CAGD 170 - Video Game Design

Taktikoh
By Group 11
12/12/17

Many people have often wondered to themselves, “What if Tik-Tak-Toh was fun?” Well, the game Taktikoh is just that, it combines elements of Tik-Tak-Toh and combines it with elements of other complex and absurd card games. By doing this Taktikoh becomes an extremely fun to play 2-player card game for people of mid-20’s with high replay value that never ceases to impress and astonish.

This project actually went rather smoothly all things considered. The only time something went awry was right before the first playtest when the cards for the game had not yet been printed and cut out. Because of that our playtesting was postponed by more than preferable but did not have any major effects on the end result of the game.

As far as problems with the game itself, there also weren't very many. Some of the few problems we discovered we had with the game were that being able to tell the difference between your cards and your opponents cards can sometimes get confusing. It was a relatively easy fix, we essentially just marked up the cards with different colors to be able to identify them better. Another problem was that many of the people had a hard time understanding the rules and the individual properties of the cards, although the thing about that problem, in particular, is that in any complex card game there is always going to be confusion. They will always have a learning curve and all we can do as the designers of the game is make the rulesheet as clear as possible.

In order to prevent the mistake of not having finished the cards by time, it was time to playtest all we could really have done was divvy up the workload a bit better. there's not really much to be said about it in my opinion. We just thought we had more time than we really did. Not to say that it's okay if it happens a lot, but sometimes things just get out of hand, and the best we can do is to try our best to not let it.

In regards to the development process, moving forward I would like to simply be more on top of things. By just doing things sooner rather than later I feel that the game could be made much better and with less stress. Although I suppose that's easier said than done. Other than that I would also have liked to personalize the Google Form that we used for this project a bit more. For the purposes of school, the form we used this time around was almost explicitly in regards to the rubric we were being graded off of. However, I would have liked the survey to be much more specific to our game rather than being generalized.

_________________________________________________________________________
Crash Deception

By Crazy Taxi (Group 9)
10/25/17

     Crash Deception is a simulation racing game for new drivers of all ages (recommended ages 16 - 21) about Texting and Driving where each player attempts to prove their superiority on the TextPad. By memorizing and typing nonsensical phrases into your phone you’ll speed ahead of your opponent and win the game!

    In the end, I would say that Crash Deception was a very simple game to make, and because of its simplicity, there weren’t many problems with the making the physical game. The two really basic parts of the game that were needed was a game board, and cards. Aside from being a little less than pleased with how the game board’s visual style turned out there really was no issue with either of them. Although that’s where the problem really comes into play, what I realized too late into the development process is that the two of us in the group were working individually on the same project. Essentially what I mean is that there was not a lot of collaboration between the two of us. In the end, it, made the game feel really conflicting with itself. As if on one hand it’s trying to be happy-go-lucky and on the other hand a serious game about why you shouldn’t text and drive.

    So I could go on a small little rant here about this and that and why I think my game was bad, but I’d rather just present solutions to the problem. What I believe could have really helped is if we were simply more involved with each other throughout the creation process. All that was discussed between us were the foundations of each piece of the game. For instance what we decided together on the matter of the bard were things like how many spaces it would have, and where the two players would start. Because of that once the board was made it left the creative style solely to the person making it. You can easily tell the difference between the board, which was hand drawn out in pencil on two pieces of lined paper, and the cards which had been meticulously typed and printed out to be the exact dimensions of an actual playing card. 

     You could also make the case that if we had simply been more compatible as people then it would have been better because things would have naturally lined up between us more. Although the thing is not everybody you work with is always going to be on the same page as you so it’s just one of those things you have to learn to live with when you’re working on a group project. Sometimes you’re just placed with people who don’t really do the work, or just don’t really care about it in whole. Now I’m not saying that my partner did either of those, but I definitely have had partners like that before. So it really puts the extra responsibility of reaching out and genuinely trying to make a connection between their partner and their project.

     In the future, there is one major thing that I will change about my development process. Before my partner and I even start making the project, I’d like to get to know them first. Go to lunch, or even just grab a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Anything so that before we start worrying about the game and what it’s going to be, we’ll be more comfortable around each other and more aware of what the other person is like. After experiencing what this last project was like, I honestly think that it's an extremely crucial step in the development process.
_________________________________________________________________________

Pseudo Macaroni Cooking: The Game

By: Joshua Pierce & Paul Mamalakis (Group 6)

9/20/17

   This is a fast-paced card game meant for 20 - 30-year old who enjoy competitive card games and cooking! With one player adding compliments to a dish and the other player adding hazards until the dish gets inevitably destroyed and somebody racks up all the points. It’s a chef eat chef world in the kitchen of Pseudo Macaroni Cooking.

   We encountered problems throughout every step of making this game. I believe the cards alone were redesigned 3 times. The rules were edited twice, and the rule sheet as a whole had to be completely redone. Some of the problems were very simple and some were very early, such as when we were coming up with the initial mechanics of the game and before we had officially made the game, although some came much later and made it more tedious to fix. For instance, during the initial planning of the game, there were many fallacies we found ourselves with and fixing them at the moment. Although there were also times when we had to make revisions to cards that were already printed because of balance issues, so despite the sloppiness of scratching over a perfectly good card, we just did that anyway. Also as mentioned the rule-book had to be revised with every single one of these in-game edits and completely remade when we discovered that it had been much too long for people to read all the way through. However despite all of our problems, we were told that our game has a very solid base to it, so I’m very happy with that.

   As far as completing the tasks, it went by fairly smoothly with all things considered. The only task that didn’t get done that could’ve been was redesigning the cards so that they are a bit more balanced. Although my partner and I had agreed that it would take too much time and effort to fix that and decided with the little time we had left it would be wiser to focus on fixing more immediate and quick fixes. Although other than that everything we set out to do was completed. I’d say I have my partner to thank for a lot of that, considering that with the workload I definitely could not have tackled it myself in the given time frame.

   As far as solutions to my task completion issues, like I said I didn’t have any but the one. Although if I had two (maybe three days) of absolute focus on that task I definitely could have gotten it done. Although the problem then would have been testing to see if the new set is unbalanced, then recreating that set again if it did turn out to be unbalanced, and so forth and so forth. This is where the problem comes into play, I’d need an extra time of absolute focus for every reiteration of cards and that could take quite some time.

   As far as the design process, I was very happy with how it went down. First, my partner and I had come up with an initial design, followed up by a couple meeting and then actually making the game. Afterwards, we still met up and talk about the issues of our game in order to fix them, it’s at that point it became much easier to navigate this project. After the initial design, less meetups were required and fewer things were being sped to completion. Although a lot of my satisfaction I would say I can attribute to having such a good partner in this overall process.