Game Design questions week 6
Aleah Dudek
Week 5 Game Ideas
- Leprechauns is a card game in which players collect the most gold by drawing cards and strategically stealing from the other players.
- Front Lines is a board game in which the players collect troops to fight the other players by taking over the armies of others.
- Producer is a card game in which the players collect instruments to make the best band by collecting cards and making trades with others.
- Trinkets is a card game in which the players obtain the best trinkets by collecting cards that change rules, give players abilities, and trading with other players.
- Headlampers is a board game in which the players collect the most gems and jewels by mining for gems on the board.
Carcassonne Game review
Madison Hurst
Was it fun? I felt that Carcassonne was fairly good. I enjoyed the concept of placing the tiles to build a unique and creative map. I liked the simplicity of the mechanics but it was not the most engaging game. It was enjoyable at times but it took a long time to complete and there were lots of moments where not much was occurring.
What were the player interactions? The player interactions were based on chance, whether that was what tile you picked up or how people chose to place their tiles. You can’t really affect other players’ decisions but depending on how you play your tiles and meeples, it can impact how other players might choose to play.
How long did it take to learn? It didn’t take too long to learn, the rules were very straight forward as well as the point system.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played? I would say that the most frustrating part of the game was the length and scale. The winner was whoever had the most amount of points after all the tiles were played. This took up lots of space and time. Also the pieces were very easy to knock out of place, which could cause confusion because the flow of roads and buildings mattered.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played? My favorite aspect of the game was that it was a simple game. There were set rules for how to play and how to keep score. There were a lot of moving parts but the simplicity made it easy to follow.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t? I wish that you could complete different structures without having to have all sides match. This would have a new strategy to the game because you could sabotage what other people are trying to create and how they have placed their meeples.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
from the experience, what would it be? I would add the ability to complete a structure or road without needing to match all sides.
Is this a game you would play again? No, because in the long run it was not a very engaging game. There were fun parts of it but over all across the whole game there was not a lot that kept us players fully focused on the game. It was easy and flowed but not an entertaining pace. In the pandemic it was hard to learn but every turn there was something different that could throw players off or help us get closer to winning.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure. In the first act of the game we are just setting up the game and board, there were not many tiles on the table or points being scored. Just players setting up different avenues for where they might be able to gain points in the future. Players are also learning how to place their tiles and meeples to build connections and earn points.
In the second act of the game players are creating more strategy when it comes in as players start to expand their tiles and start to earn points. The board is growing and more meeples are placed to hopefully gain points in the future. Players are more specific about where they are placing their tiles to help benefit themselves.
In the third act players are incorporating farming and adding up their points. The board has become quite large with many different complete roads, monasteries, and castles. At the very end all tiles should have been played.
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? Carcassonne has a lot of competitive aspects but not many collaborative ones. The competitiveness comes from the players fighting to score the most points and “out meeple” other players to restrict them from gaining points. There is a little bit of collaboration between players because a player’s action can influence where someone else places their next tile.
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics stand out? The game’s metaphor is about shaping and claiming the landscape. As if you are watching a countryside develop piece by piece. A mechanic that stood out to me was how unfinished tiles like half built roads and cities can still influence the game. This created different routes of strategy choosing between getting guaranteed points or to keep building for more points in the future.
5 Games that involve collecting – Bryce Mathews
[Game name] is a [category of] game in which [the players or their avatars] [do or compete or collaborate for some goal] by [using tools the game provides them].
“Scrapworld” is a board game in which players act as robots that compete to be the only settlement standing using the scrap they collect in the wasteland.
“Ghostly Gather” is a board game in which a paranormal investigator must collect as many haunted items possible, and escape, before being haunted, using the tools in their arsenal and the items they collect.
“Shuffled” is a memory-based card game in which players compete to build the largest deck of cards by memorizing and matching cards.
“Sheltered” is a card game in which survivors in a zombie apocalypse must collaborate to fortify their base and survive the waves of zombie attacks by using the items they collect.
“Quads” is a card game where players compete to have the highest poker hand by collecting cards and bluffing other players.
Game ideas: Theme of Collecting
Madison Hurst
[Game name] is a [category of] game in which [the players or their avatars] [do or compete or collaborate for some goal] by [using tools the game provides them].
Taste Test is a card game in which players have to collect unique ingredients or food to make (various ingredients hold different values), and they have to decipher whether or not that ingredients is cursed/poisoned by other opponents.
