Q1: How can we encourage sabotage while also encouraging teamwork?
- This is an important question to answer because it is the core of our game concept. Since this is a social game that aims to achieve the aesthetic of “fellowship” we want to encourage some sort of teamwork/comradery, while also balancing the competition and sabotage dynamic.
- We can make very simple low-fidelity prototypes with varying levels of sabotage, and test what the limit is.
- I guess that “poisoner” versus the rest of the group (while each member has their own specific goal) will be a good level of sabotage and teamwork, as it would encourage the rest of the players to work together while working towards their own respective goals.
Q2: Will players be able to keep track of the rules? (i.e. how complicated can the game be?)
- This is an important question to answer because if the players are just confused the entire time, then they won’t have the opportunity to have fun. Ensuring that the game is accessible and learnable is crucial to its playability.
- We can make different low-fi prototypes with varying levels of complication, this can be made by just adjusting the roles cards rules rather than the entire game so we don’t have to make lots of entire prototypes.
- I guess that a role with one objective and a game with simple sabotage cards and ingredients cards will be enough complication for the game.
Q3: How will players interact with each other, especially given their roles?
- This is an important question to answer because we are designing a social game so we want to prioritize person-to-person interaction. This is especially important if the game is being played in a party or social setting, as we don’t want to put a damper on the mood (if players get too intense or something).
- We can just make a roles prototype and a very simple gameplay prototype to focus on the social dynamics given players’ roles.
- I’m guessing that players won’t take the roles too seriously (at least to the point of ruining a party… I hope).
