Game Studies/ Project 2: Tabletop Gameplay Information and Data
Game Studies, Bachelor of Design (Honours) in Creative Media
Project 2: Tabletop Gameplay Information and Data
Table of Contents
- Module Information Booklet (MIB)
- Project 2: Tabletop Gameplay Information and Data
- Feedbacks
- Reflection
Fig.1 Module Information Booklet (MIB)
Project 2: Tabletop Gameplay Information and Data
For this part, we need to use various methods, such as conducting playtest responses, observations, interviews and survey by questionnaire to collect primary data for their study. All evidence to support data collection is to be organized well.
Requirements:
- Select and justify suitable primary research methods relevant to the study.
- Carry out the research and collect data.
During weekly tutorials, students must present their progress through Tabletop Sim gameplay sessions. Every student would be expected to record and note feedbacks by the facilitator by written form as posts in their blog or vlog post embedded in their blogs.
Sugar Heist
Sugar Heist is a fast-paced, social card game inspired by Exploding Kittens and UNO, designed with educational twist around glucose metabolism.
Players match Body State cards with the correct Pathway cards to stimulate how the body processes glucose under different conditions.
The game combines strategy, luck and learning, making it both fun and informative as player race to earn ATP points, and outplay their opponents to win.
Week 4 / Playtest with Lecturers
This week, we presented our first draft playtest to the lecturers and received constructive feedback. To improve the game, we held a group discussion and made these changes on new win condition, ATP clarification, and some updates on action cards.
Problem:
- Game objective was not clear enough; Is finishing your cards early an advantage?
- Confusion behind function of stored ATP.
- Incorrect body state: ‘Sick in bed’ does not follow the function of PPP, which is to repair and build.
- Clarified the objective of the game: First person to reach 7 points and yells "glucose!" wins. This is to emphasize one of the strategies is to stay in the game to build up points & not finish your cards.
- Added a new rule: In the case that player doesn’t have Power ATP to deduct and has stored ATP, Stored ATP is downgraded into 1 Power ATP in exchange.
- Updated the PPP matches.
Week 6 / Pre-Alpha Playtest
This week, we ran a pre-alpha playtest of our game, just among our team members. We recorded our gameplay and found some problems while playing. We also improved some game mechanics along the way. It was helpful to try things out and make the game better step by step.
|
| Fig.3.1 Testing our own game |
Problem:
- Too little cards. No balance between negative cards and matches.
- More matches made the probability of having 7 matches on the first more likely.
- We added 6 more matches; 2 glycolysis, 2 glycogenesis, and 2 PPP. Making the total number of matches in the game 22 which equals 31 points.
- Added a new rule of playing maximum 3 matches allowed before the first round.
Week 7 / Alpha Playtest with classmates
This week, we did our Alpha Playtest, which means each group had to prepare their game for others to play. One team member stayed with the players to help explain the rules and observe how they played. We also recorded the session, just like in Week 6. While watching, we took notes on what worked well and what didn’t.
a. First playtest with classmate
Problem:
-
Matching list
of body states and pathways takes too long to follow
due to the number of matches. And it was
hard
for all players to see the list.
- We color coded the cards and added symbols so that players can find it easier to match cards without having to constantly refer to the list.
- Additionally, we made a rule book which has the list of matches if needed.
b. Second playtest with classmates
Problem:
- The game mechanic of drawing cards at the end of each turn made them confused which hindered the game play.
- We updated the game mechanics so that they players draw the card first then decide if they want to play the card they drew or take out a match.
Week 8 / Beta Playtest Preparation
There were no classes this week, but our team met up on campus to prepare for the upcoming Beta Playtest. We divided the tasks among ourselves to make progress more efficiently.