The Alleyway Pharmacy is a card game in which the players are drug dealers competing against other drug dealers where they have to collect various drugs to resell. The kick to it is, the drug dealers have to make sure whether the drugs they collected are real and not candy. If they are caught using candy (x amount of times) then they will go to jail (lose).
Recycle Go! Is a card game in which players are collecting and sorting what trash is recycled properly and efficiently. They are to sort plastic, trash, glass, etc and the faster player to do so wins.
Blink and Collect is a card game in which the player has a set amount of time to look at a card that is a picture filled with random junk/objects that contain various things that could potentially earn them points. They have to remember as much as they can from that card to pick cards that gives them points (they saw a chair in the picture, so they would pick up a chair card that is 1 point).
The attic is a memory/collection game in which players are going through their attic while flipping tiles that match the items they found. They have to avoid different setbacks (mice) that affect your collections of matches.
Game Review – King of Tokyo – Bryce Mathews
I found King of Tokyo pretty fun to play. The art was flashy and creative, and the game play was very unique.
Players had to trade damage and play “King of the Hill” for Tokyo City to gain points and win either by score or attrition.
King of Tokyo was simple to learn. The dice rolling, health, score, and battle mechanics made sense.
I believe that the energy system was nearly useless. There were not enough opportunities to gain enough energy to buy the cards necessary for a leg-up. You are mostly focusing on healing, fighting, collecting score, or a mixture of the three. Energy felt like an unpolished mechanic beside the other systems.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
I enjoyed the dice-rolling aspect of the game. Determining your next action based on how lucky you are is always slightly annoying, but the re-rolling allowed players to recover from bad luck.
I wanted more energy to buy items. However, I felt too preoccupied with keeping enough health and damaging my opponents enough to force them out of the center.
I would make the energy economy less demanding, allowing players to come across energy more often. Less than 5 cards were bought during our game.
No. Even though I enjoyed the art and concept of the game. I did not believe that the mechanics were fully used or tuned to make the game enjoyable to play.
In the first act, players develop their initial strategy. A few players rushed to the center and tried to hold on to it as much as possible. Other players held back and were able to out heal the damage and collect energy. In the second act, exchanges of control over the center happened more often, and players may start using items to get ahead. In the final act, players gather enough points, either by fighting or using cards, to win.
There was little collaboration in the game. Due to the fighting mechanics, players cannot choose who they strike and the damage is divided into “In Tokyo” and “Outside of Tokyo”. The game is a free-for-all with very little ways or reasons to work together.
I believe that the overall metaphor is “King of the Hill”. Players must work against each other to hold a piece of territory for the longest time, all while preventing others from reaching it. This “there can only be one” style of game is unlike other games played in this class.
Mow Masters
Rules Update
Madison Hurst
Mow Masters!
Objective:
- The objective of the game is to get as many grass points/cards as you and your opponent mow all the grass on the board in order to end the game.
Materials needed:
- Board
- Grass cards
- Setback cards
- Two dice
- meebles (marks which space/tile was mowed already)
- Paper and pencil to keep track of score
- Iphone timer
Setup:
- Take all of the cards and shuffle them into one deck and place them in a empty space on the board.
- The tallest player will start the game or be the first turn.
Turn:
- Both players are going simultaneously
- The player will roll one dice, and move the amount of spaces of that number on the dice.
- The player can go anywhere on the board, no restrictions.
- The player will pick a card for each space they move. For example, they roll a 2 and move 2 spaces hence pick up 2 cards.
- After you have moved (mowed) a space, you will mark it with a x or a meeble.
(you can still use this space to move around in it but you can not get a card from it.)
Ex: rolls the dice and gets 3, but ⅔ spaces are mowed already. So, you can only pick up one card.
- If you pick up a card that has a setback, you will have to complete the task on the card in order to continue.
- You have approx. 25 seconds to complete the
- Out of gas
- Nebby neighbor
- Dinner time
- Reapply sunscreen
- You do not have a time limit with:
- Mower broke
- Dog poop on the blade
- If you do not complete the setback challenge within the time constraints then you have to remove one grass card point from your pile.
Winning/Losing:
- Once the whole lawn is mowed, and there is no more space to collect cards then the game is over.
- Count up your points, and the points win.
Game Review: Citadels – Bryce Mathews
I found Citadels to be a uniquely fun game that relies on player interaction in a way unlike any other cardboard game I have played so far. The game play loop encourages hiding your strategy while constantly changing it to remain elusive from other player’s.
After players understood the game. IT became clear that, to win, offensive attacks were required to prevent others from gaining a lead. Before, players would seek the character cards that allowed them to build more, or gain more wealth. Later on in the game, players picked cards that harmed others more often.
