The "classic" 600.355 course is focused entirely on developing a sizable video game, but for our "Special Edition" we're doing things very differently. Students start by developing a "paper prototype" of their game to study game mechanics. They then simulate those mechanics to ensure that the game is well-balanced and finally turn the essential ideas and mechanics from their "paper prototype" into a corresponding "digital prototype" for which the engineering students will focus on software development while the art students will focus on the artistic direction of the game. All of them are, of course, responsible for the entirety of the final game they produce together. Now that's how you do an interdisciplinary course!
Tonight we had the first round of playtests for the paper prototypes and I seized the opportunity to take a few snapshots of the "organized chaos" this entails. The first hour was dedicated to each team setting up their games and making some last-minute changes to their rule sets:
|Feedback from Jason and finishing the "fate cards" for the game.|
|Cutting the rules down to size. With axes.|
|Relaxing with their supposedly already debugged game.|
|Clarifying the rules and adding illustrations to help new players.|
|Producing more and more custom game pieces.|
|Programmers fixing game boards, artists clarifying the rules.|
If you have not caught on yet why this Computer Science course is a little different, maybe this picture will do the trick:
|Dice and Crayola: Computer Science at work!|
After the initial hour of prep-work we started the two rounds of playtesting. One person from each team "stayed behind" to observe what another team would do with their game. The "observers" were encouraged to really observe and only speak up to help the testers if they were really stuck on some iffy part of the rules. Here's how the first round went down:
|Debugged rules getting debugged for real.|
|Jason listening in on a play test.|
|Wait, what are we supposed to do?|
|Ballistic Armor and Ninja Throwing Stars?|
|Cool, fate cards, but how do we move again?|
|After twenty minutes of rules we're about to start the game.|
After 30 minutes each team did a 5-minute debriefing with the observer and then everybody moved on to another game for round two:
|Sometimes even a co-designer needs to check the rules.|
|After six rounds we're still all naked and starving?|
|Attack or outrun the enemy?|
|Everything is better with different color game pieces!|
|Fun is being had interpreting rules.|
|Everything is better with a pre-configured game board!|
We did allow for small adjustments between the playtests, and for several games that led to a much more satisfying second round. So our students saw first-hand how playtesting can improve their games, and we hope that by next week they will incorporate all of the feedback they received and arrive with suitably streamlined and even more enjoyable games.
And they better, because next week we're hosting Dan "Delta" Collins as a guest lecturer and he will be looking at each of their games in detail with his excellent eye for weak mechanics and shoddy design. And I've encouraged him to not hold back and be as cruel as he needs to be with his feedback. Good times!
Just in case you couldn't tell yet, I am having a great time co-teaching this "Special Edition" course, and I hope that we can get MICA and JHU to regularly offer something like this, a course that builds bridges between very different educational worlds and helps our students understand what it means to work on truly interdisciplinary teams.
And the best thing? Class officially ended at 7:30 pm but the first student asking "Wait, are we out of time already?" did so at 7:45 pm. I think they are having fun as well.