After having read “Game Design Workshop” by Tracy Fullerton, we were aware that digital game designers sometimes prototype their games by using analog prototypes. That inspired us as a group to try and convert a digital game into an analog experience. For that, we chose Pong, which might be the first issue we encountered. Pong is one of the first digital games and due to it being preinstalled on the first home PCs considered a classic. Still, it is a repetitive and very  predictable game, only affording for very competitive players to stay engaged for long periods (This opinion is definitely colored by my knowledge and exposure to more “sophisticated” games. In it’s time Pong was considered entirely novel and innovative I would presume.)

Still, Pong also showed us that some games heavily depend on computerization to feel engaging. And that holds true even if it is a digital version of Ping Pong. It took the main loops from this game and turned them into a game that could also be played alone and without running and hitting a ball. The computer takes the position of both the other player and physical influences.

In our first iteration, three players had to play the game. Two were controlling the pads; one was steering the ball. The original game relies on fast reactions and strong hand-to-eye-coordination. It is a proper game to measure very specific skill competitively. If applied to a card game, we would have needed to scrap the spatiality that comes with the ball. But as we considered the ball necessary to recognize Pong, we wanted to keep it in the game by all means. We did not use the ball as a card that would be passed along players or translate it into some sort of health bar. This decision can be questioned a lot and has definitely shaped our outcome. Due to time restrictions and scope, we took the first iteration we created and iterated on it until the resulting prototype felt like a proper game.  

Here you can see which iterations we tried:

In retrospect, we broke Pong, then added rules and mechanics until it was playable again. Yet, the game we created may be more engaging than the original Pong, it is no longer just a skill game but not focuses on strategic thinking. Drawing cards bring some alea elements into the game, which provides more diversity during play. It is a short game and fun to play for a very limited duration of time.

Still, reflecting the process, I think not every game is suitable for being tested or played analog. I can not imagine a game like Pong being prototyped analog because then humans have to do the tedious and boring work that the computer calculates in the background. Just look at how complicated the rules of pen-and-paper-games are. Their core mechanics of the skill system may be very mathematical, and could even be tested in an excel sheet. But if the interaction of a character is supposed to be playtested then paper prototypes fall short. So the most revealing way of prototyping has to be customized on what exactly needs to be tested. Analog prototypes seem very helpful for testing loops that are turn based and strategy-dependent in nature.

Another lesson learned from this assignment is that changing the tiniest aspect of a game changes it drastically. A game is such a complicated system of interdependent objects and attributes, making it far more challenging to find out which part of a game is working and which is not. This can only be done by subtle iterations and lots of playtesting. And we used the cardboard available at university, for further elaboration these colors have to be adjusted to be suitable for colorblind players!

download the rules here

After having read “Game Design Workshop” by Tracy Fullerton, we were aware that digital game designers sometimes prototype their games by using analog prototypes. That inspired us as a group to try and convert a digital game into an analog experience. For that, we chose Pong, which might be the first issue we encountered. Pong is one of the first digital games and due to it being preinstalled on the first home PCs considered a classic. Still, it is a repetitive and very  predictable game, only affording for very competitive players to stay engaged for long periods (This opinion is definitely colored by my knowledge and exposure to more “sophisticated” games. In it’s time Pong was considered entirely novel and innovative I would presume.)

Still, Pong also showed us that some games heavily depend on computerization to feel engaging. And that holds true even if it is a digital version of Ping Pong. It took the main loops from this game and turned them into a game that could also be played alone and without running and hitting a ball. The computer takes the position of both the other player and physical influences.

In our first iteration, three players had to play the game. Two were controlling the pads; one was steering the ball. The original game relies on fast reactions and strong hand-to-eye-coordination. It is a proper game to measure very specific skill competitively. If applied to a card game, we would have needed to scrap the spatiality that comes with the ball. But as we considered the ball necessary to recognize Pong, we wanted to keep it in the game by all means. We did not use the ball as a card that would be passed along players or translate it into some sort of health bar. This decision can be questioned a lot and has definitely shaped our outcome. Due to time restrictions and scope, we took the first iteration we created and iterated on it until the resulting prototype felt like a proper game.  

Here you can see which iterations we tried:

In retrospect, we broke Pong, then added rules and mechanics until it was playable again. Yet, the game we created may be more engaging than the original Pong, it is no longer just a skill game but not focuses on strategic thinking. Drawing cards bring some alea elements into the game, which provides more diversity during play. It is a short game and fun to play for a very limited duration of time.

Still, reflecting the process, I think not every game is suitable for being tested or played analog. I can not imagine a game like Pong being prototyped analog because then humans have to do the tedious and boring work that the computer calculates in the background. Just look at how complicated the rules of pen-and-paper-games are. Their core mechanics of the skill system may be very mathematical, and could even be tested in an excel sheet. But if the interaction of a character is supposed to be playtested then paper prototypes fall short. So the most revealing way of prototyping has to be customized on what exactly needs to be tested. Analog prototypes seem very helpful for testing loops that are turn based and strategy-dependent in nature.

Another lesson learned from this assignment is that changing the tiniest aspect of a game changes it drastically. A game is such a complicated system of interdependent objects and attributes, making it far more challenging to find out which part of a game is working and which is not. This can only be done by subtle iterations and lots of playtesting. And we used the cardboard available at university, for further elaboration these colors have to be adjusted to be suitable for colorblind players!

download the rules here