Would the chosen control scheme match with the desired player experience?
Yes, the game will be a 2d “drag and drop” style game. The controls will be pretty minimal as to allow players to hopefully focus on the strategic and analytical decisions a player must make on their turn. The controls are not “skill based” like aiming your mouse in a shooter, rather the choices the player makes are the most important part. Having some sort of physical skill would provide an unnecessary barrier and would not fit the player experience. This question is important because a misalignment between what the player is trying to do and the way in which they are doing it could make a great game mechanic fall apart. I think the easiest way to prototype it is to make a slightly simplified paper and pencil version of the map board, along with cards that act as resources or other collectables that a player can possess. The interaction method can also be preserved as clicking or physically placing a game piece on a map would be similar in the fact that they are not adding a further challenge to the game. I predict that most of the mechanics will translate well to a 2D environment, but I may have to make some creative UI solutions for some of the mechanics around player contracts.
Can players easily understand the core gameplay mechanic.
The core goal of the game is to accomplish an objective that is hidden from every other player. I think naming such a goal the “win condition” or perhaps something that is more related to the story/atmosphere of the game could fit better. However, some of the other mechanics in the game may require some sort of tutorial or rules to be given to new players ahead of time. I am hopeful that experienced gamers would more easily recognize and be able to use familiar strategies or elements. This question is key in assessing the games difficulty and learning curve, which is one of the main drivers of player retention and long-term interest. A digital prototype that focuses only on the trading and hidden objectives systems could help measure this inital comprehension without exposing the prototype testers to the full complexity of the game all at once.
Do the image representations of game elements convey the intended mechanics?
For the answer of this question to be yes, the visual design of the game pieces/tokens/icons must prioritize clarity rather than aesthetics. Each resource should be independently colored, and territory ownership/control should be clearly outlined in some fashion. I have an idea that the UI could visually separate different strategic elements from more tactical choices to help the players more easily organize their thoughts/decisions. This question is relevant to balancing the cognitive load that the game places on the players; if deciphering the visuals is an intended mechanic, then having them be complicated is an intended choice of the designer. When visuals are not part of the mechanics of the game, then they should clearly convey their purpose to even first time players. I think a static UI mockup in figma or on paper would be helpful in seeing if players can easily identify different elements’ roles and functions. I am guessing that more standard strategy game conventions will work well here, having cool looking art is nice, but what is more important is that information is clearly conveyed.
