Playtesting
Video Game Developer
UK | 12 Participants | Observation | Interview | Survey
Research Goals
The client was developing a stealth shooter AAA title and needed early player feedback on core gameplay mechanics, navigation and overall experience.
The goal was to evaluate how the game performed in real player contexts. Identifying friction points and opportunities to strengthen engagement, challenges, and immersion ahead of further development.
Project Context.
Playtesting sessions were designed using a structured approach that combined two surveys, live gameplay observation and post-session interviews.
3 x 2 hour sessions took place with 4 participants in each session (12 participants in total).
Research Objectives
Research Process
UK | 12 Participants | 3 groups | 2 hours
Researchers observed the gameplay in an observation room separate from the participants.
This structure was designed to capture both in-the-moment behaviour through observation and retrospective reflection through interviews, with surveys bookending the session to track how perception shifted from expectation to experience.
Analysis
The analysis process consisted of thematic analysis. Whereby surveys, gameplay and transcripts were closely examined to identify common themes and patterns.
1
2
Once the data has been coded the themes are then reviewed to explore potential ideas for recommended solutions.
3
Using Miro an affinity map was created to assist with organising the data and recommendations.
An insights report was then presented to the client, accompanied by a highlight reel to bring the insights to life.
4
Insights
Here are a few of the insights that were presented to the client.
Predictable AI Behaviour
Participants found the AI’s combat and stealth detection too basic and predictable. This reduced the tension and sense of challenge within the game, thus undermining the intended player experience.
Implication:
Enhancing AI behaviour was critical to maintaining engagement and delivering on the core promise of a stealth experience. This informed the need for more adaptive and responsive AI systems to increase replay ability and long-term player satisfaction.
Way-finding Confusion
Some participants struggled to understand how to progress through objectives. This lead to confusion, disengagement and uncertainty in how to find their way through the game.
Implication:
Clearer guidance systems were needed to support player navigation. This pointed to refining level design, environmental cues, and subtle in-game direction to improve flow and reduce friction.
Interactive Environment
Participants wanted more opportunities to interact with the environment. They wished they could climb, vault, crouch and navigating terrain more dynamically.
Implication:
Expanding environmental interaction was key to reinforcing immersion and aligning the experience with player expectations. This highlighted an opportunity to deepen core mechanics rather than rely solely on narrative or mission structure.
Outcome
AAA game development operates on significant budgets and tight development windows, getting core mechanics wrong at this stage is expensive to fix later. These findings gave the development team clear, evidence-based direction on where to focus next.
Reflections & Challenges
It’s normal when testing an early build for there to be a few glitches, crashes and potential disruptions to gameplay. To minimise impact on the sessions, I familiarised myself extensively with the prototype in advance.
This included repeated play-throughs to understand task flow, identify potential blockers and calibrate session timing. This ensured sessions ran smoothly and that any issues did not compromise the quality of the insights gathered.