Labels

Games Studies - Final Compilation

 

Picture Source: The Aesir | Playstation, Illustration by Sui Ishida

23/09/2025 - 30/12/2025 / Week 1 - Week 14

Aquela Zefanya Soares / 0374377

Games Studies / Bachelor of Design (Honours) in Creative Media / Taylor's University

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LECTURES

Week 1

Core principles:

Player experience: what makes a video game engaging in the first place? need to have positive and negative emotions. the game is considered successful if players show signs of broad emotions. flow state must be optimal between challenge and skill. must have a playful and immersive experience (engagement)

Gameplay mechanics:

  • primary mechanics: the core actions players perform in the game (ex: movement/turn actions, dice rolling, card drawing)
  • secondary mechanics: additional enriching gameplay features (ex: exploration, trading, resource management)
  • feedback loops: positive and negative feedback, dynamic feedback loops

Storytelling in games: better if come up with some story/lore

  • player agency
  • environmental storytelling
  • narrative arcs

Balance and challenge

  • difficulty curve: balance the increasing challenge with player skill
  • skill vs luck: incorporate both luck and strategy to make the game more dynamic and engaging
  • player progression: reward players with growth to provide a sense of achievement that keeps them invested and motivated

Feedback and iteration

  • playtesting: helps identify areas of the game that need improvement or judgment
  • feedback loops
  • fine-tuning the experience

Immersion and worldbuilding

  • immersion

Challenges:

  • overcomplication
  • failing to adapt
  • monetization vs player experience

Week 2

Fun: often engaging mechanics, rewarding challenges, and an experience that feels emotionally satisfying → often comes from player choice, competition, discovery, and achievement

Education: can range from simple knowledge acquisition to complex problem-solving, critical thinking, or real-world application → may involve teaching concepts, improving skills, or enhancing understanding in areas like math, language, science, or history

How would u balance these 2, so it’s both serious n fun
  • the key is to design games that r both entertaining n educational 
  • the goal: make learning feel natural n rewarding without sacrificing fun
  • key challenge how to design the game so that the learning experience doesn’t overwhelm the player, n ensure the fun doesn’t feel secondary or gimmicky
  • ex: the bezier game
Strategies:
  • learning through play: educational content emerges naturally from game mechanics
  • layered learning: unlock educational elements as players progress
  • game mechanics as educational tools: directly teach concepts through gameplay
  • storytelling with purpose: using narrative as reinforcement

Learning through play: games as simulations
  • real world scenarios: allow players to learn through trial n error while simultaneously engaging in strategic decision-making. educational content emerges naturally from game mechanics
  • ex: pandemic
Layered learning: layering game experience
  • rather than front-loading a game with too much educational content, designers can embed learning into layers of the game experience. players can unlock educational elements as they progress or explore certain features of the game
  • ex: betrayal at house on the hill
Game mechanics as educational tools: problem-solving in games
  • use the game’s mechanics to directly teach concepts. a game can include challenges that require problem-solving or puzzle mechanics to unlock levels or rewards. basically, by giving them objectives, u make them learn about the game
  • ex: catan

Storytelling with purpose: using narratives as reinforcement
  • narrative drives engagement, learning happens within the exciting context of an adventure. create a narrative that reinforces educational objectives while remaining engaging → ensure that the story provides emotional stakes n relevance to the educational content
  • ex: the resistance: avalon
Avoiding over instruction in gameplay mechanics
  • edutainment fatigue
    • avoid making the educational content too overt: making the educational aspect too obvious or forced can turn the game into a chore rather than an enjoyable experience. designers must ensure that learning feels natural n integrated into the flow of the game
    • focus on fun mechanics
Gameplay mechanics
  • ex: brain age
  • intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation: intrinsic → whatever u feel on the inside, driven by curiosity, exploration, n achievement. extrinsic → rewards like points, levels, or badges that reinforce progress
    • it’s important to design rewards carefully so that they feel meaningful within the game context, in educational games, rewards should connect to the learning experience

Week 4

Design thinking / basic iterative process:

Design (game mechanic) → Play test (player’s behavior) → Analyze (game motives) (looping)

iterative process framework can be adjusted according to the needed / important project or context u wanna work in, until u get the whole idea → ex: playful experience

ex 2: search a game from board games / offline games that has been remediated into an online game. look at how the experience differs in different environments (offline and online). talk about a brief explanation of the game, discuss the differences and similarities

  • (tip: pick a game with either real-time or turn-based action, describe its core mechanics and explain how the player experiences them temporally in both dimensions), and choose the benefits and disadvantages of physical vs digital forms
  • (tip: find a game that has appeared in both versions, compare them, and give grounds for the benefits in terms of playability and playful experience)

INSTRUCTION

<iframe src="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-tWJTzULHytSjl6eo3EU-fGzQuFIYF3-/preview" width="640" height="480" allow="autoplay"></iframe>

PROGRESS

Week 1

Group is formed, played boardgames during class.

