Game Studies Week study and finally project

Game Studies

Starting from 12.2024
4.2025 -8.2025 / Week 1 - Week 14
Ge Xianjing / 0377636
Game Studies / Interactive Space Design

Game Research Week1 Study Notes

This week is the project kick-off week, and the main tasks are around project initiation, data learning, team formation and initial conception.

In this lesson, we need to read all the class materials on Teams in advance

1. Using Metabolic Debuffs as Game Challenges

I realized that "Debuffs" mentioned in the document can serve as engaging negative mechanics to heighten tension in the game. For example:

In the glycolytic pathway, I would design a "PFK-1 Inhibition Card" that slows down energy production when ATP or citrate levels are too high (inspired by real feedback regulation). Players must strategically manage ATP usage to avoid triggering this debuff.

The issue of "NAD⁺ deficiency" (–) could be transformed into a "Mitochondrial Failure Event", where the cell loses its ability to process glucose. Players would need to scavenge specific resources or switch to anaerobic pathways to regenerate NAD⁺.

For glycogen synthesis, I would introduce a "Glucagon Surge Mechanism" (–), which forces players to use stored glycogen immediately during “emergency” turns, increasing the pressure to balance storage and consumption.

I also see potential in general debuffs such as mitochondrial dysfunction (–) and hypoxia (–). For instance, "hypoxic zones" in a level may restrict the use of aerobic pathways, compelling players to rely solely on glycolysis—a high-risk, low-reward strategy.

2. Translating Buffs into Game Enhancements

The "Buffs" mentioned in the document offer clear ideas for designing rewarding gameplay mechanics. Here are my envisioned applications:

During glycolysis, a "PFK-1 Overdrive Token" () could let players skip two steps in the pathway, simulating this enzyme's role as a "checkpoint gatekeeper" ().

A "Mitochondrial Express" power-up () might instantly send pyruvate into the TCA cycle, rewarding players for efficient resource management.

In the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP), a "G6PD Hyper-Boost" () could produce NADPH to resist oxidative damage, directly reflecting the pathway's antioxidant role ().

A "DNA Demand Surge" () could grant ribose-5-phosphate tokens to players focused on cell growth or DNA synthesis tasks.

A generic enhancement like "Vitamin B Booster" () could be used as a rare "key item" to unlock blocked enzymes (e.g., pyruvate dehydrogenase, ), enriching the player's exploration and nutrient acquisition strategies.

3. Designing Game Mechanics Around Dynamic Metabolic Pathways

Drawing on the game mechanic suggestions from the document (–, –), I would focus on:

Card Strategy: Building a deck of Debuff and Buff cards. For example, a player may draw a "Enzyme Dysfunction" Debuff (lose one enzyme token, ), or use a "Antioxidant Shield" Buff to nullify an "Oxidative Stress" card ().

Resource Management: Track glucose, ATP, NAD⁺, and glycogen as separate resources. For instance, storing too much glycogen might trigger a "Storage Overflow" debuff (–), forcing players to convert excess glucose into fat—a risky choice with long-term consequences.

Pathway Switching: Let players switch pathways depending on their goals. In a "speed-run" level, activating glycolysis via an "Oxygen Surge" buff () can maximize ATP quickly; whereas in a "survival" level, players may need to balance the PPP for NADPH and store glycogen for sustainability.

4. Increasing Game Depth Through Interactive Effects

Inspired by the Buff-Debuff interactions described in the document (–), I would include:

Combo Effects: Combining "NAD⁺ Regeneration" and "PFK-1 Overdrive" () may trigger a "Turbo Glycolysis" effect, doubling ATP output—but failing to sustain it might result in a "Burnout" penalty.

Boss Fights: A final boss such as the "Electron Transport Chain Emperor" (based on the ETC, ) could be introduced. Players would need "Mitochondrial Upgrade" buffs () to counteract Debuffs like cyanide poisoning ().

Strategic Trade-offs: For example, using "Satiety Lockdown" () to ignore glucagon may protect glycogen stores, but when the effect wears off during combat, players could become vulnerable to hormonal debuffs.

