Guidon
Team: Sparta
Game overview
Guidon: a small flag or streamer carried as a guide, for marking or signaling, or for identification.
Guidon is a location-based game of capture-the-flag. A number of teams (Microsoft, Sony,
Nintendo) compete to collect 'money' placed by a Game Master (the Market) and bring it back to their base. The team with the largest fortune wins.
Aims of the game
- Collect money
- Bring it back to your base
- Stop other teams from taking your market share
The game can be played by any number of teams.
We have developed it for 3 teams - Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo
Physical location
Boundaries
- Buildings 10 – 12 – 14 Levels: 9 – 11
- Only Stairs and Corridors. NO ROOMS AND ELEVATORS.
- Jail is in front of the elevators on Level 10 Bldg 12
- Microsoft: Level 11 Bldg 12. In front of elevators.
- Sony: Level 9 Bldg 12. In front of elevators.
- Nintendo: Level 10 Bldg 10. In front of elevators.
Silly string: Used as a weapon. If you are tagged by silly string, you are sent to jail. The Game
Master carries a can of silly string as well.
Goals of the game
- Collect as much money as you can.
- How players will achieve these goals
- Players search the play area for notes hidden by the Game Master (the Market). They will be placed
- and taken back at random intervals so there is only a limited amount of time to collect it within.
- You can also steal any money from someone you have tagged.
- One person can only carry one note at a time
- If a person carrying a note is tagged, he drops the note and goes to jail
- Notes hidden at bases can be found and stolen by other teams
- The Game Master places currency and sends out clues randomly
- GM can use the elevators and will be carrying a can of silly string
- GM can tag you but you can't tag the GM
1. 11, 14
Casual or Seasonal Gamer?
2. 11, 12
Man on Fire
3. 11, 10
Fresh from the Deli (multiple uses possible)
4. 9, 10
Exit (multiple uses possible)
5. 11, 10
'11'
6. 10, 10
Department Heads
7. 9, 12
G70 -
8. 10, 12
Love, R James
9. 9, 10
Programming Techniques help!
10.9, 14
Need a drink, think of Global Warming
1 comment:
Guidon game assessment
In the third session, I was gamemaster (with Rachel Collis) for my team's game, Guidon. The first 5 minutes were spent explaining the rules to the three teams, handing out team bracelets and silly string, and establishing mobile phone numbers so clues could be sent out via SMS. With each team at their base, I set off with the flags, while Rachel guarded the jail.
I only had two minutes headstart on the players, but I'd already hidden one flag before the session started so I had some breathing room. I had a list of locations that the team had prepared along with appropriate SMS clues. However, when it came time to actually play the game, the unpredictable element of where the players were forced me to abandon the planned locations and choose new ones where I could place the flag without being seen. Consulting the plan was also slowing me down, so the new ad hoc system made my job easier. I managed to place a flag once every 5 minutes, and by the end of the game I had placed nine of the ten flags.
The most time-consuming thing as gamemaster was writing the SMS messages. I found I could get them out in a timely fashion if I chose a location, typed out the clue on my mobile, then simultaneously hit 'Send' and place the flag. I had my own “Go directly to Jail” can of silly string to prevent players from following me around. This was such an effective deterrent that I never actually had to spray anybody. Unknown to me until the end of the game, one crafty player managed to tail me from a distance for part of the session, and win the game for their team. I guess that's my fault for not paying more attention.
For the most part, I could go about my business alone. The players were limited to the hallways and stairwells of levels 9, 10, and 11 in buildings 10, 12, and 14. By using floors 8 and 12, I found I could get from building to building without drawing attention to myself. I could also use the elevators which the players were resitricted from using, but these usually took too long to arrive to be effective.
To combat the problem of silly string being left everywhere, we decidedly quickly before the game that points would be deducted from teams who failed to clean up their own mess at the end of the game. While this rule sort of worked, the silly string is still a major limitation on where the game could be played.
The player response to the game was generally positive, though a few people complained that they were stuck in jail too long. Unfortunately, I couldn't get to the jail after I sent each clue like I should've. In hindsight, this could've been fixed if I'd also sent the clue to Rachel to let her know that the jail could be emptied.