Week 2

We discussed the game that we wanted to adopt and expand, then mixed it with our own ideas. After a lot of discussion, we decided to mix Deception with Werewolf, using "sekolah menengah mystery" as the main theme. We also had an initial idea where there would be a "witness" and "killer" role, both of which were inspired by those games.

Week 3

There was no class this week, and we were asked to observe board games to get inspiration. After that, we played the game that we chose as our reference.

We played several games, including Deception, to familiarize ourselves with the mechanics. It was hard to understand at first, but we gradually understood as the game progressed.

Figure 1.1 Playing Deception

While we were playing Deception, the table beside us was having so much fun playing a gun mafia board game, so we decided to play it as well. We also took this photo, yay!

Figure 1.2 Group photo

After doing the game tests, we now have a more refined idea for the game mechanics.

Game inspirations: Deception, Werewolf

This is a sekolah menengah murder mystery game, but without a host. Everyone can take turns being the “game leader,” but they still play, the leader just gives out instructions, that’s all

There are 3 main roles:

  • Killer: their goal is to make sure the real clue isn’t discovered, make classmates vote each other out, and try to find out who the witness is, if the killer correctly identifies the witness, they instantly win.
  • Witness: can only talk during discussion time but can’t vote, they must not get caught by the killer and can’t give super obvious hints.
  • Classmates: they work together to vote and find out who the killer is

there are clue cards and weapon cards like in deception, but only 3 of each are placed in the middle of the table, there are also powerup cards, but they can only be used once per game, so players need to be smart about when to use them

so in total there are 4 card decks:

  • role cards
  • weapon cards
  • clue cards
  • powerup cards

the whole game is based on voting, the killer can’t kill anyone directly and players are eliminated through votes

How to play the game:

  • in night phase everyone closes their eyes, the killer secretly chooses 1 weapon and 1 clue, and places two bullet stickers (or any kind of marker) on top of those cards, then closes their eyes again
  • the witness opens their eyes, looks at which cards have the stickers, memorizes them, takes the stickers with them, hides them, and then closes their eyes
  • everyone opens their eyes again
  • in discussion phase, everyone starts discussing, ideally the witness should speak first, giving indirect hints to help identify the killer without being too obvious, and then after everyone shares their thoughts, they prepare for the next night phase
  • in voting phase, everyone closes their eyes again, and the game leader gives instructions for players to vote secretly using stickers, so everyone can vote, except the witness (they just pretend they did)
  • if the group gets desperate and wants extra help, everyone (including the witness) can agree to use a powerup card, all powerup cards are shuffled, and one is drawn randomly, the group uses it based on the effect described
  • remember: it can only be used once for the whole game, so they need to plan wisely

Endgame:

  • if the killer gets voted out, they’re allowed to guess who the witness is
  • if the killer guesses correctly, they still win, even if they were voted out
  • if they guess wrong, the classmates and witness win

Week 4

Before class, we created a playtest and played the low-fidelity prototype with our friends.

Figure 1.3 Unofficial playtest

We also consulted with Ms. Anis about the gameplay. We presented the lo-fi prototype and asked for her feedback. After receiving it, we made some adjustments.

This is the refined game mechanism idea:

This is a murder mystery party game where players must figure out who murdered the victim. The game has a host, but the host can still join as a player. There will be an instruction sheet for the host to follow throughout the game.

There are 3 main roles:

  • Murderer: their goal is to keep the real clue hidden, make classmates vote each other out, and identify who the witness is. If the murderer correctly guesses the witness, they instantly win.
  • Witness: can only speak during the discussion phase. They must avoid being discovered by the murderer and can only give subtle hints.
  • Classmates: work together to discuss, investigate, and vote out who they believe is the murderer.
There are four types of cards in total:
  • Role cards
  • Weapon cards
  • Clue cards
  • Power up cards

There will be 3 clue cards and 3 weapon cards placed in the middle of the table. Power up cards can only be used once per game, so players must plan carefully when to use them.

Game Setup:

  • Each player rolls a dice, the one with the highest number becomes the host.
  • Shuffle the clue and weapon cards, then place 3 of each face up in the center of the table.
  • Shuffle and distribute the role cards to each player.
  • Shuffle the power up cards and place them face down in a deck.
Night Phase:
  • Everyone closes their eyes.
  • The murderer secretly chooses 1 weapon card and 1 clue card, and flips those cards. Then they close their eyes again.
  • The witness opens their eyes, memorizes which cards were flipped, and then closes their eyes again.
  • Everyone opens their eyes, the game moves to the next phase.

NB: The night phase only occurs at the very beginning of the game (when the murderer and witness pick the weapon and clue cards) and when a power up card favors the murderer (the one that allows the murderer to change the clue or weapon card).

