valorant: add a feature
Thanks for checking out Valorant UX+. I’m always excited to discuss games, data, and UX! Feel free to reach out.
target audience.
Solution 1: Post-Match Performance Dashboard
Problem: Players can’t track performance beyond kills/deaths. Support players feel invisible.
Solution:
A modern post-match dashboard that includes:
Kill/death trend chart
Accuracy heatmaps (by area)
Utility usage stats (e.g., flash success rate)
Role-specific feedback (initiator, sentinel, etc.)
Benefits:
Makes feedback inclusive, actionable, and visual—helping all roles improve.
Solution 2: “Why Did We Lose?” Summary Screen
Problem: Players leave matches confused and defensive. No tactical breakdown of team mistakes.
Solution:
A match-end summary highlighting:
Post-plant success/failure
Low trade percentage
Site-based death clusters
Missing synergy (e.g., stacking sites or utility overlap)
Benefits:
Helps players understand team-level patterns and reduce blame.
the 2 features.
overview.
Role
UX/UI Designer & UX Researcher
Timeline
3-4 months
Project Type
Mobile App
Tools
Figma, FigJam
Valorant UX+ is a self-initiated UX enhancement project for the popular FPS game Valorant. This case study focuses on designing two new in-game features that address performance insight and team synergy. Through interviews, competitive research, and visual design, I created intuitive tools to help players grow, understand losses, and make smarter decisions in solo and team play.
Valorant’s current post-game and agent select screens don’t support player growth or strategy well—especially in solo queue. Players often leave games frustrated, with no clear path to improve or understand what went wrong. My goal was to improve this by building thoughtful, in-game feedback systems grounded in data and teamwork.
Problems Identified:
Post-match screens lack tactical and role-specific feedback
No synergy guidance during agent selection
No constructive team-wide summary of losses
Solo queue players trying to improve
New or casual players needing guidance
Competitive/intermediate players seeking tactical insights
Research Insights.
Information Overload (or Lack Thereof)
The current match summary is either too minimal (just a scoreboard) or buried in tabs with too much raw data and no interpretation.
Players don’t know what to look for to improve — there’s no hierarchy or prioritization of insights.
Support & Sentinel Roles Feel Invisible
Players who play non-fragging roles (like Sage, Skye, Killjoy) don’t see their contributions acknowledged.
Healing, utility setups, vision denial, and flank watching are rarely tracked or praised.
No Cause-and-Effect Feedback
Players don’t understand how a missed flash, failed retake, or lack of trades impacted the outcome.
I conducted lightweight user interviews and heuristic evaluation of Valorant’s current UX, and compared it to FPS titles like CS:GO, Overwatch, and Apex Legends. Interview participants included a mix of casual, intermediate, and professional players. Key themes emerged around feedback gaps, blame culture, and the desire for digestible data.
What I Did
Pain Points
Takeaways.
This project deepened my understanding of designing for real-time strategy games. I learned the importance of balancing clarity with emotion, and how visual data can improve community health. I loved creating solutions that feel tactical and friendly—just like Valorant.
Results & Impact.
User feedback was positive across all player types. Kendy valued tactical data. Mikaela felt recognized as a support. Jeffrey appreciated the solo-friendly feedback. Players said they’d reflect more post-match and felt less blamed.
success metrics.
If implemented, success would be measured by increased post-match engagement, better agent role balance, and reduced reports related to toxicity. Metrics might include:
Use of post-match dashboard
Winrate changes after reviewing insights
Agent comp balance during solo queue
Drop in early match surrenders
Key insights.
Players Crave Context, Not Just Stats
Users want post-match insights that explain why things happened — not just raw data like K/D. Tactical breakdowns and clear visualizations help turn reflection into learning.
Support Roles Feel Undervalued
Players who main support or sentinel agents feel invisible in end-of-match summaries. Lack of recognition for non-lethal contributions leads to frustration and discouragement.
Different Players Want Different Depths of Insight
Competitive and casual players both want feedback, but with different levels of detail. UI needs to support both deep analysis and quick, digestible overviews.
Goals & Scope.
Design two features that:
Empower solo players and teams with post-game tactical insights
Make agent selection more strategic
Reduce toxicity by helping players understand real causes of loss
persona: Rashik hossain.
Testing & Feedback.
User feedback was positive across all player types. Kendy valued tactical data. Mikaela felt recognized as a support. Jeffrey appreciated the solo-friendly feedback. Players said they’d reflect more post-match and felt less blamed.
Ideation & Early Sketches.
HIGH-FIDELITY WIREFRAMES
LOW-FIDELITY WIREFRAMES
competitor analysis.
PRO:
Granular stats + visuals.
CON:
No coaching; not in-game.
💸 Free.
Target:
Ranked grinders + stat nerds.
Strength:
Heatmaps, K/D trends, role data.
Weakness:
External app, overwhelming UX.
Note:
Great depth, but lacks guidance or context.
Tracker.gg
Aim Lab
Overwatch 2
Blitz.gg
PRO:
Personalized aim training.
CON:
No tactical or team insight.
💸 Free.
Target:
Mechanical tryhards, Diamond–Radiant.
Strength:
Riot-backed drills + feedback loops.
Weakness:
Aim-only focus, zero strategy.
Note:
Solid training, but disconnected from match flow.
PRO:
Role synergy + team balance UX.
CON:
Shallow stats post-game.
💸 Free to play.
Target:
Broad FPS audience, team-oriented.
Strength:
Agent pick hints, medals, scoreboard.
Weakness:
No deep review or tactical feedback.
Note:
Strong onboarding, but not reflective for improvement.
PRO:
In-game overlays + pick suggestions.
CON:
Solo-focused, can be intrusive.
💸 Free(account linking for extras).
Target:
Casual-to-mid players seeking tips.
Strength:
Live coaching, lineup maps, agent builds.
Weakness:
Lacks team tools or synergy focus.
Note:
Great onboarding, but no holistic insight.
problem statement.