Monday, November 15, 2004

Response to play testing

Hey everybody,
I think the play testing has gone well. Everyone has had a interesting project to present, and the class hasn’t seemed to have much trouble staying involved. Its nice that everyone is keeping an open mind and having some laughs. Keeping the environment somewhat relaxed seems key. If the person presenting is nervous as hell its hard for them to make themselves clear. And if the testers and observes are able to speak openly about a game without to much pressure to do so, in-class feedback is a lot more sincere and most importantly honest. It seems when teachers end up dragging responses out of the students the rejoinder is usually confusing or just bullshit. If nobody has anything to say it’s a response. Fortunately I don’t think this has happened much in our class and a good amount of dialog has been exchanged during testing. Hope people are enjoying the games as much as I am, a big shout out to everyone who is actively taking part. See yall in class..

Friday, November 12, 2004

Feed back fo Jay

Feed Back for Jay~
Jay your live action Robotron is a great idea for a game. The prototype was a little… ehy not so fun. But I think the game has plenty of potential.
The game is human scale and what we played in the prototype would be categorized as a field game(played on the field platform).
Shooting and paced chasing seem to be the core mechanic. And to me these two things = fun as hell. Playing live action Robotron was not that great to playtest however. I would describe my experience playtesting as short and easy. I was able to kill all the robots in what felt like under 30 seconds. I think this was due to the fact that only the robots were subject to limiting the pace of their movement and I was moving and shooting hella fast all over the place.
Never the less it’s a game. A game that could be vastly improved by the adding a few elements. Most importantly boundaries, the game needs better boundaries, when I was playing I never could tell if I was out of bounds or not, and I think I jumped out a few times without anyone being able to tell. Imagine playing this in a racket ball court or something of the sort, stray nurf darts stuck to the walls, echoing sounds, and the best part someone up agenst a wall cornered by the robots. Consider multiple weapon types that can be picked up in game. Another important element I would suggest would be outlining a system of levels and maps. As a player advances through levels create more challenges like different kinds of robots, ones that can maybe even shoot back or take multiple hits. You could even think about providing better weapons for fighting more sophisticated or larger numbers of robots as a player progresses.
The best thing you got going would be the nerf guns, they seemed to work perty well. No one complained about getting hurt, wile firing the gun was accurate and effective(a hit was recognisable).
The rules for the prototype were outlined well(8), only maybe you could of included how to work the gun for shooting impaired people like Jacob.
I was able to develop a strategy wile playing, it was shoot as fast as I could accurately(not hard with the guns supplied) and move towards what I was shooting at and never go backwards.
For the final product lets see if you can involve some of the stuff I mentioned and maybe even a sound track.
good luck Jay!

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Feed back for Greymundo

Hey Grey,
Yo I think Frisco Wars Has the potential of being a great board game.. a possible SF CLASSIC! Because its so much like risk and other great games, oh and how it allows one player to get all the guns and dominate HAHA! ~Naww, What I really dig about the game is that it is based on actual locations. By using real places in your game you entice players to buy into it. Players draw on personal knowledge of the locations and can immerse themselves deeper into their own fictional narratives based on the games events. For if the game is based on something or somewhere the player is familiar with the player can draw up on previous experience to better role play in the game.
The core mechanic of the game seems to be strategizing agenst the other players to dominate the map with your colored pieces, something most game players have experienced before. With the back story being san Francisco neighborhood street warfare, via the SF MUNI bus routs, Frisco Wars makes this common core mechanic attractive, especially for people acustom to San Francisco.
Something that might need some tweaking are the ratios between the number of game pieces and territories. when I was playing I was wondering how I was going to cover the 29 territories with 20 game pieces. Even though you can win by controlling the bus lines I like the possibility of seeing my color cover the map. I like the combat system but think its unnecessary to randomly distribute the cards and have players reveal them to each other. I think giving players random cards results in unnecessary player advantages, as in my case with the four gun cards. If each player has the same hand there is no reason to reveal their cards. Also as player hands get smaller during combat it would be easier to predict an opposing players next card selection. This could further engage the player and maybe even provide a reason for them to practice.
Over all I think the game was good fun, but I did get to Rep HP and the TL with four gats giving me a hefty advantage and maybe a biest perspective. The rules were organized well and straight forward but make sure they play out well, I wasn’t sure we got to explore them long enof in class to test out the new recruit deployment and non combat movement. Never the less I look forward to the final release. It would be really cool to see a finished product with a nice package full of original artwork. Like a box with cool depictions of SF hoods and gangstas as well as nicely printed uniform cards. You could also have themed game pieces signifying different fictional or real SF gangs or fractions. Anything to make the setup more detailed would be neeto, talk to me if you want some help.
~good luck! I know you’ll make us proud.

Rules for first game prototype

Elliot Shields
Game design as art practice
Rules for first game prototype


The SFAI balance challenge is designed to test students ability to balance physical and mental abilities. The challenge is to compete for the best time over a course of physical and mental challenges. For this prototype there will be two physical stages and two mental stages.

Stage one is a mental test to decide who gets first pic in witch vehicle will transport them to the next stage. The first mental challenge is a simple IQ test contestants have 12 min. to complete. The test is online. When the test is finished, in the order of the best score first, contestants pic witch vehicle to use in the first physical stage. In the event of a tie, a three round game of rock scissors paper will be played to break it.

Stage two, the first physical stage. This stage will test players ability at balancing themselves on a skateboard on flat land. After the start signal contestants must maneuver through a set of obstacles as quickly as possible to the next stage. Contestants cannot intentionally push or interfere with each other for safety reasons. From stage two on contestants will be timed.

Stage three will once agen test mental abilities and contestants will be presented with a math test as soon as they finish stage two. Contestants can choose to answer as many questions as they wish but for each wrong answer 10 seconds will be subtracted from individuals finish time.

Stage four the final stage, is a physical test once agen using the skate board chosen at stage one. Stage two will most likely more challenging than stage two and will take place on more diverse terrain. Each contestant must cross the finish line with their chosen skateboard. The best time wins.