Category: Game Design Studio 1

Posted on

JackBox, Stupid Inventions

Emily Buzzie – Game Design

The goal of this game is to finish various prompts, get shown 2 random prompts that were filled out by other players, draw a ‘stupid invention’ to solve the problem said in the prompt, and then vote on other players inventions, which are given a title and tagline before presented. 

Was the game fun?

This game was a lot of fun. I’ve never played it before, and it made a good first impression. Due to the mad lib style prompts, randomization, varying drawing skills, and creative titles and taglines made the game very different for each player. Even during the second round, when given the same prompt, everyone’s inventions, names, and taglines were so different from one another.

Interactions between players

Some interactions between the players include finishing prompts for other players. Each player gets to finish a prompt or two, which is then given to another player to pick from. So when you are drawing, you are creating an invention for other players’ prompt. Another interaction would be the voting process. Once everyone has drawn their invention, and created a title and tagline, all the other players vote on each other’s work. This determines points, and ultimately the winner. Everyone’s reason for voting is different, personally I choose the funniest invention or the invention that I would want and use. 

How long did it take to learn?

As mentioned earlier, this was my first time playing this specific JackBox game, and it didn’t take very long at all. There is a narrator that explains a little bit in the beginning, and continues to explain each step and each time something appears on the main screen and phone screen. It was very easy to pick up, no confusion, and very quick to catch onto. The title helps with this, as the goal of the game is to make a stupid, funny, helpful invention. 

Would you play again?

I definitely would. I have played JackBox before, but never Stupid Inventions, it is already one of my favorites, if not my favorite. Getting able to draw was fun, but getting to decide the title and tagline was somehow more fun to me. Voting was the most fun, in the whole game, it was super funny to see what everyone came up with. All in all, I would 100% play this game again. I feel like no matter how many times I played and who I played with, it would be different each time.

Posted on

Jackbox Review: Patently Stupid

Patently Stupid opens with a great deal of dialogue. This dialogue has no obvious option to include subtitles.  Since the dialogue goes on for some time, subtitles would make it easier for people to follow and more accessible for those with hearing issues. The game includes an option to skip the dialogue entirely, but since it is all spoken there is no way to make the intro go faster without skipping it entirely.  This could cause impatience, particularly when a game is played with some players who have already played and don’t need the intro and other players that need it.

The different steps of the game include timers.  This is important because it prevents the game from being frozen forever if a player’s device gets stuck or if they stop playing without leaving the game.  However, the timers are only located at the bottom of the main screen and not indicated on the players’ individual devices.

During the presentation stage of the game, each player gets to choose between “Present for Me” and “I will Present”.  Choosing the “I will Present” option takes the player to a menu where they can control which aspects of their project are displaying on the main screen for the other players.  The issue with this is that the menu screen takes a moment to understand at first glance, and the entire presentation is done in real time.  This means for a first time player choosing this option, it is very possible they will be too pressured to think through what order they want to present different items in. The gameplay could be improved if the players all chose at the same time how they would present and then had time to prepare their presentation before being put on the spot.

As a whole, the game felt aimless until the final round. The structure of the game wasn’t clear until it was over, and at any given time there wasn’t a clear view of where it was going. Overall, the game was too close to the corporate brainstorming sessions it is trying to mock to be a fun experience.

Posted on

JackBox Game Review: Split the Room

I find some JackBox games interesting because most of the time you want to win in the end but you need the support of others to get you there. In Spilt the Room, you are given a hypothetical situation with a fill-in-the-blank. A few multiple choice answers are given. You win more points in a round if the majority vote picks the same multiple choice answer you did.

How long did it take you to learn the game?

At the beginning of the game, we are introduced to a narrator who looks like a cat butler. He explains the game and takes you through the different prompts that will show up on your phone. I have played JackBox before, therefore, I knew that I would using my phone to interact and a TV to see the responses. I thought it was helpful that the cat butler narrated through the whole game because it gave more context and personality to the game itself. After the second round of answering the hypothetical scenarios, I caught onto the game.