5. Balancing Scientific Accuracy and Playability

When adapting content, I would prioritize making scientific concepts intuitive and accessible:

Visual Cues: Represent PFK-1 as a “gatekeeper” in the glycolysis pathway—green when active, red when inhibited.

Terminology Simplification: In tooltips, describe NAD⁺ as an “energy carrier,” and NADPH as an “antioxidant shield,” linking their roles to the document’s explanations (, ).

Feedback Mechanisms: Visually indicate when a pathway is blocked (e.g., grayed-out icons when an enzyme is inhibited), and use particle animations to emphasize Buff effects (e.g., sparkles during an "ATP Jackpot" bonus, ).

Group Formation and Registration

Form groups freely, with a maximum of 5 members per group.

Fill in the group members' names in the Teams group table link on the same day.

If you do not join a group before the deadline, you may be assigned to a group by the instructor.

If there are any collaboration issues within the group, report them to the instructor as soon as possible.

Initial Brainstorming

Hold the first group discussion meeting.
Develop the basic concept and gameplay mechanics of the board game.
Things to consider:

Game background setting.
Will it be competitive or cooperative?
How to represent the three glucose metabolic pathways (you may use analogies, such as treating "energy" as "currency," etc.).

Complete the discussion within this week and submit a 1-page PPT or a simple document to record the initial concept.

Complete Exercise 1

Each student completes this individually.

Reflect on your favorite board game or video game and describe the fun mechanics it features.

At present, we have five members in the group, namely:

Week 2

1. Practice arrangement: The teacher reminds that there will be no campus classes next week, and students need to go out to play games and make observation records, and they can book the venue in advance. Playing games allows students to have a common understanding of game design and gain experience for their assignments.

2. Game Design Essentials: Game design is all about balancing fun and education. Fun is reflected in providing players with choice, competition, exploration and a sense of achievement; Educational is about allowing players to acquire knowledge and skills. Taking the Instagram interface update and the design of the door as an example, it shows that the design should focus on the user experience and make the interaction natural.

3. Examples of design methods: Simulating real-life scenarios can add to the fun of the game, such as games such as Overcooked and Pandemic, where players can make mistakes and use logical decisions in a simulated world. Set up problem-solving sessions, like in Part Time, where the player takes on the role of a leader dealing with war and resource management issues. Incorporate storytelling, such as Betrayal at the House on the Hill, where players can cooperate to survive in exploration. At the same time, connect the player's inner emotions with the extrinsic rewards, such as collectible card games and Monopoly.

4. Follow-up tasks and discussions: The teacher provides negative and positive effect cards that can be used in the game for students to refer to. After that, the students began to discuss game design, and came up with game ideas that fused gods, monsters, and humans, including damage settings and immunity mechanics.

Week 3

📘 Game Introduction

Our game is a role-based strategic board game for five players, set inside a human body infected by ancient viruses. Each player takes on the role of a vital organ—such as the Brain, Liver, or Fat—controlled by a virus. The game blends factional combat, hidden identities, upgrade systems, and voting mechanics over 8 turns. The goal varies based on your identity: survive, eliminate enemies, or bring balance as the neutral Peacemaker.

🧪 First Playtest Reflection

During our first trial session, we quickly discovered several issues affecting gameplay and clarity. These included:
Unclear game rules: Some players were unsure about how to take actions, when certain phases occurred, or how energy and upgrades worked.
Overly complex mechanics: The combination of identity drawing, energy systems, voting, and skill activation felt overwhelming for new players.
Incomplete role introductions: Players didn’t fully understand the unique traits and win conditions of their characters.
Unbalanced power dynamics: Some roles (like Peacemaker or Mage) felt too strong or too confusing.
Pacing issues: The game flow was sometimes slow, especially during voting or mid-phase decisions.

