User Testing
Hypothesis 1: By seeing a desolate forest environment of a possible future, it will incite reflection from testers about how human actions directly contribute to climate change.
Goal
The purpose of testing hypothesis 1 is to observe if seeing a possible destroyed environment is enough to incite users to reflect on their actions and how they are unknowingly harming nature. Knowing whether or not this is true will help the team to make necessary modifications to address underlying issues. This is crucial to test because our project aims to provoke reflection in immersants by the conclusion of the experience through the strong visual and emotional difference in colours and vitality.
Method
To test hypothesis 1, we asked testers to switch between views whenever they were comfortable to see the forest’s bleak future, and we observed how they reacted to the change of environment. Through observation, the team received insight on whether the dual view mechanic provides a strong enough visual and emotional contrast about how human actions contribute to climate change, specifically deforestation.
Results
Testers were actively searching for clues to prevent the destruction of the forest, switching between timelines to do so. The stark visual contrast between the present and future motivated testers to protect the lush forest.
Hypothesis 2: By having an animal companion that is closely tied with the forest and accompanies testers through their exploration, it will create a stronger emotional connection between the tester and nature.
Goal
The purpose of testing hypothesis 1 is to observe if seeing a possible destroyed environment is enough to incite users to reflect on their actions and how they are unknowingly harming nature. Knowing whether or not this is true will help the team to make necessary modifications to address underlying issues. This is crucial to test because our project aims to provoke reflection in immersants by the conclusion of the experience through the strong visual and emotional difference in colours and vitality.
Method
To test hypothesis 2, we got testers to interact with the fox companion then switch to the future view where the fox disappears. After the experience, we interviewed testers about their emotional connection with the fox regarding seeing it alive and well then suddenly dying since the forest has been destroyed.
Result
The fox companion was a major influence on the tester’s emotional appeal toward the “present” view environment, especially because it follows the immersant around and constantly looks at the player camera. They also felt devastated when they see that the animal is gone in the “future” view and always feel like staying in the present environment.
Hypothesis 3: Moving with a joystick in a game is more immersive and intuitive to understand, and it is less likely to cause motion sickness.
Goal
The purpose of testing hypothesis 3 is to determine how testers feel when moving with analog movement and whether they felt nauseous or more immersed after the experience.
Method
To test hypothesis 3, we got testers to move around the environment and after the testing session we asked them if the movement speed was too fast or too slow, and whether they felt nauseous.
Result
Several testers thought our player movement was about right, while some thought it was a little too fast. As a result, we may need to tweak it down a small amount. We also received a suggestion of keeping the default speed slow while allowing immersants to accelerate (increase running speed) whenever they want to.
Critique
During our critique sessions, the feedback we received revolved around focusing and adjusting our idea to be more thematically and narratively accurate. For example, we initially had the immersant be guided by a dog companion which will allow the user to create an emotional connection to the dog and help drive our narrative, but a dog is not an animal commonly associated with nature and forest, thus we decided on changing the guide into a fox. We also received feedback in regards to our currently planned ending, as the current ending might not leave a lingering feeling for the immersant, and thus we should focus on leaving it slightly open ended with subtle hints for the immersant to pick up on.
March 30, User-Testing with VR:
The fox companion is a major influence on the tester’s emotional appeal toward the “present” view environment, especially because it follows the immersant around and constantly looks at the player camera. They also feel devastated when they see that the animal is gone in the “future” view and always feel like staying in the present environment.
Some people thought player movement was about right, and some thought it was a little too fast. May need to tweak it down a small amount. We also received the suggestion of keeping the default speed slow while allowing immersants to accelerate (increase running speed) whenever they want to.
One person mentioned to include a “dash” movement for the player for a quick burst of speed forward
The “snappy” player rotation (rotates 90 degrees in either direction at a time using right analog stick) didn’t feel good, and should be changed for a smooth/continuous change in rotation while holding the analog stick down
The generator should have more than 1 life, maybe 3, to make it more challenging. We mentioned there will be other challenges, and the TA said 1 life for the generator is fine as long as there are other challenges.
Game crashed when the bucket was filled with water if the player was still holding it. This was a known bug, and is fixed.
We believe that the feedback we received in the critiquing sessions allowed our project to become more focused and attuned with the project's core theme of climate change, and thus we decided to implement and incorporate the ideas discussed. While we won't take everything that was suggested word for word, we will use the ideas generated in the meeting to make our project better.