Ava Matthews CAGD 270

  What went right? Path was easy to follow Playtesters did get lost in my level. There aren’t any alternate paths in my level, and the walls are very high, which contributes to this. Enemies well placed Not too few or too many Physically located in reasonable places; the player does not get overwhelmed with too many enemies or go for long distances with no enemies What went wrong? Goes by fast The level is completed very quickly with little to no challenge. Not enough to do Like mentioned before, there’s not a ton of challenge to this game There is really no replayability either, considering there is only one path.  Missing checkpoints If you do die, you have to start all over again, which is especially frustrating when the level is not particularly fun to replay.  The level feels somewhat empty without them, since playtesters tend to expect checkpoints to be there.  Improvements Add more pathways This will both make the level more interesting and longer.  The m...

What went right? The level’s platforming was strong. Playtesters noted enjoying the layout of the level itself. I did have some concerns with there being too much platforming, that it would become tedious rather than fun, but playtesters didn’t seem to have this issue. Enemies felt well placed, not too few or too many. I did have the concern that, especially compared to other levels I playtested myself, my level didn’t have enough challenge. The platforming plus enemies created enough difficulty for a fun level. Checkpoints were well dispersed throughout the level.  Checkpoint placement is actually super important in a level. It can signal a new area to a player, and also make a level much less exhausting to finish for the player. At no point did the play testers feel stranded or frustrated because they did not have a reasonably placed checkpoint.  Playtesters didn’t get lost in the level, in fact it was almost too easy to navigate… Example of level platforming What went wrong...