❌Key Disadvantages Identified
Steep learning curve – New players need time to understand both the narrative and complex mechanics.
Rule ambiguity – Some rules (e.g. Killer mechanics, Peacemaker upgrades) lacked clarity or consistent interpretation.
High cognitive load – Players must remember many abilities, costs, and team dynamics at once.
Unclear win conditions – Especially for the Peacemaker, victory goals were not always obvious.
Time-consuming setup – The multiple phases and drawing steps slowed down game start and player immersion.

Week 4 and 5

Regarding the issues that need improvement discovered after the first trial

Unfortunately, during our first presentation to the teacher, he pointed out that our game's definition of the "Peacemaker" role seemed too vague. The role didn’t feel like an independent faction, but more like someone who just picks a team. She also felt that the energy and skill systems for each player were overly complex and didn’t align well with the actual glucose metabolic pathway. She hopes we can adopt a simpler approach that directly follows some classic board game mechanics to simulate glucose metabolism.

So, we decided to adopt the gameplay style of “Exploding Kittens.”

- Basic Game Information
  - Number of Players: 5-9
  - Game Type: Turn-based elimination
  - Goal: Be the last survivor; avoid elimination by bomb
- Core Game Mechanics
  - Card Drawing & Playing
    - Each player randomly draws 1 role card; starting player decided by rock-paper-scissors (turns proceed clockwise)
    - Players may play a card or draw a card each turn; hand limit: 7 cards
  - Bomb & Pliers Mechanics
    - 2 Bombs in total; if drawn, use Pliers (6 cards) to defuse; lose 1 HP if no Pliers
    - When defusing, place the Bomb in the first 3 or last 3 cards of the deck
  - Special Card Effects
    - Request (4 cards): Steal 1 card from any player
    - Prophecy (4 cards): View and return the top card of the deck
    - Eye of Perspective (3 cards): View and return the top 3 cards of the deck in order
    - Exchange (4 cards): Swap all hands with another player
    - Shuffle (3 cards): Shuffle the deck randomly
    - Turn (2 cards): Reverse the order of play
    - Pass the Buck (4 cards): Force a chosen player to draw 1 card (can be bounced with +1 effect)
    - Skip (5 cards): Skip your turn, let the next player act
- Roles & Corresponding Cells
  - Wizard (Neuron): Starting hand [Pliers, Prophecy]; Prophecy can act as Eye of Perspective
  - Mighty Chris (Muscle Cell): Starting hand [Pliers, Eye of Perspective]; keep 1 card when exchanging hands
  - Robber (Immune Cell): Starting hand [Pliers]; target must give Pliers on first Request use
  - Giant (Fat Cell): Starting hand [Pliers, Skip]; requires 2 Pliers to defuse bombs; survives 2 explosions
  - Clever Trader (Liver Cell): Starting hand [Pliers, Pass the Buck]; Skip and Pass the Buck are interchangeable
  - Tight-fisted Iron Rooster (Red Blood Cell): Starting hand [Pliers, Skip]; immune to Request/Exchange
  - Slime (Stem Cell): Starting hand [Pliers, Skip]; survives first explosion with 3-card hand limit
  - Unfortunate Fellow (Pancreatic Beta Cell): Starting hand [Skip, Eye of Perspective]; guaranteed explosion on Shuffle; Eye of Perspective can act as Pliers
  - Gambler (Mitochondria): Starting hand [Pliers, Eye of Perspective]; dodge bomb with ≥2 matching dice (3-of-a-kind passes bomb to nearest player)
- Scientific Theme Mapping
  - Card Drawing: Simulates glucose intake and metabolism initiation
  - Bomb: Represents energy crises (e.g., oxidative stress, overload)
  - Pliers: Symbolizes enzymes resolving metabolic stress
  - Special Cards: Reflect intercellular signaling and material exchange
  - Role Traits: Mirror cell-specific functions (e.g., neuron regulation, fat cell energy storage)
- References
  - Reference 1: Three Kingdoms Kill
    - Borrowed character mechanics with unique strengths/weaknesses
  - Reference 2: Bomb Cat
    - Adapted bomb-defusing tension and strategic risk-taking