Citadels was one of the harder games to technically understand. Learning its flow, and the intricate set of steps needed was slightly frustrating, especially because the game often failed to justify why we needed to perform these actions initially.
To me, the most frustrating aspect of the game was learning it. I believe that the game did not fully explain its mechanics well to new players. We spent a significant amount of time trying to understand what cards meant, and how the round was supposed to start. We also complained, as mentioned before, that the game did not explain the reason as to why things happened the way they did. The sense of discovery finding out what the game’s intentions were was satisfying, but it took us a while to get there.
My favorite aspect about playing the game was trying to fool other players into assassinating cards they believed I had. I drew a different character card, because I knew that I would be targeted if I picked a king. I was able to fool the assassin into targeting the wrong person, allowing me to stay ahead.
I wanted a purple character card in the original deck of characters. Since there are no purple cards in the standard character deck, and the cost of purple cards are high, it did not feel worth the effort sometimes. I would also add more cards that benefit players regardless of their character.
I would add more fun characteristics to many of the character cards. It did feel as though players only picked 4 of the 8 cards we had.
Yes. Citadels offers a unique pseudo-role based experience unlike many other games that I have played. The strategies that people develop in the endgame pit them against each other nicely.
The first act is centered around the initial setup and the first round. Players understand the basics and pick whichever card they think is best, usually a Merchant, Bishop, or King. In the mid game, players have around half the cards needed to win, so players must choose to play defensively or offensively (depending on the character cards they get). In the end game, players attack and sabotage more often in the race to the end.
There was little collaboration in our game. We did not feel as though players could successfully collaborate much beyond choosing to attack one player over another. There were many competitive aspects, however. The role-based system allows players to use their own means to succeed, and players are called in a specific order to prioritize players who take offensive actions first.
In my opinion, the highlight of this game is the dynamic turn order. Players do not proceed in any set fashion, but are called to act by the “king” of the round. The character you chose determines your sequence. This means that players can study the cards drawn and deduce who they think their opponents are, and act accordingly. I used this method to discover a hidden Warlord and steal their resources. The game rewards players who take risks and play offensively. The game’s metaphor describes the unique roles everyone plays to build an empire.
5 Themed Game Ideas
Theme: Chakras
- Chakra Crusade- This is a collecting card game where the goal is to achieve balance by gathering chakra sets. Each player must collect five cards of each chakra color to reach total harmony. The first player to complete all chakra sets wins.To add strategy and interaction, there are action cards that can alter other players’ progress. For example, an action card might block a chakra, steal one from an opponent, or temporarily disrupt their balance. This creates both competition and tension as players race to complete their chakra collections while managing obstacles from others.
- Balance- This is a collaborative game, where all players must help the board reach total balance, by aligning all their chakras. During the game, players take turns taking actions and drawing cards that will either help them align the chakras or cause problems that alter their progress. Players win whenever all the chakras are aligned, or if the deck runs out and the players do not align all chakras then they lose.
- Spiritual Journey is a dice and movement game where players travel along a path toward the Crown Chakra, collecting chakra tokens along the way. Each turn, players roll dice to move forward, landing on spaces that present different outcomes such as challenges, setbacks, or energy boosts. When a player successfully overcomes a challenge or lands on an energy space, they earn a chakra token that represents balance in that area. The goal is to collect all seven chakra tokens before reaching the Crown Chakra. The first player to arrive at the Crown Chakra with all their chakra tokens wins the game, completing their spiritual journey to harmony and enlightenment.
- Chakra Crash is a competitive head-to-head game where players begin fully enlightened, with all their chakras aligned. The goal is to maintain your own balance while disrupting other players’ chakras using action cards. Players take turns playing cards with abilities such as “Meditate to be safe from attacks until your next turn” or “Use Heart Chakra to heal a lost chakra.” Once players are out of chakras they are out of the game, and whoever is left with whatever chakras they still have, wins the game.
Chakra-enga- this game is a version of jenga, and is a collaborative game, rules are the same as regular jenga. But there are special blocks with chakra labels on them and all players must gather all the chakra blocks to win without making the tower fall, but if it falls players lose.
Game Response – Carcassonne
Carcassonne is a world building game where players take turns placing random tiles and meeples to connect their real estate to gain points.
Was it fun? It was alright
What were the player interactions? Player interactions consisted of sort of chance on what the other people would do and where they would place there tiles.
