As context, we plan on building “Rise of the Robots”, a board/card game themed after a robot apocalypse: the majority of humans must make it to the safe zone (the other end of the board) without dying, but some players are robots in disguise. If even a single robot makes it to the safe zone, then the humans lose.
Do players feel incentivized to work as a team or alone?
In our game, we plan to offer the mechanic for players to move as a group if they land on the same square—in doing so, they may unlock “team events” and potentially move more spots/get more privileges. However, there is also the chance that the robot will be a part of the team and their reaching the end will be accelerated. As such, this question is important to ask to see if benefits of the mechanic should be either improved or worsened in order to prevent unfairness.
In order to answer this question, we can prototype with iterations that either feature or exclude the ability to join another team, assessing if one iteration appears more fair and/or more entertaining.
I predict that a robot that joins a human team will be greatly advantaged over the humans on their team, causing a shorter game that may not be as fun for the players.
How might we make our players feel connected through this game?
Beyond the theming and mechanics of the game, the overarching goals of the game are to connect people. Feeling close to their teammates is also important to ensure that players feel invested in doing well. This game features fellowship and social deception; alliances, trust, and betrayal are a key part of the gameplay.
To answer this question, we may potentially test a card-centric variant of the game that goes around the circle of players without having to progress a piece across the board. By comparing this with the default version, featuring both the cards and the board, we may see if this format facilitates more conversation and inclusion across members as their turn is spotlighted.
I believe the card-only format would offer more time for individual discussion, but the physical board would be beneficial to visualize teams as they move along the board—as such, I predict that the card and board format will best facilitate connection.
How can we make the player feel immersed in the fantasy?
The theming of the game as a robot apocalypse is important as a driver of the game’s plot, and also serves as motivation for the player to do well. Posing the humans losing as “the end of humanity”, for instance, might make the stakes higher and more entertaining for the players.
Playing with a physical prototype of the board and cards that adheres to the game’s theme would be one way to test the effectiveness of physical components in setting the scene. For instance, one event card could feature the event “Scan for viruses” to test any one player on if they are a robot or not.
I predict that both a themed board and cards will further the players’ immersion in the game. As a visual cue, having the board go from dark and apocalyptic on one side to bright and safe on the other can make the players feel like they are continuously moving their pieces towards safety, in line with the plot of the game.
