What should our evaluation cards or metrics for judging each round look like? (silly situations, superlatives, etc)
This question is really important to answer so we can identify the most fun objective for our game. I think we will need to make multiple prototypes of possible evaluation cards and then play out a couple versions to see which one we are most engaged in. My hypothesis is that playing with silly situations can create an environment with a lot of laughter and creativity, which will make it really fun for students.
In what format should players compete against each other? (one-on-one, around the world style where it’s one-on-one and the winner moves to compete against the next person, whole group at once, etc)
This is important because it determines how our game is played and what form of competition exists between individual players. We would need to create prototypes with different cards and mechanisms to retrieve power-up accessories to try the different versions of players as a formal element. I believe that the “around the world” style of competition will be extremely engaging since the competition keeps building upon itself.
How will trading/negotiation be implemented?
Our group is really excited about incorporating a negotiation mechanism to create at atmosphere for conflict and alliances to form. This is really important to answer because it would impact a lot of the individual strategy when approaching the game. I almost think we would prototype this aspect by multiple play-tests. Games like catan/monopoly have rules where you can only initiate trades on your turn. That could be an interesting rule to play test in our game. Since we haven’t finalized the specific objectives of our game, I think those decisions will influence how we think about trading/negotiation. I think we may need to introduce additional mechanisms to create conflict in order to make trading/negotiations necessary and incentivized for all players.