How long did it take to learn? Not very long
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played? As the game progressed, not being able to place meeples on unclaimed land that you didn’t just place
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played? It was simple and kinda cute
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t? Yes, place meeples on unclaimed land you didn’t just place
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything from the experience, what would it be? Same as the previous answer
Is this a game you would play again? Maybe, it is a maybe not a yes because it wasn’t quite engaging enough to play a lot
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure. Setup, placing tiles and meeples and accumulating points and land, farming should be the third act but none of use really wanted to do it and count all those points so someone won before we got to act 3
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? Collaborative on an unofficial level where you can try to convince people where to put their tiles to either help you or other players, competitive in the fact that well you are trying to simply get the most points and win
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? The metaphor is around medieval estate collecting and establishing kingdoms, i liked the mechanic of chance of what tile you place and needing it to match up with tiles on all sides.
Game response – King of Tokyo
Was it fun?
Yes, I thought it was a fun game.
What were the player interactions?
Player interactions were adjusting points and health wheels, moving their player in and out of Tokyo, rolling dice, and collecting/ spending energy points.
How long did it take to learn?
It did not take long to learn at all, but we also had it explained to us instead of reading the instructions.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?
The most frustrating part was the luck of the dice, since it was all luck you could base your actions on. It was hard to plan a strategy or anything “stable”.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
Even though the dice were the most frustrating, I thought it was the coolest aspect of the game because you could only do actions according to the dice.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
There were times I wanted my character to leave Tokyo, but I couldn’t because I wasn’t being attacked. Then even when I wanted to leave Tokyo, I was still taking damage.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
from the experience, what would it be?
The only thing I would like to see in this game is more character, and how the game would go if there were more players. Obviously, the game would have to be altered to meet this like having more spots in Tokyo, and more characters.
Is this a game you would play again? Yes _____ No ______ Why
Yes, because our game was quick because I reached 20 points, but normally the game runs longer and is more competitive. I would like to play the game to experience different strategies and outcomes.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
The first act of the game is setting up the game, choosing characters, and starting your first dice rolls. This helps introduce the game to the players. The second act is when characters start battling for Tokyo and start losing/ gaining points, hearts, and energy cubes. Players start to gain leads and die off at this point in the game. The last act is when stakes are high and players start making risky decisions to try and survive, and then finally when the last player is standing or someone reaches 20 points they are then the King of Tokyo.
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
The collaborative aspects of the game would probably only be trying to stop others from winning either by points, killing each other off, etc… The game mostly focuses on competitive aspects of the game which would be harming (taking hearts away) other players, gaining points, buying cards with benefits, and being in/out of Tokyo.
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics stand out?
The game’s metaphor is monsters trying to take over Tokyo by eliminating other monsters, and seeing who will be the King of Tokyo. The game’s mechanics that stood out were rolling the dice, moving characters in and out of Tokyo, and the personalized score boards with adjustable heart health and points.
Game Response – Citadels
Was it fun?
Yes, I thought it was a very fun game.
What were the player interactions?
The player interactions were picking characters, doing role calls (which I thought was a very cool aspect), and collecting gold.
How long did it take to learn?
It took awhile to understand, and we struggled the most with the characters and what to do with extras. But after we got the hang of it the game flowed well.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?
The most frustrating part was when you got to pick your character last, and the person who picked before you knew what character you were because there were only two to choose from.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?
I liked being able to pick my own character, and planning what cards I should be collecting. I also really liked the role call aspect, I thought it added a fun touch.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?
There was nothing I really wanted to do that I couldn’t.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
from the experience, what would it be?
I would maybe add two or three more character cards. I know there were extra for a harder version included, but I think it would add some more randomness/ guessing when targeting players.
Is this a game you would play again? Yes _____ No ______ Why
Yes, because I thought it was very engaging and enjoyable, and the group I was playing with was very competitive and made it fun.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
The first act is the game set up, everyone first gets a hand of cards with districts that they could possibly build, and gets a feel for the flow of the game and all the characters actions. The second act is when people start building their districts, planning strategies to try and win, and stopping other players from taking their turns/ building districts. The third act is when players are getting close to building the set amount of districts, and finally one who reaches that amount first wins.
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?
The collaborative aspects of the game would probably only be trying to stop others from reaching the goal of districts, but this game is more competitive than collaborative. The competitive aspects are reaching a district goal first, destroying districts, assassinating characters (losing a turn), swapping cards, and stealing gold. All of these aspects create tension between players.
What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics stand out?
The metaphor is about power and influence in a medieval kingdom. Players take on shifting roles of different characters, each representing a way to gain wealth, gain control, or sabotage other players. The act of building districts stands in for constructing a city and proving dominance in the kingdom. The mechanics that stand out are building districts, choosing characters, and using character powers to interfere with other players actions.
