Week 2

When we were designing our game last week, it became clear to me that no first idea will ever be the solution. By that, I am talking about how all the members of my group found a different type of game, but they were not great games. Also, the game we ended up picking to build off of was brought up by Andrew. The game that he brought up had some interesting points that we were able to use for our draft. When we put together the draft for our game, we went through the six elements we talked about in class and if it would be easy to pick up by someone passing by. We also looked at what type of game we wanted to make that anyone can have fun playing, so we looked at some camp games like Ninja. In Ninja, there are no props or anything the players need to have. This and simple rules got rid of a barrier of entry to our game. The name of our game is still a work in progress, but the rules are like tag, there are two teams; one team or person that is “it” and another team that avoids being caught, but there are also a few people that want to get caught because if they get caught; the ones that were “it” lose. The person(s) are chosen at random based on what color clothes they are wearing and the people who they don’t want to tag are chosen by the remaining people and the ones who are “it” don’t know who's who. This adds an element of surprise to our game. The action in our game would be that everyone run around trying to avoid the person that’s “it”; the goal would be to try and get everyone out if you are “it” or be the last one standing if you are not unless you were chosen by the group to be one of the “safe people” that if you get tagged your team wins. In our game, there are no necessary objects that you have to have. Also, the play space that is required for our game can be anywhere indoor or outdoor. You just have to have enough room for everyone to run around and not keep bumping into each other. Finally, the players can be anyone who wants to play and there can be any number of them, but there should at least be five or six people at the minimum to play the game. When we were designing our game, we definitely wanted it to be fun with nothing preventing someone from playing who is able and wants to play. That is why our game can also maybe be considered a folk game because of the definition given to us by Doug Wilson. The factors he mentions are that it is simple to teach; minimal or swappable equipment; spread by word of mouth; modified by “house rules”; and the procedure is negotiated.