The objective of our game is to create an improv style drawing game that centers around a secret code. Each pair of players has a shared code, but they don’t know who their “partner”, or the person who has their same code, is. Everyone draws based on a prompt, and their goal is to include their code within their drawing. Depending on whether there are odd or even players, there are 1-2 odd ones out in that they do not have the same code as any other players. Their role is to guess other pairs’ codes and confuse them. At the voting round, every player will choose who they think their code partner was, but if someone chooses the odd one out, they win.
How can we ensure proper pacing of the game to ensure efficient and urgent play?
The importance of this question centers around user engagement and proper difficulty. If the game ended too fast or was too slow to start, we would lack the initial fun that our game needs to continue on for multiple rounds. Thus, a prototype with a timer for multiple rounds that decreases the amount of time available per round would add more urgency to the game. Then, we can gauge the appropriate length of time for deduction and shift the difficulty of the play as well. My guess is that there will be a specific amount of rounds (a prediction of 5) the teams play before players start getting exhausted, and the time limit difference between each round needs to be drastic enough for players to feel the rush.
How do we balance out the power the “odd one out” will receive to aid their sabotaging vs. the players who have to guess the “odd one out” to win?
This question is important not just for the difficulty of the game, but also the pacing. A game where the “odd one out” has the abilities to see what the other codes are, for example, would make it too easy for them to sabotage, while not giving them enough outside “powers” would make it so the game would go on for too many rounds. A prototype that can test this is for the “odd one out” to get hints to the code, and the amount of rounds played during the playtest as well as player deductions will be evaluated to see whether or not the hints were needed. My guess is that the “odd one out” will need only one-two “hints” or “additions” before the game will get too difficult for the rest of the players.
How do explore the scalability of our mechanics for group size (and factors such as odd vs. even numbers)?
This question was essential to our team as the concept of “odd one out” varies when there are odd or even players. This was an important question to answer when considering the mechanics of the game too, which should level out the game’s difficulty no matter how many players are involved or, even, what the prompts are. In taking those factors into consideration, a prototype that would help explore this question follows an idea similar to Secret Hitler where different modes of play have different mechanics. The game would have 1-2 odd players out depending on whether the game is odd or even, and the prompts shifted from “nouns” that players have to draw to “adjectives” to ensure all rounds played would have similar difficulty for group size. My prediction for the prototype is that players will approach the game differently and deduct differently based on whether there are odd or even players, which is something they can assess as it can be an extra clue for them. Other than that, I believe the prompts would have the potential to be too difficult, and if so, we can decide to make the codes adjectives instead.
