The fourth type of playtesters includes game designers or developers not actually
working on your project. These are people whom you know and trust and whose opin-
ions you respect. They may not be able to test your project full time as traditional
testers can, but the feedback they provide can be extremely useful. Fellow game
designers who are not working on your project will be able to play your game and pro-
vide insight about its strengths and weaknesses in ways that other testers cannot.
These testers understand game design in a way that allows them to analyze how your
project may come up short and how it might be improved. Many experienced game
designers will use these testers particularly early in the process, when they are still
trying to get a sense of whether their new game design is truly compelling or not.
These game designers turned testers will be better able to overlook the game’s obvi-
ous shortcomings at this early stage, such as bugs or incomplete features, and can look
beyond to see if the game shows the promise of becoming a good game in the future.
Steve Meretzky, in Chapter 10, mentions how useful the “Imp Lunches” were. At these
lunches, the Infocom implementers would gather to discuss their different game design
ideas. When a new Infocom title first became playable, other implementers would be
the first to start testing the game, while there was still time to make any fundamental
changes necessary. Of course, fellow game designers will typically be too busy to spend
a lot of time playing your game and giving you feedback. Whatever feedback these fel-
low designers give you can be extremely helpful, both in helping you pinpoint problem
areas you had not anticipated, as well as reassuring you that your design is on the right
course, if it actually is. If you are not fortunate enough to have developer friends with
enough free time to assess your game, there are numerous design consultants in the
industry who, for a fee, are available to review your work and provide valuable
feedback.
The fifth class of testers that I find to be of particular value are non-gamers. All of
the types of testers I have discussed thus far have, for the most part, been pretty big
fans of games. They will have an especially high tolerance for the things that games tra-
ditionally do badly, such as having overly complex controls or simply being too hard to
play. Having some people who are not big enthusiasts can provide fabulous feedback,
pointing out fundamental problems that hard-core gamers will overlook and forgive.
These testers can be literally anyone: the guy who comes to fix the coffee machine, a
neighbor, a team member’s parent, or literally someone right off the street. As long as
they will be honest about what they think of your game, anyone’s opinion can be valu-
able here. Combining the third group, first-impression testers, with non-gamer testers
can be particularly useful in determining if an interface is too confusing or the game is
too unforgiving. These testers will seldom be able to provide constructive feedback on
how you might improve your game, but they will be able to point out fundamental prob-
lems in a way that other testers cannot.
Who Should Not Test...........................
There are a number of people or groups of people whom you typically cannot trust as
playtesters. These are people whose opinions are colored by their own personal moti-
vations, or who may be unwilling to provide truly objective opinions. Though you may
be forced to hear the feedback of these people, it is important to understand the motiva-
tions behind their comments so that you can apply their advice appropriately.
Chapter 25: Playtesting 487