Terran Defenders Post Mortem
Terran Defenders was inspired by key ideas from Tracy Fullerton’s Game Design Workshop, particularly Chapters 2, 3, and 8. These readings helped us develop a strong core mechanic and refine our design through iteration and feedback. Chapter 3 teaches player motivation and feedback loops beyond just functionality, which was crucial for our combat-driven gameplay. We focused on creating a feeling of being overwhelmed but still capable in enemy encounters. Chapter 8’s iterative cycle guided our multiple rounds of testing and refinement.
One thing I would change while developing the prototype is how we interpreted early playtesting feedback and that more serious discussions should of been had to identify the root of player frustration. In hindsight, we misdiagnosed a major usability issue, believing feedback about hit detection and weapon feel was a matter of sound or visual effects. However, in later testing (especially from Users 6, 7, and 8), it became clear that the real issue was player control and movement. Our reliance on click-to-move made moment-to-moment combat feel unresponsive to several testers. Suppose we had more critically applied Fullerton’s idea of playcentric design, building and refining the experience based on real user needs. In that case, we might have transitioned to WASD controls much earlier, which could have reshaped how players engaged with combat entirely. A larger emphasis should have been put on the Core audience.
The design of Terran Defenders was mostly well recieved. Inspired by Chapter 2 of Game Design Workshop, we focused on how the player would feel (constantly under pressure but still able). This influenced choices like making enemies aggressive, especially Cthulhu, who forces the player to stay mobile. Also the visuals which were widely appreciated and widely acknowledged to affect the player experience.
Looking back, we missed a chance to better apply Fullerton’s idea of testing and refining through play. Our click-to-move system didn’t support the kind of tight, responsive combat we wanted. Chapter 3’s point about aligning mechanics with player experience can be seen where if we’d switched to WASD earlier, players could have been more immersed. Weapon and enemy variety did add choice, but without smooth control, those choices didn’t always land well. This means we understood the concept of Meaningful Choices, but did not fully realise it.