Experiment Setup: Matchy Cat

Source Concept

Based on the approved Matchy Cat Phase 5 Implementation Briefing.

The prototype contains one hunger challenge:

Match tiles → Gain colored resources → Use “Pat the Head” → Increase willingness → Drag the cat to the food station

Validation Goal

Determine whether players understand that matching tiles does not directly feed the cat. Matches generate resources used for pet interactions, which increase willingness and unlock care actions.

Primary Hypothesis

Players can understand and complete the full loop without explicit step-by-step instructions.

The key transitions are:

1. Matches generate colored resources.
2. Resources unlock “Pat the Head.”
3. “Pat the Head” increases willingness.
4. Sufficient willingness allows the cat to use the food station.

Secondary Questions

* Do players understand that they must drag the cat, not the food?

* Are resource costs and locked actions clear?

* Does the refusal reaction explain insufficient willingness?

* Do interaction animations feel responsive?

Prototype Scope

* One need: Hunger

* One 6x6 match-3 board

* Six tile and resource types

* One action: “Pat the Head”

* Cost: Red Fish and Yellow Cupcakes

* One willingness meter

* One hunger meter

* One draggable cat

* One food station

* Essential transfer effects and cat reactions

The prototype should not explain the complete loop upfront. Contextual help appears only after hesitation or repeated failure.

Success Evidence

* Players intentionally collect resources required by “Pat the Head.”

* Players activate “Pat the Head” when its cost is met.

* Players connect the action to increased willingness.

* Players drag the cat to the food station once the requirement is met.

* Players complete the challenge without intervention.

Failure Evidence

* Players expect matches to directly reduce hunger.

* Players repeatedly drag tiles, food, or UI elements onto the cat.

* Players do not understand why “Pat the Head” is locked.

* Players repeatedly attempt the food station with insufficient willingness.

* Players stop interacting for more than 10 seconds or exit early.

Metrics

Record:

* Time to first match

* Time to first intentional required-color match

* Time from action unlock to activation

* Failed station drags

* Incorrect object drags

* Hesitations longer than five seconds

* Total completion time

* Whether contextual help was triggered

* Device and input issues

Decision Rules

Continue

* At least 70% complete the challenge.

* At least 60% activate “Pat the Head” without explicit help.

* Median failed station drags are one or fewer.

* Fewer than 20% attempt to drag the wrong object.

* At least 80% attempt the food station after reaching sufficient willingness.

Iterate

Players understand the general loop but struggle with resource costs, locked states, willingness, or drag targets. Improve visual communication and retest.

Reconsider the loop

Players still cannot connect resources, pet interactions, and willingness after multiple UI and onboarding revisions.

Park the concept

Most players exit during the first 30 seconds or cannot complete the loop even with contextual help.

Non-Goals

* Retention

* Progression

* Customization

* Multiple needs

* Complex match-3 mechanics

* Autonomous cat turns

* Monetization

Core Validation Question

Can players independently understand that the puzzle powers pet interactions, and that those interactions build enough willingness to complete care?