3 questions my team’s various game prototypes might answer for P1 are:
- At the end of each round, everyone will vote for who they think is the/an imposter. Should imposters be allowed to vote?
- This is an important question to answer because one of the core kinds of fun our game aims to evoke is challenge. Therefore, granting imposters the ability to vote alters the level of challenge and allows for the formation of dynamics such as strategizing and coordinating votes amongst imposters (evoking fellowship as well). However, we don’t know if this will make the game more or less fair for all the players.
- The type of prototype I will make to answer this question is a prototype that allows for playtesting with 7 or 10 players as these are the amount of players required to have more than one imposters. As 7-10 players will yield 3-4 rounds, the prototype will have to include enough prompt sets (3-4 real prompts and 3-4 “fake” prompts) for each of these rounds. The prototype can also include pen and paper for each player to write their vote on for the given round. Building a prototype to this extent will allow us to test all versions of the game where there are multiple imposters and compare plays where imposters are allowed to vote and plays where they aren’t allowed to vote.
- My guess about how it will turn out is that allowing imposters to vote will evoke stronger fellowship amongst them as it creates another dynamic for them to coordinate and strategize with one another. This will help the imposters feel greater control over their position in the game—even when suspicions arise against them—keeping them emotionally invested. I also think it should remain fair for all the players as there is never a state where there are more imposters than non-imposters, meaning imposters can’t ever override the majority.
- At the end of each round, everyone will vote for who they think is the/an imposter. Should votes be transparent or secret?
- This is an important question to answer because the choice to reveal players’ votes or not affects how players vote. For instance, if player A, who is not an imposter, is extremely vocal about voting for player B, who is an imposter, secret votes allow player B and the other imposter(s) to vote out player A without threatening their identities, whereas a transparent vote would force player the imposter(s) to strategize in a different form.
- The type of prototype I will make to answer this question is the same protoype as the one for the previous question with an additional rule. To test transparent voting, all players will hold their paper up revealing their vote. To test secret voting, all players will place their paper in a box/bag-like container where the votes can be shuffled and then counted.
- My guess about how it will turn out is that transparent voting may encourage more cautious yet interrogative play, where players will break into discussion as they question others’ votes and justify their own. This will require social deduction skills from players, which may make it hard for players that don’t know one another to assess opponents properly. This could lead to players feeling like they have less control over the game’s outcome as they will have to guess and rely in part luck. In contrast, players that do know one another may find great challenge/competition fun as their prior information on others will aid their social deduction skills in game. On the other hand, secret voting will allow players to vote freely with no consequences, but it may demote feelings of fellowship. It will feel like every player for themselves.
- What is the ideal amount of rounds for a game?
- This is an important question to answer because if a game takes too long to finish, then players may lose interest. Vice versa, if a game finishes too quick, then players may not feel stimulated enough, leading to boredom and thus a loss of interest. Considering that one of the core kinds of fun our game aims to evoke is competition, it is crucial that we maintain players’ investment and their desire to win.
- The type of prototype I will make to answer this question is a prototype that includes 8 prompt sets, allowing for playtesting with up to 8 rounds. We will also need 14 playtesters to test up to 8 rounds (this will simulatenously allow us to test the ideal amount of players for the game).
- My guess about how it will turn out is that the ideal number of rounds will likely fall around 4. This range should be long enough to allow for meaningful engagement, but short enough to avoid boredom. I expect that fewer than 4 rounds may feel too brief and unsatisfying, while more than 4 rounds could start to feel repetitive or drawn out.
