CAGD 170

ePortfolio Post - Project 3

Final Presentation:

Part 1.

Play Testers:

Game Prototype:

 This is the original game board before we decided to cut down the size of the game board.

This is the latest edition of the game board after we cut down the game board size.

Class Pieces:

This is all of the nine class pieces with all of their health represented by the push pins. 

Part 2.

Team Name:

·        Our group number is 19 and our team name is the Gold Team.

·        Our team members consist of Alicia Hill and Cameron Hillman.

Game Name:

·        The game name we came up for our game is Slaughterfield.

·        We chose the name Slaughterfield because in the game the players slaughter their opponent's game pieces as they move their own game pieces along the field to capture the central control point to win the game.

 

Game Summary:

·        Slaughterfield is a turn-based strategy combat and territory control game for the PC.

·        The forces of man and inhuman monsters are locked in an endless war. The players are the commanders on opposing sides, form a squad of dangerous killers that will fight for honor and to their glorious death.

Include Target Audience:

·        The target audience for Slaughtefield are people 25 to 35 years old.

·        Slaughterfield also targets people who are strategy game enthusiasts.

·        Slaughterfield is mainly for the Competitor and the Director types of players as in Slaughterfield the outcome of the game is determined heavily by the players actions with one player eventually winning the war.

Problems Encountered in Both Gameplay via Playtesting Observation as Well as Task Completion Within the Group:

·        There were a few problems we encountered in gameplay and in the play testing observation:

·        The first problem we encountered in gameplay was that the play testing sessions were too long taking anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour.

·        The second problem was that from the feedback we received from the Google online survey form the play testers felt the rule sheet was too long, wordy, and generally confusing.

·        The third problem we realized was that the size of the game board was too big and as a result the play testers were spending too much time on moving their class pieces around the board rather than engaging in combat.

·         The fourth problem was that we realized by shortening the size of the board the play testers had too many class pieces in the now smaller game board. So we now changed the amount of class pieces each play tester had.

·         There were no issues with task completion in the group as both Cameron and I completed all the tasks that were assigned to each of us on time and before the submissions dates.

Solutions to Any Task Completion Issues in Regard to Gameplay as Well as Management of the Project:

·        There were no issues concerning task completion issues.

·        Cameron and I evenly divided the tasks between us.

·        Cameron and I worked on our assigned tasks together during team meetings and apart on shared Google documents.

·        I mainly focused on recording information during the play tests, typed up the documents for assignments, refined the game board design, and drew play testers to play test our game.

·        Cameron focused on assisting the play testers during the play tests with any questions or confusions they may have had concerning our game, creating the core concept of Slaughterfield, refining the documents for assignments, created the rule sheet and class sheet, and assisted with the game board design.

·         In regard to the management of the project Cameron and I kept on top of each other and reminded each other of assignment deadlines, team meetings, and tasks we needed to complete.

What you Would Change About Your Development Process Going Forward:

·        Going forward I would create a video tutorial on how to play Slaughterfield as our game needs a demonstration on how to play.

·         The nature of Slaughterfield is for strategy game enthusiasts and as such some of the play testers in CAGD 170 class were not strategy game enthusiasts and so they were confused and often lost as they do not play these types of games on a regular basis.

·        I would also further refine the rule sheet to reflect the changes we have made to the game, as well as change the length and wording so it does not confuse play testers.

ePortfolio Post - Project 2

Part 1. 

Play Testers:

Game Prototype:

Cards Prototype: 

A Nation Card:

A Plutonium Element Card:

A Uranium Element Card:

Elemental Die Prototype:

Part 2.

1. Group number: 

• Our group number is eighteen.

2. Game name: 

• Our group name is Nuke Squad. We chose Nuke Squad because it relates to our game’s theme about nuclear non-proliferation.

3. Game summary: 

• In 22K, players play cooperatively to beat the Game System. While both players go around the board once, players will calculate their combined population and number of warheads. After both players go around the board once, players will then calculate the Game System’s number of warheads. To win, the combined number of warheads needs to be less than the Game System’s number of warheads.

4. Target Audience: 

• 22K’s intended target audience are people in the age range of 9 to 12 years old. 

• 22K appeals to people in this age range because players can practice their math skills and learn about the political nature of nuclear warfare. 

