Moodring: Party Question Game is a getting-to-know-you game that centers conversation and connections. It was created by Moodring LLC. The target audience is partners or friends that already know each other. For my Critical Play, I played Moodring, using the mobile app, with eight other players – some of who I am only acquainted with.
Moodring is similar to Team 6’s (T6) game in game format and win condition. For example, Moodring and T6’s game have the same mechanics of using prompt cards in a turn-based format. This means that for both games, there is one player drawing a card, and each card consists of a prompt to be answered. Moreover, Moodring and T6’s game have similar objectives of fostering connections between players and strengthening relationships. Although neither game has obvious win conditions, the implicit win condition is getting to know other players through the conversations that should hopefully occur throughout the game.
Despite the similarities between Moodring and T6’s game, they are different due to the intended audiences, game categorization, and how conversation is driven. During my experience playing Moodring, I realized that it is a game for players that already know each other. Many of the prompts ask the players about one another, so it was awkward to answer questions about people I did not know well. I recall players saying, “I don’t know how I should answer this about you,” and “That’s a weird question to ask about them.” On top of this, I believe this was a poor decision on the game designer’s part, since there is no guarantee that players will be equally asked about. Instead of using names, it would have been better if the cards said to answer about the player to the left or about all players. In contrast, T6’s game is intended to be played between players of all relationship stages. This means even strangers can play T6’s game without having to guess responses about one another.
In addition, Moodring and T6’s game categorize their prompts differently. Moodring is categorized into different packs. This means players can choose what kind of prompts they are asked and in what ways they get to know the other players. I believe this was a good game design choice, as it allows players to customize their gameplay experience. Although T6’s game’s prompts also vary across the different categories, they are randomized into a single deck without distinction. Instead, the prompts of T6’s game are then categorized based on level of intimacy, so it can be easily experienced by audiences of varying relationship stages. I think this further categorization into the level of intimacy would have been useful in Moodring, so more players who do not already know one another can play it.
Furthermore, Moodring relies on the players to drive conversation while T6’s game incorporates additional prompt cards to help drive conversation. Moodring consists of each player answering a prompt before it is the next person’s turn, so if players are not forthcoming or comfortable with one another, it leads to little conversation following the responses. But if there is no conversation, it takes away from the depth and goal of Moodring. For instance, following my game of Moodring, one of the players commented that the game was “not fun at first” and “slow in the beginning.” On the other hand, T6’s game incorporates additional prompt cards to drive conversation between players and serve as an icebreaker. After each round, the player that drew the prompt card is asked an additional question drawn from a second deck of cards that asks follow-up questions. Such additional questions may include, “At what age did this start?” or “Why are you keeping this a secret?” T6 hopes to create a game that is more lighthearted, so the additional prompt cards help alleviate the pressure of initiating conversation.
Even though many of the mechanics and details of Moodring and T6’s game slightly differ, they still have similar dynamics and aesthetics. For example, the nature of the prompt cards in both games create a dynamic of vulnerability. As players are prompted to share their personal stories and experiences, it requires vulnerability that fosters trust and intimacy. Additionally, the act of sharing experiences and perspectives creates a dynamic of empathy. Players may realize that they share experiences or where they differ, but the empathy felt towards one another helps them foster deeper connections.
The dynamics of vulnerability and empathy lead to the aesthetics of fellowship and expression. The implicit goal of getting to know the other players serves as the commonality driving fellowship between players. Both games also serve as an opportunity for self-discovery as players are prompted to consider new questions and ideas about themselves (and other players in Moodring) that they have not pondered before.
