Start a brief
Services Methodology Case studies About us
Start a brief
team reviewing game usability findings

How our usability services fit around your roadmap

Different stages of development raise different questions. Our services are built to answer the right ones at the right time, without pulling your team away from shipping.
01

Prototype and early builds

When you invite us into your project, you are not buying generic research. You are asking for a clearer view of how players actually experience your game at this stage. We combine moderated playtests, structured tasks, and targeted surveys to uncover where learning breaks, where UI hides intent, and where friction helps or hurts.

02

Mid development checkpoints

As systems solidify, small usability issues can quietly turn into expensive redesigns. Mid development playtests focus on core loops, difficulty curves, and interface flows under real pressure. We align sessions with your sprints, so findings feed directly into planning rather than arriving as late stage surprises.
03

Pre launch and live support

Close to launch or during live operations, risk tolerance changes. Here, we run tighter, more focused passes on onboarding, HUDs, menus, and new features, checking how clearly players understand updates and how comfortably they return after breaks. The goal is not to rethink everything, but to catch avoidable confusion before it reaches more players.

Service overview

Core game usability service paths

Underneath the variety of platforms and genres, most of our work falls into four main paths: early prototype reviews to catch structural UX issues before they harden, mid development playtests that stress test core loops, pre launch usability passes focused on onboarding and UI, and post launch optimisation that keeps live games understandable as they grow. Each service uses internal frameworks like Internal Loop Mapping and the Friction Filter rubric, adapted to your build and team rhythm.
01

Early prototype UX reviews

Set strong foundations
When your game is still forming, the most valuable work is often quiet and structural. In our prototype UX reviews, we look at early flows, control schemes, and interaction patterns before art and content lock in. Using paper, greybox, or early digital builds, we run short sessions that focus on comprehension: what players think they can do, what they actually try, and where mental models diverge from your intent. Findings are delivered as annotated flows and trade offs, helping you make foundational decisions while change is still affordable.
  • Concept and greybox checks
  • Control and camera trials
  • Early flow mapping
02

Mid development playtests

See how the game actually plays
Once systems and content start to come together, we shift into structured playtests. Here we observe how players move through onboarding, first sessions, and early progression, paying attention to pacing, feedback, and difficulty spikes. Our Flow Trace method maps moments of hesitation, confusion, or improvisation onto your core loops, so you can see which issues are temporary rough edges and which signal deeper design debt. Reports highlight priority changes that can realistically land in upcoming sprints.
  • Onboarding and first hour
  • Core loop stress tests
  • Difficulty and pacing
03

Pre launch usability passes

Reduce avoidable confusion
As launch approaches, attention shifts to polish and risk management. Our pre launch usability passes focus on the surfaces players touch first and most: menus, HUDs, tutorials, and key settings. We run targeted tasks under realistic conditions, checking readability, discoverability, and comfort. Using our Screen Storyboard method, we translate findings into annotated layouts and microcopy suggestions, keeping recommendations grounded in what can be changed without destabilising the build.
  • HUD and UI clarity
  • Tutorial and help
  • Settings and comfort

How an engagement with our usability team works

Each engagement, whether a single study or a longer partnership, follows the same backbone: clear questions, disciplined observation, and structured iteration support.

Plan: align on questions, scope, and constraints

We begin by clarifying what you need from usability work at this stage: a green light on a risky feature, clarity on onboarding drop offs, or a structured look at HUD readability. Together, we define research questions, choose the service path that fits, and agree on constraints like timelines, build stability, and recruitment options. This becomes the shared brief that shapes everything that follows.

Test: observe real players in structured sessions

Next, we design and run the study using internal frameworks such as Internal Loop Mapping for flows and the Friction Filter rubric for issues. Sessions may be remote or lab based, moderated or lightly guided, depending on your needs. We capture behaviour through video, inputs, and, where available, telemetry, then tag moments where player expectations and design intent diverge.

Iterate: turn findings into a repeatable feedback loop

Finally, we consolidate observations into patterns, prioritise issues by impact and effort, and frame each recommendation as a clear trade off. You receive a report, highlight clips, and a debrief focused on decisions, not just findings. If you choose an ongoing partnership, we help plan the next round of checks, turning this cycle into a repeatable feedback loop that evolves with your game.
player in VR usability session

Specialised focus areas

Some questions only appear once players step into less typical spaces: VR lobbies, AR overlays, cross device menus, or complex free to play onboarding flows. For those, we use specialised setups and methods that account for motion, context, and long term habits, not just first impressions.

We run VR and AR usability tests that track comfort, orientation, and gesture learnability, mobile F2P onboarding reviews that balance clarity with monetisation flows, live ops feature testing to see how returning players read updates, and accessibility audits that highlight where controls, visuals, and text quietly exclude players who want to stay. Each uses the same disciplined backbone, adjusted for the realities of your platform.

reviewing mobile onboarding flow

Choosing between one off studies and ongoing usability partnerships

When you run a single, focused usability study, you get a snapshot of how players meet your game at a specific moment. This works well when you have a clear, narrow question, such as whether a new tutorial lands or a revised HUD is readable under pressure. It is efficient, contained, and easier to schedule around a busy roadmap, but it will not track how issues evolve as the game changes.

An ongoing testing partnership treats usability as a recurring checkpoint rather than a single event. Instead of waiting for a crisis, you schedule lighter rounds at key milestones, from early onboarding through post launch updates. Patterns become clearer, and fixes can be validated over time, but it requires steady commitment from both your team and ours.

For smaller teams or tightly scoped features, a one off engagement may be enough to unblock a decision. You define the question, we design and run the study, and you walk away with a ranked list of issues and suggested moves. This suits prototypes, pilots, or specific flows where you need clarity now without a long term arrangement.

Larger or live projects often benefit from a retainer style arrangement, where we stay close to your builds and data. Here, we help you plan recurring checks, interpret analytics alongside player sessions, and keep an eye on how new content interacts with old systems. The trade off is more planning upfront in exchange for a steadier, less reactive feedback loop.

Choose the level of usability support that matches your team’s bandwidth and risk tolerance

Every game arrives with different constraints: shifting deadlines, partial telemetry, experimental mechanics, or complex approval paths. Our services are designed to flex within those realities. You choose the depth and cadence; we bring structured methods that turn scattered player behaviour into a short list of practical UX moves you can act on within your next few sprints.

Bring a real build, a real concern, and a realistic window for change

To make the first round meaningful, share three things: the platform and genre you are building for, the specific flows or features that worry you most, and the timeframe you can realistically allocate to changes. We will suggest a right sized mix of playtests, UX reviews, and follow up checks, so every session serves a clear decision instead of adding more noise to your backlog.

Plan study