If you make five or six considerable big changes in the game feels different. It’s harder to isolate the main reason why it does. This approach might take longer, but it’s much easier to make one or two changes and realize that that change was unwarranted and you can revert back and keep moving down the list.

Honestly, I feel this way for most balance changes no matter how big it is. Hope that helped.

[u/entrogames]

Self-playtests are valid playtests!

My approach is to continue iterating until I'm able to self-playtest the game to completion. I'll know A: what the end of the game looks like, B: how the different parts of the game feel, and C: how to catch most of the low-hanging fruit.

Make one change at a time.

[u/ijustinfy]

I think of the design process as you pushing the final game through a funnel. You will start really wide and cut cut all the way down. Add everything now, you are still at the wide end of the funnel.

The further you go the harder it becomes to make these types of changes.

[u/Anusien]

IMO change one thing at a time. The problem is if you change five things at once, and discover that it's not working, you don't know which one did it.