• This game will also help students in the Elementary and Middle school range practice their math skills by learning to calculate in the tens and thousands.

5. Problems encountered in both gameplay via playtesting observation as well as task completion within the group: 

• The main issue we encountered during playtesting was that it was difficult getting two play testers at the same time to play test the game and so we often had to play with the play tester which made it difficult to properly observe them. As a result Jaime or I had to play with the play tester as their team mate. This made it difficult for us to properly observe the play testers as they played 22K. 

• Our team worked well with each other and we had no problems with deadlines or tasks assigned because we met outside of class and made Google documents to work on assignments together.

• We also set goals for completing assignments and reminded each other of the tasks we each had to complete by either the next class or meeting. 

6. Solutions to any task completion issues in regard to gameplay as well as management of the project: 

• The project manager for our team is Alicia Hill. 

• Feedback we received during the first play test was that we needed to change the game board design as it was a little confusing to players where pieces go. So we changed the game board design by adding spaces for the cards and filling in the center shapes.

• We also added rules for certain situations and made the rule sheet a little less wordy. So we shortened the rule sheet and added rules for certain conditions in the games so that the rule sheet is clearer to the players.

7. What you would change about your development process going forward: 

• Moving forward we would implement into the rule sheet a rule that the game system would also have two Nation cards to even out the playing field. 

• We would also add a special rule where if the conditions are met that if the players get one or both of the less populated Nation cards than the effect of the Uranium card for Option A is doubled for a certain amount of time determined by players rolling a dice. 

• For the final additional rule we would make moving forward we would add in the rule sheet that players need to start on the opposite ends of the game board.

• We would also re-make the rule sheet to reflect the changes we would make moving forward and to work on further refining the rule sheet.

ePortfolio Post - Project 1

Part 1. 

Game Prototype:

Cards Prototype:

Part 2.

1. Group number: 

• Our assigned group number is twenty-one. 

2. Game name: 

• Our group name is HAMN. Nicole and I chose HAMN because it is an acronym of Nicole’s and I names. H. for Hill, A. for Alicia, M. for Martinez, and N. for Nicole.

3. Game summary: 

• In Buzz Boom players play against each other as opponents to destroy each other’s energy drink symbols. The first player to clear the opponent’s board of energy drink symbols, or if the time runs out the person with the most symbols remaining on the board wins.


4. Target Audience: 

• Buzz Boom’s intended target audience are people in the age range of 20 to 32 years old. In this age range the game is more focused on college students and younger adults who consume energy drinks.
• Buzz Boom appeals to people in this age range because energy drinks can help give them energy in their everyday life as they go to work or class, drop off their children, or need to stay up for work or for studying. 
• They can also relate and talk about energy drinks with people younger, the same age, and or older than them.

5. Problems encountered in both gameplay via playtesting observation as well as task completion within the group: 

• The main issue we encountered during play testing was that it was difficult to get two play testers to play the game at the same time. As a result Nicole or I had to play with the play tester as their opponent. This made it difficult for us to properly observe the play testers as they played Buzz Boom. 

• Our team worked well with each other and we encountered no issues while assigning or completing tasks since we often met outside of class. 
• Nicole and I have another class together so after that class we would meet and either complete a task together or would bring the tasks assigned to us the previous class or meeting. 
• We also reminded each other of the tasks we each had to complete by either the next class or meeting. 

6. Solutions to any task completion issues in regard to gameplay as well as management of the project: 

• There were no task completion issues as we assigned tasks to each other and completed them. 
• Nicole and I also had team meetings where we would do tasks together like cutting, gluing, or stapling game pieces.
• For example Nicole and I at a team meeting stapled the redesigned game cards to flash cards so that they are clearer to understand.
• The project manager for our team is Nicole Martinez. 

7. What you would change about your development process going forward: 

• Based on feedback from play testers is to work on aligning the holes in the cardboard energy drink symbols to the graph board. 
• As there was a bit of confusion on the rules and how to play Buzz Boom Nicole and I would re-make the rule sheet.
• Based on the feedback from the play testers Nicole and I would only make a single lose a turn card in the card deck. Also Nicole and I would create several ‘Draw Two’ cards to the deck of cards where players would draw two cards from the deck of cards.