Creating EndangerED was informative and fulfilling. After playing Epipen Tycoon, I was initially nervous that creating a “teaching game” would require preachy lessons, or prioritize education in an unfulfilling, gamified manner; I was delighted to learn otherwise, and particularly entranced by how scattered bits of learning through interaction with game mechanics or other players could still establish “teaching games” that didn’t sacrifice fun or balance to get across its message. After final playtests and iterations, I personally believe we made what is first and foremost a delightfully fun game that also succeeds in teaching players about conservational competition.
EndangerED afforded fun through challenge, discovery, and fellowship, and my group specifically tuned mechanics to work in favor of both fun and teaching not only that conservation is difficult because of finances or natural causes, but that efforts to preserve animals often leads to competition for limited resources. To harness fun through discovery and simultaneously showcase how researchers are still searching for suitable habitats, we had players flip over tiles and find out what resources they had to harness. To emphasize how coexistence isn’t always possible, we placed limitations on animal migration and how many animals can exist on a tile. We tied every action to money, forcing players to quickly realize how constantly they needed more funding. We also had players impacted by events both natural and based on corporate or conservational input, which made players realize how their fight wasn’t just against nature or man, but both. And of course, we ultimately had players fighting over limited resources to support their animal, often sabotaging somebody else. From all of these challenges, players felt triumphant whenever they succeeded, and found fellowship through their mutual plight—that is, until they embraced the cutthroat competitive nature the game attempted to induce and teach them about.
Through these interactions, I personally believe we tailored our game to appeal greatly to the Killers of Bartle’s Taxonomy of Players, whilst not being overwhelmingly in their favor/unfun for others. In attempting to satisfy this demographic, I learned a lot about modifying mechanics to affect the emotions of my players in a way to achieve learning and design goals, and I believe that most choices became successful: hearing seasoned players say that they believed we were only a few minor adjustments to being a game they would genuinely play with their friends was empowering. Likewise, watching our mechanics create an aesthetic where players perfectly emulated real-world conservation efforts by choosing to “sacrifice” other players’ animals to best protect their own made me think: this game fulfilled its purpose; I did something right along the design process.
While I leave this project proud, this pride comes from gained experienced: in threading theoretical mechanics into core ideas; in approaching an ambitious concept and making it work; in creating a game for an outcome besides simple fun; and, notably, in laser cutting. Going forward, I can’t wait to continue molding experiences for not only players, but myself.