Game Questions Camel Up
Madison Hurst
Was it fun?- Camel Up was a really fun game, and I loved the whole concept of it. I thought it was different from a lot of games because you didn’t choose a camel to win. I liked how they used the concept of betting on the camels, like you were watching the Kentucky Derby. It was pretty fun trying to predict which camel would win the leg and trying to see who would win the most money.
What were the player interactions? – The player interactions is not directly affecting each other. I would say the theme of the game is “ best bet wins” in a sense. Every player gets the chance to roll the dice and see what camel moves if that is the action they take during their turn. I would say the only interaction that would affect the other players is how quickly someone picks up a bet card for camel, which would lessen the amount of coins the following person would get if they bet on that same camel.
How long did it take to learn?- We ended up watching a quick 8-minute video about how to play Camel Up, and briefly read over the directions. I would say it took about 15 minutes and around the end of the first leg to fully understand the game.
What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played? – The most frustrating part about the game was only having one action on your turn. For instance, I couldn’t place a bet and roll the dice to see which camel moved up on the space. Though I can see why there was only one action, because they came could’ve been a lot faster or too easy.
What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played? – My favorite moment of the game was the aftermath of placing a bet and winning. I really enjoyed reading the game and seeing which camel was more likely to win or get second place. I also didn’t mind the twist of the crazy camels going the other way in order to make the game more unpredictable.
Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t? – One thing I wanted to do but couldn’t was place multiple bets in one action. I wanted to place two bets at once to possibly benefit me, but I couldn’t and had to wait a whole round. When it came back to my turn, either the reward of that bet decreased in value or the leg ended.
If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything
From the experience, what would it be? – I would love to change the value of the betting cards and increase them. I think it would add more risk and reward to this game. I think I was rash with betting at some points because the risk/reward wasn’t high enough. The other thing I would change is something with the rogue camels, and making them more of an issue.
Is this a game you would play again? Yes , I would play this game again because it was super fun and I enjoyed the concept of it. I am not into any type of betting games, but I like this game because it’s not actually an issue, and it’s fun. I really loved reading the game and trying to see what cards to bet. I also loved the design of the board game and the camels.
Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.
In the first act of the game, every player is figuring out how to play and what cards, tokens, and dice mean. Everyone is not reading the game as quickly or to their full extent because we were still learning. I think the only part that everyone struggled to grasp was the player they chose and what bet they placed.
In the second act, everyone now understands the game, and we are in the second leg of the race. Bets are being placed, and we are starting to see which camel is taking the lead. In this case, this was the blue camel by far (ended up winning the race). Players are taking cards to see who is going to win the leg, and we are rolling the dice to see which camel is going to move. This is the act that the majority of the game is in, and things start to heat up as we close out the game.
The third act is when final bets are made and players are placing their player cards on the final winners/losers. I was rolling the dice and reading the other camel’s spots, and seeing which cards to bet in order to get the most amount of coins. The ending of the game is when the first camel crosses the line, and this is when all bets are final. Each player will count up how many coins they won/lost. The person with the most coins wins!
What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?- This game is a competitive game and not much of a collaborative one. The competitive side of the game was fighting for the highest betting cards and trying to get as many coins as possible in order to win. The collaborative side of the game was that every player had the chance to benefit from the same camel. There wasn’t a camel that any player couldn’t bet on.
What is the game’s metaphor, and which of the game’s mechanics stand out?- The theme of the game is a desert camel race, where the player is a spectator and betting on which camel will win. The mechanics of this game are the ability to stack camels and how they affect which camel is in 1st or 2nd place. There are rogue camels that affect where the camels are placed on the board. Moreover, the pyramid dice rolling plays a factor as a mechanical part of the game because there is uncertainty and randomness in it, which can either push the camels to the lead or not even move a space.
5 Themed Game Ideas (Ghosts)
I decided that my theme will be Ghosts.
- “The Haunt” is a board game in which players must compete to posses a human and escape a house of trapped souls using strategies to learn their victim’s identity.
- “Ghost hunters” is a card game where players must evade capture by world renowned ghost hunters using the tools they come across to win.
- “Spirit’s Revenge” is a collaborative board game where players collaborate to hunt down a mysterious and elusive spirit using the clues found around the location.
- “Battle of the Boos” is a strategy game where players compete to be the head of the house using the clues of this opponents identities.
- “Ghost Stories” is a card game where players must compete by building the best ghost story using the cards they draw and pass to others.