We refer to the Lens of Flow and ask ourselves:
- Does our game have clear goals? If not, how can we fix that?
- Are the goals of the player the same goals we intended?
- Do parts of the game distract players so they forget their goal? if so, can these distractions be reduced, or tied into the game goals?
- Does our game provide a steady stream of gradually increasing challenges?
- Are the player's skills improving as expected? If not, how can we change that?
During our first play testing session with Kai, she mentioned that there were many parts of the game that distracted her from reaching her goal. Stopping her moves at every transfer station in order to pick up a Chance Card made her lose focus, the objective, and interest in the game. She said, "I don't feel like I'm learning because I'm moving around constantly." Immediately after hearing that, we knew we had to change the system with picking up Chance Cards at every transfer station. Through collaborative effort, we decided that players should move the exact number they have rolled and when have passed through one or more express stations, they must pick up a Chance Card and apply it immediately. We've applied these rules with our second play testing group, which went much more smoothly. During our observation, we were able to recognize the state of flow amongst the group; players during their strategizing moments were quiet, sometimes muttering to themselves, while rapidly shifting their eyes around the board.
When thinking about improvements for our game based on the feedback collected in our play-testing sessions, we thought about lens #10 Holographic Design. What elements of the game make the experience enjoyable? What elements of the game may detract from the experience? How can I change game elements to improve the experience? Some suggestions were related to the graphic and the story of our game so we decided to work on them to reinforce our theme. For example, instead of earning "beer cards" to travel express, now we change them to be metro cards so it is more consistent with what they represent in real-life. This decision was also supported by Schell's lens of Expected Value - where he tells designers that every action a player can take has an expected value. After playing the game, our final play-testers asked "why does a beer make me go express" and clearly the beer that they had earned a bar did not meet their expected value. Therefore changing the prize for visiting a bar to Metrocards was more in sync with both the narrative we chose and the expectations that the players had. In addition, we also incorporated the Home Cards to reinforce the story of the "bar crawl" where players usually start from their home, go to the bars and then go back home... usually. Before that, our starting-ending point was at any station near Central Park which was very confusing for players and it didn't make much sense with the whole narrative of the game. One suggestion from our class feedback that we would like to incorporate in the future is how to play this game in teams. As you might notice people don't go alone to crawl bars, quite the opposite, the fun part of going to this social events is to go with friends or meet other people. Thus in our next and final iteration, we are considering giving players the option to play in teams which will ultimately allow us to create additional learning goals related to collaboration and group learning.
As Schell points out, "a good game gives the player meaningful choices. Not just any choices but choices that will have a real impact on what happens next and how the game turns out...Meaningful choices are the heart of interactivity, and having a lens to examine them is quite useful" (Schell, p. 210-11). There are several ways in which we allow players to practice making meaningful choices, for the feeling of freedom and fulfillment in the game. We start by offering players the choice of where their start and end points are (Home Card). When choosing their Home Cards, players ask themselves these following questions: Where should I go? How should I spend my resources? What strategy should I use in this situation? Should I play it safe or take a big risk? Another meaningful choice we offer our players is choosing their Location Cards. While the first 5 cards they choose are purely by chance, they also have the option to exchange 2 of their cards in for new locations. Of course, luck and risk is mixed into this choice due to the possibility of choosing new locations that may be difficult to reach. Another choice players can make related to the Location Cards is taking more cards to collect more stars. It is entirely up to the player to either hit home first and end the game with the amount of stars he/she has, or conquer more bars to win more stars before he/she heads home. Again, players question their choice of direction, resources, strategies, and risks along the way. Some of the Chance Cards such as BFF Bouncer, Yellow Cab Ride, NYPD Card, allows for the players to choose which player to use the card on, which train/line the cab takes them to, and when to use the random inspection NYPD card.
The next lens we have incorporated into our game design is Lens #54: The Lens of Accessibility. "A puzzle is a game with a dominant strategy" (Schell, p. 241). Players understand the goal of our puzzle or game, and start strategizing. As they continue to play, they develop a sense of progress and visually see how close or far they are from the solution, which is in this case-- winning the game. Players enjoy this sense of progress-it gives them the motivation to continue playing. Visible progress (Lens #55) is important in all aspects of gameplay and game design. Players naturally gravitate toward answering the questions that are easiest for them and slowly work their way up toward harder questions. Puzzles make a player stop and think, and in our game, players will be able to make progress, encounter challenges, strategize, and overcome those challenges. For example, players can look at their location cards, choose to go to the easier and closer bars to their home, and work their way to the more difficult locations.
Speaking of obstacles, Schell mentions that a goal with no obstacles is not worth pursuing. We look at Lens #74: The Lens of the Obstacle. Players share the goal of hitting all 5 bars, collect the most stars, and head back home first. But there are obstacles and challenges that do not make this goal so easy to achieve: the number rolled on the die, disadvantageous Chance Cards, low value of chosen Location Cards, and arriving home faster than the other players while having the most stars. These are obstacles that make the game fun, and challenging enough that makes the players want to overcome. Nevertheless, our players feel freedom throughout the game. This lens also ties closely with meaningful choice. Then next lens that naturally follows is Lens #79: Freedom. We asked ourselves these questions: When do our players have freedom of action? Do they feel free at these times? When are they constrained? Are there any places we can let them feel more free than they do now? Are there any places where they are overwhelmed by too much freedom? Players feel free when they have the choice to use a roll count to transfer stations or to move back and forth, when they have the option to use their Metro Cards as express, when they want to use at the same time there are some constraints where necessary.
Regarding our player's inherent interest, it is funny that one of the things that they liked the most was that we used the original MTA map. We didn't add nor take any piece of information from the original map and as a result it resonated with the players' experience navigating the NYC subway system. Thus, even though lens #70 Inherent Interest says that "unusual is more interesting that ordinary" in our case the lens of resonance is more applicable. Using the original MTA map benefits the player not only because it resonates with their previous experience but also because it allows them to transfer knowledge from the game into their real-life more easily. This connects to lens #72: The Lens of Projection because our familiar physical interface enables players to project themselves into situations that they have experienced using the NYC subway. In addition, by incorporating the Yelp rating into our Location Cards (bars) we are encouraging players to actually use this information in their real life, increasing their interest and motivation for playing our game. By playing this game, players are going to learn about bars that are in their neighborhoods and also how to get to highly-rated bars by using the NYC subway.
With each of the lenses that we used to look critically at the current iteration of our game design, we have attempted to refine the overall experience of game play for the players. Without an immersive game environment, with seamless flow and an accessible system of rules, players would not engage with the NYC MTA subway system. By giving our players a fun pretense for exploring the MTA subway system using the official MTA subway map, we hope to provide a open space for dynamic exploration of the subway system so that players can begin to achieve the learning goals we listed earlier through varied practice.
