QA Responses to Battlefront III

Milestone 12 (April 2007) Responses
Respondent Facts
Occupation: 
Lead, Assistant Lead, and QA Testers
Most Commonly Played Platform: 
PC. PS2 was a close second. 
Least Commonly Played Platform: 
PS3. PSP and Wii tied for second.
Most Played Game Genres: 
Action/Adventure, First-Person Shooter, and Third-Person Shooter
Favorite Genre Overall:
First-Person Shooter
Least Commonly Played Genres:
Sim, Sports, Arcade, Racing
Average Amount of Time Playing Games for Fun:
5-8 Hours Per Week
Opinions of Battlefront 1 & Battlefront 2: 
We intentionally recruited testers with little or no experience with Battlefront 1 & 2. Of those who had played the games, the average reaction was that previous Battlefronts were, “Neither Bad nor Good”. This was the middle response in a scale of quality. This suggests that these players were not averse to the Battlefront franchise, but found some elements of the past titles lacking. Overall, BF2 ranked slightly higher than BF1.
Styles of Online Play: 
*These players preferred team based play to “me against the world” online games.
*They preferred objective-based to sandbox/freeform types of play.
*And they were evenly split on playing competitively vs. playing co-operatively.
Assumptions:
It is fair to assume that the testers responding to BF3 fall into the core to hardcore group of gamers. These are players with a very thorough understanding of industry trends and established game controls and mechanics. Because of this, they were able to pick up the game quickly and with very little instruction. These are the types of players that would be opinion leaders on Internet forums and mavens in the online community. It is also safe to assume that many reviewers will share their level of expertise and tastes when the time comes to evaluate Battlefront 3. Historically, our internal QA score has been within 5 points of the final Metacritc rating.
Format
Eight Testers spent an hour and a half playing Battlefront 3. While they played, all testers in the room were encouraged to provide commentary, particularly the player with the control. Players played Instant Action Conquest with max A.I. on Tatooine, Coruscant, Cloud City, and the C.I.S. Cruiser single-player. All players had a chance to play for about 5-10 minutes. Once everyone had a turn with single-player, players switched to split-screen Instant Action on the C.I.S. Cruiser and Tatooine.
Overall Trends
Summary
*Players had fun.*The visuals delivered on the Star Wars universe.*Players were not aware that the VBF existed.*They had trouble piloting vehicles, particularly starfighters*They got lost a lot, especially on the C.I.S. Cruiser.*In general, the world felt empty.*Players were not impressed by A.I. behavior.
Positive
Most players were very enthusiastic about the authenticity of the visuals. Tatooine, Coruscant, and Cloud City frequently elicited “oohs and aahs”, particularly when players recognized locations from the movies. Overall, most players agreed with the statement, “The game looks as good, or better than, I would expect from a 2008 action game.” And many players strongly agreed with the statement, “The look of the game captures the Star Wars universe.”
Players rated the on-foot controls highly. Many strongly agreed with the statement, “It was easy to control my character on foot”. These are players who are very familiar with FPS and Third-Person Shooters on consoles, and took to navigating the world with little difficulty.
Many players agreed with the statement, “I understood why I won or lost the game.”
Most players agreed with the statement, “I had fun while playing BF3,” with three out of eight giving this statement a 5/5 (completely agree).
Negative
The testers were not aware that the VBF existed until it was pointed out to them almost 45 minutes into the session. Once they recognized it, they were enthusiastic, but many responded to the statement, “Land and space both felt like important parts of the battle.” with N/A or disagreement.
Vehicle controls did not fare as well as the on-foot controls. Players disagreed with the statement, “It was easy to control space vehicles” and neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement, “It was easy to control land vehicles.” Observing players, space controls certainly proved to be problematic. Many players commented that the controls felt “backwards” and that “Roll and accelerate should not be together”.
Overall, the combat experience was found to be lacking. This was largely due to the low density across the VBF. In general, players did not agree with the statements, “I felt like I was part of an action-packed Star Wars battle.”, “I felt like I could play any way that I wanted to”, “Combat on the ground is fun and exciting.” and “Combat in space is fun and exciting.”
Despite the fact that this was a very skilled set of players, many got lost and confused, particularly on the capital ships. There were a number of complaints regarding the minimap. The iconography of the map was not clear, and the geography of the world was not effectively communicated. Many players wanted a different map when they were in an interior than the one that they have on the terrain.
A number of comments were made regarding the intelligence of the A.I. However, this was not a major concern for the players. They assumed that A.I. behaviour will improve throughout the course of development.
Most players had difficulty distinguishing friendly units from enemies, particularly at a distance.
Takeway
There is still a great deal of work to be done on the vertical battlefront, vehicle controls, A.I. behaviours, player navigation, and combat density. But, despite all of these challenges, most players still said that they had fun playing the game. Players enjoyed touring familiar Star Wars environments, hopping in and out of vehicles, and firing into clusters of units (friendly and enemy alike). In general, the testers were optimistic that any issues with animation, A.I, and navigation would be fixed in the course of development.
Verbatims
Player01.png
Player02.png
Player03.png
Player04.png
Player05.png
Player06.png
Player07.png
Player08.png
==References==
*MS12_QA_First_Impressions.pdf
Category:Internal & Technical