In class, we conducted a game test and did discover some issues, such as how many cards each person should have in their hands and how many cards must be played if the number exceeds. Otherwise, it will result in players having too many cards in their hands later on, making it difficult to quickly end the game

https://youtu.be/iO7yyfAJtEs

🧠 Lessons Learned from Iterative Testing

During playtesting, several critical loopholes were uncovered that disrupted the flow of the game—such as unclear resolution orders, unintended infinite loops with card effects, and misinterpretations of skill timing. While these issues initially hindered smooth gameplay, they proved to be valuable learning moments, reinforcing a key lesson:

🧪 Only through repeated hands-on testing can a game’s logic and balance truly be validated.

This experience highlighted the necessity of playtesting with players unfamiliar with the rules, as they are more likely to question assumptions and expose unclear or unstable mechanics. Their confusion or alternative interpretations helped us reword abilities and clarify rule ambiguities.

In response, we revised several rule elements and conducted follow-up playtests with players outside the core development team, including members from other groups. Their fresh perspectives provided a more neutral and accurate reflection of gameplay balance and rule clarity.

🎲 From Suspense to Strategy: Final Playtesting Feedback on Gluconomy（Feedback from other groups）

I. Overview of Core Experience

Playtesters consistently highlighted Gluconomy’s unique blend of strategic depth, calculated randomness, and overall fairness — a rare combination that keeps tension high and rounds briskly engaging. The game’s mechanics mirror its biochemical theme seamlessly, transforming the abstract process of glycolysis into a gripping, accessible card game.

The innovative mechanics — especially the single-turn round structure and post-elimination involvement — received widespread praise for maintaining momentum and suspense. Newcomers and experienced players alike found the game approachable yet mentally stimulating.

II. Core Mechanics: Highlights from Playtesting

1. Innovation and Accessibility

Players found the game “cleverly designed,” noting how the “bomb defusal” and “character skills” mechanics elegantly supported the theme. The rules were straightforward, and most players could grasp the core mechanics with minimal instruction thanks to intuitive character cards.

🧠 “Each role offers distinct tactics — it’s creative without being confusing.”

2. Balance Between Strategy and Randomness

The turn-based system with single-action constraints avoids repetition while maintaining tactical tension. Special cards like “Throw the Buck” and “Prophecy” added depth and required players to adjust strategies based on revealed bombs and card stage dynamics.

Randomized bomb placement and hidden-hand mechanics effectively reduced the “snowball effect.” Notably, many newcomers reversed the game against experienced players by leveraging hand advantages — keeping victory uncertain until the final turns.

🎲 “You can outwit seasoned players — it’s not about who’s played more, but who plays smarter.”

3. Pacing and Fairness

The switch from time-consuming “Rock-Paper-Scissors” to a simple clockwise card draw significantly improved round pacing. Eliminated players still contribute by placing bombs, keeping everyone involved and reducing downtime.

The randomized starting hands and bomb positions provided a balanced starting point for all players. Although adding new players mid-game could slightly disrupt balance, playtesters found the standard game experience generally fair and satisfying.

⏱️ “Even when out, I could influence the board. It keeps the game lively — no boring stretches.”

III. Player Feedback: Direct Quotes

Here are a few standout reactions from playtesters:

🧩 “Character skills like the Gambler’s dice rolls are exciting — you never know what will happen.”
🗣️ “Rules are simple but the choices aren’t — the hand-swaps and bomb surprises keep each round fresh.”
🔁 “Short rounds and post-death interaction are genius. You’re never sitting out for too long.”

These quotes reflect a strong consensus on the game’s balance between accessibility, interaction, and strategic flexibility.

IV. Summary & Future Directions

In summary, Gluconomy succeeds in delivering a fast-paced, thought-provoking experience through its character differentiation, dynamic card effects, and process optimizations. Its design effectively balances ease-of-entry for new players with deeper layers of strategy for veterans.

Moving forward, possible refinements include:

Fine-tuning the mechanics for adding players mid-game to ensure continuous balance;
Further enriching card variety or map modules to enhance replay value;
Exploring role-class synergies or skill evolution to deepen long-term tactics.