I was a game master so didn’t get to play the third round game. I was in charge of the jail which meant that I just made sure nobody cheated by leaving jail early. Everyone seemed to enjoy the game, however some said that the rule that you couldn’t leave jail until the next clue was out was silly. What we didn’t think about was the fact that I wasn’t told when the next clue was out, which was a bit of stuff up. Otherwise it was great and went according to plan.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
Ages 12 and up, anyone who enjoys a treasure hunt style game.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why? It was very challenging (Medium), as you had to dodge other teams but also solve clues along the way.
Was it physically or mentally challenging? It did both of these fantastic, it was exhausting running from people and to the treasure areas but also mentally challenging because you had to figure out where the treasure was from the clues you were sent.
Does it have a steep learning curve? Learning how to understand how the game worked was instant, but playing it correctly took the time.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical? Very clear rules and the game was well thought out.
Are they easy to remember and follow? Very easy to remember and follow.
Are there enough or too many? They had thought of everything with the rules and was at a good amount.
Do they get in the way of playing the game? No they don’t they actually help the game play.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established? Yes from the very beginning you know exactly what your after its just how to get to it that you have to find out.
Is it over an appropriate area? Yes the 3 floors of building 10-14 was a perfect “arena” for their game.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? Yes the silly string can was a major player in the game and was very fun in large fire fights.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game? Yes the items fit in great with the game
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game? Extend the experience
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is? Get the most money to your base, hide it and keep it there until the time runs out. You get more money from working out clues and being the first one to the scene.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal? Yes they make total sense.
Do the goals seem meaningful? Yes, the goals for some reason motivated everyone in all the teams quite a lot. Maybe it was the thought of silly stringing someone into jail.
Duration
Did it take too long? No it was a good length
What was the experience like? Very exhausting (running, stairs) but incredibly fun and would do it again in a flash.
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not? It was a lot of fun because of multiple factors, the silly string weapon was a great idea. The clues using SMS was also a great idea, gave it a feeling of a real treasure hunt and properly organised location based game.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
I think they would as it is a really good fun game, but it would be very hard to do it in that area with strangers to the building due to most of the clues required prior knowledge.
What could have been improved?
The use of the lifts so we didn’t get so tired.
What really worked about it?
The sense of real teamwork and sticking together and working out the clues as a team as fast as you can.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
- 25 and below? For anyone who enjoys an active lifestyle since this game involves a lot of running.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
- Hard for couch potatoes, easy for sportsmen/women. Again, heaps of running.
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
- Physically!
Does it have a steep learning curve?
- Not really.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
- Definitely for some. It’s quite thrilling actually.. ☺
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
- Yes.
Are they easy to remember and follow?
- Yes.
Are there enough or too many?
- Just about the right amount.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
- No.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
- Yes.
Is it over an appropriate area?
- Yes.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
- No.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
- Yes.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
- No.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
- Yes, to get as many $100 bill as possible and at the same time to avoid getting “tagged” by other teams.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
- Yes.
Do the goals seem meaningful?
- Yes.
Duration
Did it take too long?
¬- No.
What was the experience like?
- Tiring but thrilling.
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
- Yes and No. Yes because it’s very thrilling, and no because there was a little too much running to do.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
- Yes I don’t see why not!
What could have been improved?
- Less running perhaps?
What really worked about it?
- The use of text messaging to communicate (between the game master and teams)
This game was heaps of fun it was definitely more my type of game. I believe it would appeal to anyone above the age of 7/8 years that could follow the rules and strategies and anyone who likes to be active, or who is competitive.
Physically challenging and easy rules to remember, I don’t think you would play it again to improve skills but you definitely would be better at it the second time I think you would return to play based on the fun factor, I felt a real comparison to zone 3 laser games, with the silly string as a weapon to catch you.
Easy to follow the rules fairly clear only I wasn’t sure if there should have been a time limit to get to jail as you could essentially keep wondering around no one policed it…. But I am not sure how successfully it could be implemented as you are on 3 levels n one can see.
