How will the bluffing mechanic impact player engagement and strategy?
The bluffing option, where players hold either a bluff or real card and can be challenged, adds an intriguing layer of deception and risk/reward to the game. It has the potential to increase player interaction and strategic thinking. However, it could also disrupt the flow of the core question-answering gameplay if bluff challenges become too frequent or heated.
To test out this mechanic, we’ll create a simplified prototype that includes bluff cards and allows challenges. We’ll observe how often players choose to bluff, how frequently bluffs are called, and whether this dynamic enhances or detracts from the overall experience. My hypothesis is that giving each player a limited number of bluff cards to use strategically throughout the game will provide the most engaging balance, rather than having a bluff in play every turn. But playtesting will help us evaluate the right ratio of bluff cards to regular cards for maximum fun and strategic depth.
What is the ideal endgame point target and how will it affect game length?
Determining the right point threshold to trigger the end of the game is an important factor in pacing and maintaining player engagement. If the point goal is too low, the game may end before players feel they’ve had a chance to deploy their strategies or answer enough juicy questions. Too high and the game may drag on past the point of enjoyment.
Our prototype will allow us to easily adjust the endgame point total and track key data points like actual game length, player sentiment over time, and the average points scored per round. We’ll test a range of point targets, starting at a lower threshold like 10 points per player and working upward to assess the sweet spot. My initial estimate is that 20-25 points per player will provide a satisfying game length, but data from multiple playtests will help identify the optimal target for our desired 30-45 minute play time.
What player count will provide the best experience and how will turn order work?
The number of players and sequence of turns can have a big impact on a game’s dynamics and downtime between turns. Too few players may limit the variety of responses and social interactions. Too many can lead to long waits and disengagement between turns. We also want to consider whether a consistent clockwise order or randomized sequence works better for turn-taking.
To assess the ideal player count and turn order, we’ll create prototypes for 4, 6, and 8 players and alternate between clockwise and random turn orders. We’ll measure factors like player idle time, instances of repetitive answers, and overall engagement at each player count to determine the range that provides the richest experience. We’ll also gather feedback on whether the consistency of clockwise or the unpredictability of random turns feels better to players. My sense is that 5-7 players will be the sweet spot, with a slight preference for clockwise order, but playtesting these variations will help us make a data-informed design choice.
