How accessible is the game for different types of players?
This matters because if the game is too confusing or has a steep learning curve, it might push people away, especially those who don’t usually play games. We want to make sure anyone can play it. We can make a simplified version of the game with clear, easy-to-read cards and simple objectives. We’ll test it with people who play games often and people who don’t, and see where confusion pops up. My prediction is that we’ll probably find that too much text or too many rules slow things down. My team thought the game we played during class had too many rules so making a game with not that many would be effective.
How do we make the objectives fun and engaging?
This matters because objectives might be the core of our game, if they’re boring or repetitive, the game dies. We want them to feel exciting so players look forward to pulling new ones. We’ll brainstorm and write lots of sample objectives, then test how players react to them. Are they laughing? Thinking hard? Bored? We’ll revise based on what gets the best energy. My prediction is that the most fun objectives will probably involve player interaction or doing something unexpected!
Does the game feel balanced even when players have different objectives?
This matters because if some objectives are way easier or more fun than others, it could feel unfair or frustrating. We want every player to feel like they have a shot at winning and are doing something cool. We can run several rounds where players switch objectives and score them. We’ll also look at how often people complete objectives and which ones get ignored. My prediction is that we might find that we need categories or levels of objectives (like easy, medium, hard), or rules that let players trade or swap them to balance things out.