With its robust foundation and strong player reception, Gluconomy shows great promise for continued development, potential digital adaptation, or entry into competitive tabletop design circuits.

Week 6–8: Tug-of-War in Mechanics Refinement

In Weeks 6 to 8, we entered a loop of continuous adjustments, unsure whether to add more mechanics or simplify further. While our second version significantly improved playability, we quickly realized that a "good-feeling" game isn’t always a balanced one.

Playtesters enjoyed drawing cards, dodging bombs, and activating roles, but problems emerged:

"Why does someone always end up with too many cards?"

"I still don’t get what this card does."

"This role feels overpowered!"

At first, we thought the issue lay in player comprehension, but the truth was our rules were not tight enough. To address this, we:

Set a strict hand limit of 5 cards, including role-given cards.

If a player exceeds this number due to skills or exchanges, they must immediately play or discard down to 5 cards.

The hand limit resets at the start of each turn.

What began as a band-aid fix became a defining mechanic: it introduced pressure and forced players to strategize within limited resources. That compression added tension and sparked smarter plays.

🚀 Cell Race – Myself Feedback Summary

🚀 Game Overview

Cell Race is a fast-paced, thematic card game inspired by the metabolic process of glucose breakdown. Players act as competing “cells” collecting tools (e.g., enzymes/pliers) to resolve energy crises (represented as bombs). Through bluffing, timing, and strategic risk-taking, the last surviving player wins the round.

🔄 Design Update Based on Instructor Feedback

Following our mid-development review, the instructor suggested renaming character skills using glucose-related biological terms instead of abstract or generic ones. We implemented this advice by replacing abilities like “Gambler” with glucose-themed skill names such as:

"Glycolytic Trigger" (formerly Dice Defuse)

"Hexokinase Shuffle" (random swap mechanics)

"ATP Boost" (bonus actions or defenses)

This modification enhances thematic coherence and reinforces the educational value of the game.

Additionally, we invited members from other groups to re-playtest the revised version after these changes. Their updated feedback confirmed that the renamed skills not only clarified roles but also made the game's metaphor stronger and more memorable.

🔍 Playtesting Feedback by Question

1. Are the mechanics fresh and easy to understand?
Yes — players found the mechanics creative and well-aligned with the biological theme. The core gameplay is engaging yet accessible, with minimal rules overhead.

2. Are there overused or exploitable actions?
The game avoids repetition by limiting players to one action per turn. Cards like "Throw the Buck" and "Prophecy" introduce bluffing and strategy, preventing dominant or repetitive plays.

3. Are there incentives for creative plays?
Yes — unique character skills (e.g., the Gambler defusing bombs via dice rolls) encourage risk-taking and creativity. Players are rewarded with powerful effects for bold or lucky moves.

4. Can new players identify good plays early?
Absolutely. Character cards clearly indicate roles and functions, helping new players understand tactics quickly from the start.

5. Are there overly complex mechanics that can be simplified?
The previous version had energy bars, HP, talents, and skills. These have been streamlined into a simpler yet effective system. No further simplification is currently needed.

6. Are any mechanics non-intuitive or confusing?
Originally, the use of rock-paper-scissors to determine turn order was confusing and time-consuming. This was replaced with clockwise play, which improved pacing and clarity.

7. Are starting positions balanced?
Yes — since bomb placement is random and card draws are hidden, starting order has minimal impact on overall balance.

8. Are there dominant strategies?
The game encourages varied strategies. For example, saving tools (pliers) and risking bomb draws in early game, then avoiding bombs through skillful play in the late game. Players must adapt dynamically — no strategy guarantees a win.

9. Is the outcome uncertain until the end?
Yes — with hidden hands and card exchange mechanics, victory often remains uncertain until the last few turns. There’s no overwhelming snowball effect.

10. Can a new player beat an experienced one?
Definitely. The rules are easy to learn, and luck combined with smart choices allow new players to win — making it inclusive and replayable.

