The first of these inappropriate testers is your boss. A key part of the game
designer’s relationship with a playtester is being able to get the playtester’s feedback
and then apply it as the designer sees fit, not as the playtester dictates. Playtesters
often do not understand the game well enough to provide the best solution for a prob-
lem they encounter, and if your boss is the person who has found the problem it is likely
he will try to impose a solution on you, even if it is not the best one for the situation.
Some bosses may be wise enough to understand that, as the game’s designer, you know
how best to fix an issue. They show you the problems, and don’t care how you fix it.
Nonetheless, getting advice from someone who is signing your paycheck cannot be the
same as advice from someone who is in a less dominant position.
The second class of people ill suited to testing your game includes anyone from the
marketing department. Marketing people have too many conflicting agendas when
looking at your game and are unlikely to tell you what they actually think of it. Instead,
they will attempt to figure out what the “target demographic” wants. As I have men-
tioned repeatedly in this book, it is extremely hard to anticipate what an audience other
than yourself will like or dislike, yet this is what marketing people attempt to do. You do
not want their second-guessing, which when it comes to gameplay is wrong as often as
it is right, to muddle up your game. Furthermore, the opinions of these people are likely
to be colored by whatever is “hot” in the industry right now, often falling into the “game
of the week” syndrome. All this does not mean their feedback does not have value,
merely that you need to understand how it is affected by their own agenda. Regardless,
you should not consider feedback from them the same way you consider the rest of your
playtesting data.
A third group of people who should not test your game consists of those who are
too close to you personally, be they your close friends from way back, your family, or
your significant other. When these people look at your game, though they may claim
they are being objective, their true agenda is often to strengthen their relationship with
you. As a result they will be hesitant to criticize your game too harshly. Some friends
may understand that the best way they can strengthen their friendship with you is to
tell you the truth, but many will sugarcoat their opinions out of misguided kindness. It
is true that many authors use their spouses as their first and most effective line of criti-
cism, and if you can develop a relationship that is that honest it can be a wonderful thing.
But the fact remains that many relationships are not that honest, and you should not
deceive yourself that their feedback is completely objective.
The fourth type of people that you do not want to have testing your game is idiots.
Idiots tend to say idiotic things and have idiotic opinions, and as a result will not be of
much help to you. It is best to notice and isolate idiots as soon as possible and, if you
must work with them, learn to ignore everything they say. Of course, I am exaggerat-
ing; idiots certainly do not dominate testing teams. But every so often you will come
across a tester whom you are better off ignoring completely.
The fifth group is testers who think that they are designing your game for you.
These testers may have some useful suggestions, but mostly will try to get you to
change aspects of your game not because they are wrong but simply because they
would have done it differently. A truly good tester will recognize that you are the driv-
ing artistic force behind the project and that the game will reflect your individual
488 Chapter 25: Playtesting