Collaborative Design Practice - Task 3 and 4: Testing and Client Presentation

on

04/12/2025- 11/01/2025 (Week 11-Week 15)
Lizzie Tanaka (0362065)
Collaborative Design Practice | BDCM | Taylor's University
Task 3-4: Testing and Client Presentation

PROGRESS

The last part of this project is testing and presenting our work to client. 

After we presented the prototype to our lecturers, we continued on working on the feedback that was given, especially on the cards and packaging. 

There were some things about the game that was changed, such as the star token for winning. Dr. Luqman pointed out that it didn't make sense with the sugar, glycogen, and ATP system. We were told that we were allowed to change it so we changed the 'star' to 'energy.' With this, we had to change the card info and the info book.

This phase, I worked on the booklet. I changed the cover because we removed the whole 'star' burst thing on everything, so I decided to use the energy symbol and token that was on the packaging on the front cover.

Fig 1.1 New booklet cover


Fig 1.2 New booklet cover mockup
Other than the cover, I also changed some details inside the booklet, following the new card design and colors. 

I also helped finalizing the cards, with the star pattern on the border and helped finalizing the info cards. 

Fig 1.3 Card Finalization

I also made sure to change the icon star to the lightning token and changed the colors of the icon so that it matches the color of each resource on the resource counter. 

Fig 1.4 Icon colors


Then, we conducted a playtest session. 

Fig 1.5 Playtest video clip

Playtest Summary:

  • Gameplay went on for two hours with three players.

Feedback:

  • The card ratio between the advantage cards (the one that gives them resources) and the energy card (the ones that give them energy tokens by 'paying' with their resources) is imbalanced: Players struggled with very little resources that they cannot use the energy cards. Using sabotage cards on other players sometimes didn't work as the other player didn't even have said resource.
  • Design wise: It's nice that the type of cards are color coded, makes it easier to recognize. They said the illustrations are good as well.


Client Presentation

Fig 2.1 Client Presentation

Fig 2.2 Client's Feedback

After the feedback session, we refined again our cards. 

FEEDBACKS

Playtest Feedback:
- Gameplay: Ratio of advantage cards and energy cards should be more balanced. 
- Design: Illustrations are good and the color coding of the card types is also nice since it's easier to recognize them. 

Client Feedback:
- Client like the unique shape for the card design
- Client thinks for + and - card for sugar, glycogen, ATP design (illustration) can be differentiate
- Some card lacks resource information like the energy card
REFLECTIONS:

Overall, in this long project, I learned a lot. On the last two tasks, I learned how crucial the testing phase is. Through the playtest, I discovered some issues that we, as a group, never thought of. It gave us a chance to refine and perfect our results. Other than that, I also learned a great lesson of double checking things as in this project, we encountered a lot of small, minor mistakes of a result of not double checking details. 

Comments

Post a Comment