11. How is player elimination handled?
Even after elimination, players can influence the game by placing bombs in future deck positions (top/bottom 3 cards). The short playtime also ensures eliminated players aren’t left out for long — they can quickly rejoin a new round.

12. Is there excessive downtime?
No — turns are short and the game maintains a tight rhythm. Players stay engaged throughout the session.

13. What drives the game toward a conclusion?
The need to survive, gather tools, and avoid bombs creates natural urgency. Only one player wins each round, motivating players to act decisively and take calculated risks — mirroring cellular energy competition.

💡 Summary & Key Insights

Cell Race offers a dynamic balance between simplicity and strategy. It rewards risk-taking, offers replayability, and incorporates biological metaphors in a fun and understandable way.
Key improvements — such as replacing slow mechanics with quicker alternatives — have enhanced the pacing and accessibility.

📌 Potential Future Improvements

Add more variations to character abilities to enrich replay value
Consider optional team-based or 2v2 modes to broaden strategy scope
Develop visual card aids or iconography to further reduce rule explanations

🧠 Week 9–10: Role Balance Hell and the Identity Dilemma

Role balancing became our primary headache. One of the biggest issues was the "Glycogen Giant." While requiring two antivirus cards to defuse a virus reflected fat cells’ metabolic behavior, the role often failed quickly in practice.

To resolve this, we added a hidden trait: "Brute Clearance" — the Giant can use 5 cards as a substitute for antivirus enzyme, giving them a high-risk, high-reward option.

The next big issue was "When must a player reveal their role?" Some players revealed early to bait attacks; others waited until emergencies. This raised strategic questions.

We finalized the rule:

Players may hide their role after drawing. However, they must reveal it before using any role skill (active or passive).

If a player uses a skill without revealing their role, the action is invalid, and they must instead perform a regular move.

This rule unleashed strategic depth:

Players could "lure" others by pretending to be weak.
Or stay undercover to observe dynamics.

Reflection: Clear limitations empowered creative gameplay. It taught us that well-framed constraints do not limit strategy; they enhance it.

🧪 Week 11–12: Outsiders See What We Don’t

We invited non-developers to test the game. Their feedback was invaluable — they grasped the rules within 3 minutes, proving the design was maturing.

However, they pointed out things we had missed:

“What exactly happens when you put a virus card back?”
“Where’s the round counter?”
“Is there a card summary sheet?”

So we created:

A virus reinsertion tracker
A round counter card
A quick card reference sheet

Reflection: Game design is not academic logic — it's lived experience. Smooth onboarding = better design.

We use Figram to redesign the cards

🔥 Week 13–14: Final Polish and Naming

We officially named the game:

"Glycolytic Crisis: Cell Survival Race"

Nine final roles were refined:

Mitochondrial Scout: Can use regular cards as card-checkers.
Enzyme Power Chris: Can use a skill card twice.
ATP Robber: First request forces antivirus card reveal.
Glycogen Giant: Needs 2 antivirus to defuse; may brute-clear with 5 cards.
NAD+ Dealer: Can swap skill card types.
Fat Cell Iron Guard: Immune to request and hand swap.
Vesicle: Survives first explosion but reduces max hand to 3.
Lactate Accumulator: Explodes if drawing chaos card; can use checking card to defuse.
Glycolysis Scout: May dice-roll to avoid virus and pass it to nearest player.

📄 Final Reflections

We started with an overly complex system and gradually distilled it into an accessible, strategic, and educational board game. This wasn’t a linear path — each playtest exposed flaws that led to deeper insights.

From confusing energy bars to vibrant card interactions, from vague role definitions to rich hidden-identity tactics, we grew both as designers and players.

In the end, we learned that:

Fun thrives in clarity
Educational games need emotional hooks
Good balance comes from real user pain points

Our game isn’t perfect. But it's playable, learnable, memorable — and that makes it a success worth building on.

Draft proposal

Game Rules Poster

Final report speech on the end-of-term achievements

Link to the complete three game review videos

https://youtu.be/o77VC87bJTQ?si=BXvIhLGWj2QzYWAb