How do you interact with others?

You interact with other by seeing what answers they decide in each round. I find it interesting to see how everyone answers to a scenario. Depending on the people and scenario, you might not know how people will answer. There is not a lot of physical dialogue between players but I also think that depends on the group of people you are gathered around.

Would you play it again?

I would try it again. I would not play it as regularly as some other games I play because I think it requires a good group of people but given the right context, yes.

Posted on

Jackbox review Zeeple Dome

I have played many jackbox games over the years, and for the most part I enjoyed the majority of the games and think that they are well made, both from a artistic and technical standpoint. Sadly, Zeeple Dome is not as polished as the other games Jackbox has made. This is both due to the game itself, as well as the technical issues surrounding it. For starters zeeple Dome requires you to essentially aim your character in the right direction. While this would feasibly be a good mechanic when you are physically in front of the screen, when online the input delay is large enough that aiming resorts to aiming in the general direction and just hoping that your character will hit the enemy. Another aspect of the game that isnt really well explained are the enemies. Usually with jackbox tutorials they give you a good understanding of how the game works, while still keeping it simple and easy to understand. Zeeple Dome doesnt even explain the mechanics of the game, ESPECIALLY how the enemies work. In fact I didnt even know we had to hit the enemies specifically when they light up with our characters colors, until Tasia said so in the chat around 15 minutes in. Normally I think that the player could figure these things out on their own, but there are so many characters and particles bouncing around everywhere that analyzing what happens when you hit an enemy is unlikely. Overall, Zeeple Dome has fun mechanics that theoretically would result in a fun game, but the lack of explanation of how the game works, as well as the frustrating delay in the controls results in a unfun experience.

Posted on

Lava checker reflection

Checkerboard lava game review

After the initial playlets of this game, I found that the general mechanics work well with little issues. The reason that it played well is because it is checkers rules with a slight twist. Since I used the standard rules of checkers as my base, it was easy to make adjustments that wouldn’t hinder or over complicate the game. My favorite aspect of the game was the possibility for the board to change (by flipping the lava tiles). Players can use this to their advantage to try to block or maneuver the opponent to their benefit. Since the initial creation I made it a rule that each player can only turn over a certain amount of tiles and disabling them. This limits the players and makes a point of incorporating strategy into the game.
Some kinks that need to be worked out include the number of pieces on the board. From the first round of playing, there were only 5 per player, but I think this makes the game start a little slower since both people have to be a little more cautious of their moves and what happens. If they had more pawns, then it would increase the initial stage of the game and allow players to get more aggressive—therefore making the game more interesting. The question is though, how many pawns should they have if more than 5. I think this ties into the size of the board. Since the board size can also be negotiated at the start of each game (allowing for a change in strategy and decreasing predictability)-the number of pawns should depend on the board size. Somehow a ratio should be worked in to this. My idea is to provide several variations in board sizes and then give the number of pawns for each potential game set. This will still allow for user creation by provide more structure as a basis to go off of.
In conclusion though, although I liked the mechanics of this game and think that it does have potential, I have decided not to pursue this idea. A major reason is because it is so heavily based off of checkers, it feels almost finished with little room for my own creativity. It’s simplicity doesn’t appeal to me and I would like to continue with a game that has a lot of room for growth and idea development. I want to challenge myself and I don’t think this game allows for much other potential.
Posted on

Carcassonne Review

Carcassonne Review

My initial opinion of this game upon playing it was daunting, after being brain fried and tired and I wasn’t prepared for a high intensity strategic game. Fortunately for myself, Carcassonne is the perfect balance where it require strategy and attention with multiple interconnected parts, but with an ease of catching on. After the first half of the semester and playing various games, I have developed an appreciation for games that are complex in parts but can be learned just by starting and seeing where it goes.
The building of the board game was my favorite component, as I’m sure it is with most other players. This dynamic took something that would have been simple and redundant and allowed the user to interact and call the shots- allowing each game to be different and cause different outcomes.
Taking a step back, I really appreciated the rule set, specifically the pictorial references to show exactly what it meant. This is an aspect I’d like to include in my game (if its complicated or hard to describe with strictly words).
Posted on