Discussion Phase:
  • All players take turns asking and answering questions to find out who seems suspicious.
  • Each player must ask a question to the person next to them.
  • That person answers, then creates a new question for the next player.
  • Guiding questions will be provided to help keep the discussion flowing.
  • During the second round of discussion, power up cards can be used to help classmates, the witness, or even the murderer, depending on the situation.
  • If the group feels stuck, everyone (including the witness) may agree to use a power-up card.
  • Shuffle all power up cards and draw one randomly.
  • Follow the effect written on the card.
  • Remember: each power up card can only be used once per game, players need to use it wisely

Voting Phase:

  • After discussion, everyone secretly votes on who they think the murderer is.
  • The player with the most votes is eliminated.

Endgame:

  • If the murderer is voted out, they are allowed to guess who the witness is.
  • If the murderer guesses correctly, they win, even if they were eliminated.
  • If the murderer guesses wrong, the classmates and witness win.

Week 5

Week 6

Presentation week.

Week 7

Playtest 1, with members and other teams. 

Figure 1.4 Playtest with members

Figure 1.5 Playtest with other group

Some issues were found in the game mechanics, so we discussed how to fix them and decided to add a new detective role that acts as the host while still being able to play the game instead of just observing.

Week 8

Figure 1.6 Playtest with other group (2)

We did a second playtest with new players. The game lasted almost an hour (around 57 minutes). While the players seem to enjoy it, they initially had difficulty starting the discussion. They also mentioned that it was easy to blame each other because they already know one another. The discussion went on for too long because there’s no restriction about the time limit. To avoid this, we decided to implement a 3 minute time limit with consequences.

Figure 1.7 Playtest with friends

We also played it again with our friends to get their feedback.

Week 9

Since there was no class this week, we discussed a little about the game’s flaws, proceeded with the design, and then filled up the iterative playtest.

Week 10

This week, we decided to finish the card design, add instruction guides and then start printing the cards.

Figure 1.8 First print

Week 11

We did the third playtest with new players. The game went well overall, but there were still some parts that confused the players. The host did not take enough initiative, and the instructions were not clear enough. The discussion phase is still a challenging part of the game, and the witness role was identified too easily. As a result, we decided to make adjustments by removing the witness role and continuing to discuss ways to better guide players on how to start the discussion.

Figure 1.9 Playtest with other group (3)

Week 12

We did an unofficial playtest with several people to get their opinions (unfortunately, it was not documented). Most of the feedback was constructive, such as pointing out awkward parts of the game, and they suggested adding a story or context so players would have more options when making accusations, and they also commented on how the end game works. 

Based on this feedback, we re-discuss the game and added new elements to the game, which is why we decided to introduce a new card set to solve these problems.

Week 13

We finalized the refined game ideas (link can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hn2xe3f3bsV36CSTqJ_oWT0KRIiJgcfcounMUpR0jow/edit?usp=sharing) and began making adjustments to the card designs to match the updated concept. After that, we decided to print all the cards along with the instructions on how to play the game. While creating the instruction guide, we asked friends who were unfamiliar with the game for feedback to see whether the instructions were easy to understand. Based on their comments, we made some improvements and then proceeded with the final printing.

Figure 1.10 Final printing

Week 14

We did a final playtest with the updated version of the game, and everything went well. 

Figure 1.11 Final playtest

After that, we recorded the final presentation, compiled all our progress, and submitted the final assignment.

FINAL

Sketches

Figure 2.1 Sketches

Figure 2.2 Sketches (2)

Digital copy

Printed version

Figure 2.3 Final printed version

Final presentation

FEEDBACK

Week 3

Reword the wording of the power up cards, because words are confusing. For example "Witness may" into "Witness have the choice to or NOT to". 

Week 4

The host can also be an unreliable narratives, the person have to push you guys to discuss something, each one of us must start with a question, the questions start randomly, the first person ask question and the next person answer the question.

Week 6

Record the gameplay, make sure it doesn't consume too much time (around 20 minutes due to short attention span). Fix the flaw where the murderer keeps winning. Find out the problem. 

REFLECTIONS

psa: this is going to be a long one lol (i think?)

This module has been such a fun journey for me. I got to interact with my classmates, and I even made new friends through this module. It's fun and hard to create a game that is enjoyable, especially when there are already so many games that can be taken as inspiration lol. Doing the playtests made me realize the flaws in the game that needed to be tweaked, and I'm genuinely grateful for that because sometimes out group didn't even realize the mistakes.

We did a lot of tweaking, whether it was the mechanics or even the card design itself. The most nerve-racking part of the process was having to change the mechanics in week 12 because one lecturer played our game and pointed out parts that needed tweaking and could be improved further. But in the end, we managed to finish on time.

From all of my experiences in this module, I learned how hard it is to make a decent game with no confusing areas, and my respect for those who work in the game industry has really increased. It was difficult to think about what is good for the players and to actually make them stay and engage with the game. Especially since most gamers are picky with their games, and of course I’m included. I always rant to my brother when I find a game lacking or annoying, but now that I realize how hard it is to create one, I won’t complain too much (it’s a different story if the game is expensive lol).

I also learned how to be more patient. There were many things I wished would work, but it’s not that easy, and our group had a lot to change in the game. Still, I’m lucky to have a capable team, and I’m glad we were able to finish the game.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts