Games Studies / Project2: Tabletop gameplay information and data
11.5.2023 - 6.7.2023 (Week 6 - Week 14)
Takuto Hozumi / 0354047 / Bachelor Of Design (Hons) In Creative Media
Games Studies
Project2: Tabletop gameplay information and data
INSTRUCTION
Project Outline
For this part, the students need to use various methods, such as
conducting playtest responses, observations, interviews and survey by
questionnaire to collect primary data for their study. All evidence to
support data collection is to be organised well.
W7: Alpha play-test
I prepared a simple designed map, elemental cards, etc. for the
playtest.
Fig.1: Playtest Preparation
For this playtest, we invited one outside student within the group
members.
Fig.2: W7 Playtesting
Oral questions to outside students generally received high marks. For
example, I found the approximately one hour play time to be very long,
but some players said that was okay. The results of the survey,
including the members, are as follows.
Fig.3: Survey Results
Particularly problematic items were Playful experiences awareness,
after our discussion we decided to review the rules as follows.
Modifications;
- Using ladder : only the final box where the player lands will have an effect on the players.
- The high risk area will be gone after one person had already experienced it. (monster illustration or something)
- 3 high risk areas : back 50,40,30
- Need to get the specific number of dice in order to get to the goal (for example: only 3 boxes left until the goal, need to get 3 or less to move)
Based on these analyses, the decision was made to add a new feature
called power-up cards.
Samples for power-ups cards;
- roll the dice twice (the commands or rule of the first box you land will not be applied)
- your elements will defeat every one and you will not be affected by the other elemental cards
- you can disable any opponent (the opponent chosen will skip the next round) you can disable one opponent that is after you (if you are the last person, it will the the first person of the next round)
- move forward 4 boxes
- move forward 2 boxes
- freeze the other or next opponents (will go again to the first person).
- move forwards 1 box
- remove bridge and the bridge will be yours that you can use
Since then, the good and bad points of contention have been about the
existence of two cards, a mystery card and a power
card. Ultimately, we decided to integrate it.
W9: Final alpha play-test
At this stage, the components used in the Alpha play-test were
diverted without modification, and the participants experienced a
modified version of the rules.
Fig.4: W9 Playtesting
Attribute affinities are shown on the game board for easy
understanding. (Handwritten at this stage, but will be reflected in
the final design)
In this playtesting, one person as the observer. Their job is to
video record the gameplay session and take notes of the important
inputs like what works and what need adjustments. You can also
communicate with your players, ask them questions and suggestions
about the game. When you are carrying this task, you do not provide
feedback input into the survey. You can take turn with other
original group member for this task.
One person to join the gameplay and in charge of explaining the game
rules to the new players. They will need to provide feedback input
into the survey after the game session. You can take turn with other
original group member for this task.
The other 3 members each choose one new game to play with.
Members in charge of observers commented that the event was well
received by participants. But also feedback shown after the session
indicated that the game should have more of a storyline. Lecturer said
that there should be a feature that makes people expect a story
(event) to happen during the game. In our game, cards would play that
role. Therefore, the following measures were decided upon.
- Implement a battle function where players fight each other.
- More card effects, more decks.
W12: Beta play-test
At this stage, the design became more specific and we began to think
about UX design.
Fig.5: Map for W12
Fig.6: W12 Playtesting
At the same time, I began to think independently about making actual
game components. Then I proposed it to the members.
Fig.7: Production Idea
Since a member had difficulty understanding in English explanation, Japanese is also included. Discussions were held based on this, and the final decision was made in the direction of using magnetic sheets to create the board.
Back to the main topic of playtesting, the game rules that have been changed so far appear to have been successful. However, difficulties in understanding the map design were noted. They were not sure which direction to go. So I redesigned the map into a spiral strip to improve the UX for players.
Continued to Final Project
REFLECTIONS
As for the game, the actual feedback from the players gave us ideas for improvement in areas we did not recognize. My personal opinion is that there are pros and cons to various people coming up with ideas. It was already a bit of a departure from the rules I had originally envisioned. However, if the game itself grows into an interesting game that can be accepted by more people, that is also good. As a group work, around this time, members who were not actively involved in participation began to become noticeable. The worst weeks were the times when only the leader, Brigita, and I were working on the project. Group projects encounter many obstacles, such as those who avoid tasks because they are too busy, or those who begin to get angry when their opinions are not accepted. While this was easily foreseen, it is true that I was unpleasantly surprised when I was actually disadvantaged. Anyway, this project is coming to a close. I intend to make it all the way to the end without incident.
Comments
Post a Comment