Eugine and Zhi Wei worked on the presentation slides and updated the weekly game mechanics reiteration. Gabriela and Leen focused on designing the cards, including updating the titles and subtitles to match our new theme. Meanwhile, Xiang Lam and I worked on designing the rule book, making sure the instructions are clear, organized, and easy for players to follow. We also added a full match list so players could check if their matches were correct or not.
|
| Fig.5.1 Rule Book First Draft |
We also decided to add a dark humour theme to our body state cards to make the game more engaging and fun. Some of the new card names include “Anxiety after sending risky text,” “Heartbreak jog,” and “Skipped leg day.”
|
|
Fig.5.2 Some of the New Card Name |
Week 9 / Final Iteration (Online)
This week, we had an online progression check with our lecturer. Ms.Anis gave us some feedback on our rule book, especially about the information architecture. She mentioned that the structure could be improved to make it more organized and easier to follow. Highlight the important points more clearly, either by adding emphasis (like bold or colour) or by changing the layout so they stand out better.
Therefore, Xiang Lam and I worked on redesigning the rule book, making sure it now matches the colour scheme of our cards. This not only improves consistency, but also makes the rule book look more visually appealing and easier to understand.
Week 10/ Developing Game Assets
There was no class this week, but our group met up on campus to get some final preparations done. Leen and Gabriela completed the final card designs, and the results turned out great.
|
| Fig.7.1 Final Card Designs |
Then, we printed them out and cut the cards. Everything is starting to look more polished and consistent with our game’s overall theme.
Week 11/ Finalizing Game Assets
|
| Fig.8.1 Final Game Assets |
We needed coloured paper stars to use as ATP points when players successfully match the different pathways with the corresponding body states, and Leen managed to buy it online this week.
Week 12/ Beta Playtest
We conducted our Beta Playtest with two different groups of people — our classmates, and Mr. Shamshul along with his students.
| Fig.10.1 Beta Playtest with classmate |
|
| Fig.10.2 Beta Playtest with Mr. Shamsul and his students |
Problem:
- Game often times ends too quickly due to the high probability of players getting to 7 points early.
- To win the game faster, players were more likely to only take out glycolysis matches because it rewards 2 points and leave out the other pathway matches.
Solution:
- To make the game last longer, we added a new color star (e.g. purple), each game the winner will take 1, and the real champion will be based on the number of purple stars.
- We added a new rule: in the first round, players can only take out 1 match per pathway type. If player does not have all 3 types, then they only put out what they have.
Week 13 / Refinements Before Presentations
After going through several playtests, we realised that quite a few parts of our game had changed — especially the rules. We revised the instructions to make sure they matched the latest version of the game, and also made sure everything was clear and easy to follow.
Game Mechanic Reviews
These are the Game Mechanic Reviews from the playtests:
Fig.12.1 Game Mechanic Review #1
Fig.12.2 Game Mechanic Review #2
Fig.12.3 Game Mechanic Review #3
Feedbacks
Week 6:
- Too little cards. No balance between negative cards and matches.
- More matches made the probability of having 7 matches on the first more likely.
Week 7:
- Matching list of body states and pathways takes too long to follow due to the number of matches. And it was hard for all players to see the list.
- The game mechanic of drawing cards at the end of each turn made them confused which hindered the game play.
Week 9:
Ms.Anis gave us some feedback on our rule book, especially about the information architecture. She mentioned that the structure could be improved to make it more organized and easier to follow. Highlight the important points more clearly, either by adding emphasis (like bold or colour) or by changing the layout so they stand out better.
Week 12:
- Game often times ends too quickly due to the high probability of players getting to 7 points early.
- To win the game faster, players were more likely to only take out glycolysis matches because it rewards 2 points and leave out the other pathway matches.
Reflection
Throughout this project, I gained a clearer understanding of what it takes to develop a game from concept to completion. At the beginning, we started with basic ideas and rough mechanics, but through multiple weeks of testing and feedback, we continuously refined our design.
During the playtests, we received a lot of feedback that helped us identify problems in both gameplay and instructions. This made us realize how important it is to keep the rule book and game components consistent, especially after making many changes. Week by week, we updated things like card designs, rules, and winning systems. This process showed me how even small changes can improve the player experience.
Overall, it was a useful process that taught me how important iteration is when developing a game. The final result feels more complete and polished compared to when we first started.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment