1. Wang YuQing Liu Zihao Tran Quoc Cuong Testing Plan for Bellews Game – Year of Eden School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences

2. Wang YuQing k0wayu01@students.oamk.fi Liu Zihao k0lizi00@students.oamk.fi Cuong Quoc Tran k0trqu00@students.oamk.fi What are you testing? Year of Eden For whom are you testing? BelleViews School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences

3. 1.General playability 2.First impression 3.Graphic and sounds 4.Bugs 5.User interface usability 6.Satisfaction 15 people 8 female, 7 male Students (it, ib, architech, financial) School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences

4. In 5 minutes, user will be asked to completed one task which is given (included the instructions) they are asked to do one task (e.g. create a new player, find and build one building which is mentioned in the instruction) There is no question before test After testing users will be asked to fill in a questionnaire about some criterias such as: graphic, first impression, satisfaction… Collecting the feedback from users School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences

5. Questionair form for interview, intrustion, slide to introduction this game YuQing: talking with user, organize testing timetable, giving the instruction Zihao: write the report, collection information. Tran: prepare the material, summary result. Zihao’s home Cafeteria in University of Oulu 17 September 2011 School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences

6. There are15 testers included 8 females and 7 males. The test group has 9 persons whose age are between 20-30 years old, 3 persons under 20 and 3 persons above 30. The nationality contains Vietnamese, Chinese and Finnish. Occupation: They are all students in different field such as: BIT, IB, Financial, Architecture and IT.

7. STTNameAgeGenderOccupationNationality 1 Hang Thi Thu Nguyen 26FIBVN 2 Tran Xuan Bao 33MITFin 3 Nguyen Thi Doan Trang 20FIBVN 4 Pham Xuan Thao 30MArchitectureVN 5 Nguyen Ho Van Anh 20FIBVN 6 Pham Thi Ly 24FFinanceVN 7 Nguyen Bao Ngoc 19FIBVN 8 Yueqiang Xu 28MIBCH 9 Phuong Thi Thu Bui 33FIBVN 10Zhang23MIBCH 11Yang24FBITCH 12Wang19MBITCH 13Liu19MBITCH 14Li28FIBCH 15Zihao33MBITCH

9. STTQuestionnaireResult 1Have you ever try a game in facebook?12/15 2 How long do you want to spend for playing Facebook game (hour/day) 3 persons: 1 hours 5 persons: 30 minutes 4 persons: 10 minutes 3 persons: don’t play 3 How about the first impression of this game? 3 persons: Similar to Real-time Strategy Games. 3 persons: Excited 4 persons: Boring 3 persons: Complicated 2 persons: no feeling. 4 General playability (1 - 5) 8 persons: 4 5 persons: 3 2 persons: 1 5Graphic (1 - 5) 4 persons: 5 3 persons: 4 7 persons: 3 1 persons: 1

10. STTQuestionnaireResult 6Sound 3 persons: 5 10 persons: 3 2 persons: 2 7BugNo 8 What are the good points of this game? Graphic is greats Sound is attractive Background story looks interesting Bubble game 9 What are the disadvantage of this game? Various function of the buildings make the game more complex and challenging than may generic games on FB. Didn't see the element of social interaction; Many similar PC games are available with high quality 3D graphic. This game the graphic is relatively poorer than other similar The game looks simple Not attractive at the first impression. Quite complicated, quite hard to follow It is not interaction game

11. STTQuestionnaireResult 10What should improve? Should have the social element, for example supporting multiplayer task, since FB is a place for socializing. Graphic should be more attractive and description should be more simple Sound is little dull Interaction game Music, color, sound and interface Boring, it should be more difficult and attractive. 11 Do you want to play it again in next version? 10

12. Who participated in the session? Our group and the testing people. Main findings We found some tester’s result about the general playability, graphic, sound, also some advantages, some disadvantages and what kind of things should improve in this game.

13. Positive feedback / strong points 1.Graphic is great and suitable for the game theme. 2.Sound is attractive 3.Background story looks interesting, testers all like it. 4. This game have a great idea.

14. Areas of improvement/negative feedback 1.Didn't see the element of social interaction; Many similar PC games are available with high quality 3D graphic. This game the graphic is relatively poorer than other similar 2. Various function of the buildings make the game more complex and challenging than may generic games on FB. 3.Some testers’ says the game first impression was not attractive. 4.Some testers’ says game is complicated and hard to follow the instruction. 5.It should be more interaction.

15. 1.Game background story looks very interesting, this can make users pay attention to the game. 2.Game sound is suitable. 3.Most of tester like graphic. 4.Game idea is good.

16. 1.Interface looks not so good, users cannot change anything about the background music and also the graphic effects. 2.Game general playability is not very good. Some testers said this game was boring and complicated, do not know what they should do in the game.

17. 1. 1. Graphic should be more attractive and description should be more simple 2.Instruction is so long, it is good to be a bit brief. 3.Sound is little dull and simplex, if there are many different sound and music in the game, it will make this game more interactive. 4.Should have the social element, for example supporting multiplayer task, since FB is a place for socializing.

18. School of Business and Information Management Oulu University of Applied Sciences