Difference between revisions of "GCI/Playtesting"

From The Battle for Wesnoth Wiki
< GCI
m (Wesnoth 1.9.2 Playtesting)
(Wesnoth 1.9.2 Playtesting)
Line 22: Line 22:
  
 
- include answers to the following questionnaire for each scenario :
 
- include answers to the following questionnaire for each scenario :
 +
 +
- submit a package with end of scenario savegames
  
 
(1) What difficulty levels and what version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
 
(1) What difficulty levels and what version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?
Line 41: Line 43:
  
 
(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?
 
(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?
 +
 +
 +
Here is a short list of the sort of bugs we are interested in
 +
 +
* obvious bugs (crashes, scenario not working etc...)
 +
* bad wordings/spelling mistakes/ typos
 +
* terrain bugs (in particular missing transitions in mainline maps)
 +
* unit animation bugs (animation glitches or wrong animation played. Note that missing animations are not considered bugs)

Revision as of 09:37, 24 November 2010

Wesnoth 1.9.2 Playtesting

Download from here: http://wiki.wesnoth.org/Download#Development_.281.9_branch.29

Wesnoth 1.9 ships with 16 campaigns which total over 200 scenarios, each one with varying amounts of events, dialogue, cutscenes, special gameplay mechanics, and so on. It's inevitable that many scenarios contain bugs which have gone unnoticed or unreported. Also, most scenarios were originally written a long time ago when the game engine was much less versatile, meaning that some scenario mechanics don't function as naturally and conveniently as they could.

This task involves picking a mainline campaign on a specific difficulty level, playing through it and reporting in as much detail as possible all bugs and glitches encountered as well as suggestions for improvement. Campaigns with scenario branching should get all their branches tested.

Requirements

Reasonably familiar with Wesnoth campaigns, so as to be able to identify bugs and suggest realistically doable gameplay-enhancing changes in detail. No coding in WML or otherwise required.

Difficulty

Depending on the student's skill medium to low. Students able to learn WML and fix bugs would increase the difficulty.

Deliverable/expected proof you should get latest version of wesnoth 1.9 or trunk

- complete a report (wiki page, like GCI/Playtesting/Legend_of_Wesmere/Normal ) of what you've found

- submit all bugs to bugs.wesnoth.org and link to them in your report

- include answers to the following questionnaire for each scenario :

- submit a package with end of scenario savegames

(1) What difficulty levels and what version of Wesnoth have you played the scenario on?

(2) How difficult did you find the scenario? (1-10)

(3) How clear did you find the scenario objectives?

(4) How clear and interesting did you find the dialog and storyline of the scenario?

(5) What were your major challenges in meeting the objectives of the scenario?

(6) How fun do you think the scenario is? (1-10)

(7) What, if any, are changes you would have made to the scenario to make it more fun?

(8) Was there any event that caused you to lose the game and forced you to reload or restart the scenario?

(9) If you know a bit of the Wesnoth Markup Language - do you think that the WML of this scenario is clear and well commented? If not which part would you like to be documented better?


Here is a short list of the sort of bugs we are interested in

  • obvious bugs (crashes, scenario not working etc...)
  • bad wordings/spelling mistakes/ typos
  • terrain bugs (in particular missing transitions in mainline maps)
  • unit animation bugs (animation glitches or wrong animation played. Note that missing animations are not considered bugs)