Week 10 – Game Design

Game Review

Bohnanza

Bohnanza is a colorful bean card game in which you must trade, plant, and harvest bean cards to eventually collect coins which help you win the game. Once the third season ends, or third decks runs out, the game ends and players count their coins. The most unique part of the game is that you can’t rearrange your hand and you must play the cards in their order. The game involves negotiating, trading, and managing your hand. The game was not hard to adjust to after the first round. I think it could work well as a gateway game because it has replay value, it’s fairly simple, uses luck, and has an overall fun appeal.

Posted on

Week 9 – Game Design

Game Review

Neon Highway, a space-themed broad game playthrough went fairly smooth. The game was easy and simple enough to play but I don’t feel like it had much replay value. The game was almost too simple with mechanisms similar to Candyland and Chutes and Ladders. The theme and style were appreciated but the gameplay will have to be corrected and improved to keep the players more interested. I could add more board conflict such as an alien fleet of enemies or a more variety of cards.

Posted on

My Game Reviews

As for my Lyric game, I feel like it was very successful. Everyone seemed to enjoy playing it. I need to work on things like time–how much time do they have to answer? Also adding more categories.

For my checkerboard game, I was not exactly happy with it. I think it needs a lot of improvement. I plan to start from scratch and redesign the board again. The spaces did not work with the dice and the game went too quickly. I plan to add a few different tactics to improve it.

Posted on

gnome playtest

Gnome game play test

After excitedly composing my rule set and the game pieces for my gnome game, I put it to the test in class on February 28th. Unfortunately the game play didn’t last 5 minutes without immediately seeing what corrections were needed. Overall I am pleased with the different components and how they fit together, at this point this is my biggest accomplishment. From the conception of this idea, I wasn’t sure how everything would play out and fit together, but after a lot of time on the drawing board I think I found a good overall layout of the game in how each aspect will work.
The main issue I found through this first play test was that there is not formula or ratio of cards. Therefore, it is takes a big handful of turns to even start any sort of motion on the board. It also didn’t help how unorganized and luck reliant the card aspect is. This is mostly due to the large variety of cards I created. I have learned that instead of 12 different action cards with 2 sets a piece, I should limit the actions to 5 or so. Same goes with my trouble maker cards. I also need to figure out a formula on the ratio of resource cards to the action/trouble maker cards. For instance, the cards that give the most positive feedback should require resource cards that are harder to come by.   With all of this taken into consideration I now know that I really need to think about this mechanic and how it affects the interaction of the players as well.
Some suggestions to fix these issues include:
– having a key card that shows what different combinations are needed to perform the action or trouble maker cards-this will help players dictate which cards to hold onto and which to discard
-incorporating more aspects to the house blueprint-whether it be to include hallways, or sections in the room so its not a simple 3 spaces by 3 spaces. It was also brought to my attention that the instructions are unclear as to which direction you can move in so I will need to elaborate on that portion
-do not show your cards in front of you
The last aspect that I personally need to focus on as well is the suspicion meter. I think I need to think of a different type of punishment for the suspicion meter hitting its max. Initially, you would get sent back to start and I think eventually players will grow sick of this, so maybe instead incorporate a lost turn or have everyone steal a card from you.
All in all I am excited to move forward with this game and explore the different possibilities it has, the first step is just getting the gritty details down to a t.
Posted on

Personal Card Game Review

Collegiate Card Game

My first trial of my prototyped Collegiate Card Game was definitely helpful but proved that I do not wish to move further in elaborating and fixing the game itself. My initial idea behind the game was to showcase the different characteristics of college students and the different opportunities allotted to each based on financial needs, social etc. When it came time to make the rule set I found myself focusing in on only specific elements in hopes to simplify the game initially so that I could elaborate on it after making tweaks at each stage. The end product of my rule set and prototype focused solely on the characters and gaining points towards their “needs” (each character has a different set of points needed for categories such as financial, love, social, and knowledge). You gain these points to fulfill needs by giving up time (each player has a time chips that they can trade to complete an activity which in turn gives them points). While I liked this aspect of incorporating time management I realized through playing that there wasn’t conflict at all which meant  no interaction among players. Conflict is one of the most important components in order to make a game exciting between players and for yourself. Since my game lacked this, it turned into a simple self-fulfillment game where each player simple turned cards and moved on in the game with no important decisions or involvment from the other players. An idea offered by Maddie Ferucci suggested that I could incorporate conflict by making it mandatory to choose how you spend time. For example you have to choose between one thing or another so your needs board is constantly fluctuating. There was also a suggestion to incorporate a dice to add an element of luck to the game rather than giving all the power to the cards you draw. Other factors which need to be considered more is how much time players start off with and if they should be allowed to freely gain time per turn or if they have to manage a set amount established at the beginning of the game. I also need to consider more the amount of cards drawn and discarded as this needs to have more of a purpose than just a simple choice of which card to use and discard- an aspect of punishment would definitely also change this up.
After this first trial of playing I came to the conclusion that I do not want to pursue this game idea further. While it is possible I have found that there wasn’t any interest in any aspect of the game and it resembled the game of life but in a much more boring format. While I liked the initial concept, I realized only the concept has potential. In order to make the game more interactive and enjoyable a lot of different routes would have to be checked out and experimented with and I would prefer to turn my focus to a game with more creativity and imagination.
Posted on

Bang! & Prototyping Review

Over the years, I have played many role-deduction games, such as Mafia, Werewolf, Secret Hitler, and Don’t Mess with Cthulu.  I appreciated how Bang! took this classic game format, and added extra mechanics.  In all of the other games I’ve played, death is immediate; there is never a health bar.  In many of these games, only certain roles can kill others, whereas in Bang!, everyone can kill.

If I had to place the acts, the second act would start the moment the sheriff shoots at somebody, and the third act begins the moment people begin to die or shoot the sheriff.  Given that this game could easily be re-skinned, I am guessing that the mechanics were developed before the theme.

I also had the opportunity to prototype Robert’s Love Triangle today.  The rules were solid and the theme was fun and well-executed.  However, the game became a repetitive grind after a few playthroughs.  This could probably be fixed by adding more variety to the cards or giving the player’s new actions.

Posted on

Sushi Go Review

Game Review

Sushi Go
Sushi Go is a fast paced game that is easy to catch onto. Due to the overall speed of the game, winning is a mix of luck with only a little bit of strategy. You begin the game with a set amount of cards in your hand. You play a card face down and once the other players are ready you reveal what each player chose. The next step is what keeps the game interesting; you rotate your hand to the player on your left which keeps a level of uncertainty. From here you repeat the steps. The overall objective of the game is to match like cards together (so many kinds of a set allots a certain amount of points. The person with the most points at the end of all the rounds wins. This was the first card game I have played where you were not in control of your hand for the entire time. I thought this aspect was really beneficial and upped the stress factor slightly to keep everyone interested. Not to mention that the illustrations really lent a hand to the game itself.
Posted on

1st Playtest of ‘Death Sentence’

The first playtest went surprisingly well for Death Sentence.  There were minimal holes in the rules, gameplay was easy to understand, and everyone had a good time.  Still, there are a few items I need to address:

  1. The name ‘Death Sentence’ is no longer appropriate for the game, and needs to be revised
  2. Some typos in the rules need to be fixed
  3. The theme/lore/idea/background of the game should be added to the rules
  4. A less random trading system has been suggested

If I playtest this game again after Spring Break, these items will be considered, and more official playing cards will be printed through the website makeplayingcards.com.