Infact the jail was fun because our team used it as a way of not getting sprayed in-between getting text clues f you were sitting in jail people assumed you were meant to be there. But our team members could leave whenever they like.
The game area was a heap of fun I luved having 3 levels to play over and two stairwells it meant you could run circles and back track and in fact as our team split up a lot as a strategy, it worked well our team won the game but there was a particularly clever strategy by Weiqing he shadowed Joel who was the game master putting out the money to collect and he at times had found the money before the clue had been texted. It was a lot of fun to see people running around with the silly string I think that was excellent I am not sure how some of the other RMIT people felt at times they kind of seemed curious….
One problem I had was that a tactic was if I was chased run into the girls toilets problem was I was on a different level than I realised and ran into the men’s oops I ran back out very quickly still it did save me from being caught lol..
The goals were clear it all made sense the more cash you found you won… Though I had no idea we were deducted for silly string on the floor! We picked up some from other teams had we realised could of picked there’s up and spread it further around so they had more points deducted could have been a good strategy.
It went quickly I think the duration was long enough to establish strategies, to learn to work well as a team in that situation but not too long in that you got bored it was just right….
It was a lot of fun, I would definitely play it again just for fun.
Now this game involved some amusing running around…. kind of a location based team oriented first person shooter with only one weapon carrier per team all wrapped up in the very “non play space” of 3 levels of RMIT city campus….This premise indeed added to its hilarity and playfulness. The terror of being tag with silly string invoked some strange behavior, being in a flow state we yelled and screamed our way around hallways and hiding spots behind doors and corners of rooms… of course frightening non-game playing student’s and academic staff a like. Critic… Not knowing from the out set how much money was going to be dropped/hidden was frustrating, I was thinking that was would be lots of bills to find all over the place, but I believe there was only 5 in circulation in the game I played, our team had two lost one. A highlight of our game was when a competing teams silly string master surprised us all in an alcove and quickly took us all OUT! The whole team was sent to jail….
Who would the game appeal to?
Most ages and people who love laser tag.
Was it hard? Or easy? Why? It was hard but for good reasons such as designating which roles were suited to each team member and judging weather it was better to guard the base or go on a spraying rampage. There was room for intuition and tact and maybe even a little primitive force. The clues were a little too hard though and I think a lot of the “winning” came down to just scouring the halls at random instead.
Was it physically or mentally challenging? Both.
Does it have a steep learning curve? No, not too steep.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc? Definitely.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible? For the most part, except when it came to “Gaol” – the game really lagged because those who were sprayed and had to go to Gaol had to wait for the next clue which wasn't’ really clear unless you were the one holding the mobile
Are they easy to remember and follow? There were quite a few rules so it wasn’t the easiest to remember them all but they were easy to follow and
Are there enough or too many? Enough - just needed to be made a little clearer.
Do they get in the way of playing the game? Sometimes but in general no.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established? Yes, over three levels. Three bases. No elevators. Quite simple and clear which was good.
Is it over an appropriate area? Yes I think so. Using three levels that we were all kind of familiar with was good because we really had the chance to use some interesting location-based tactics. I.e. knowing where we could hide etc.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? Aha yes. Silly string was great fun.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game? Certainly. It’s a nice kind of weapon dare I say it. It also encourages player to be a little sparing and wise about how they use it.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game? A little.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is? To have the most items by the end of the game, to guard your team base from being ransacked and also your team member from being held hostage. Clear enough.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal? Yes, directly.
Do the goals seem meaningful? Yes! Fake $100s …even strangers thought so.
Duration
Did it take too long?
Nope. It probably could have kept going but that was fine.
What was the experience like?
Fun and exciting. Annoying when you had crazed sprayers who didn’t play fairly.
Was it fun? Why/not?
Yes. It was fun because it combined a lot of different elements of gameplay – physically (stairwell warfare, reflex action, stealth, camouflage, co-ordination) and mental (designated roles, communication with other team members, solving clues).
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Definitely.
What could have been improved?
Maybe the clue could have been designed a little better. Not so vague. Also, the time limits between clues and the Gaol limitations.
What worked?
The colour codes to separate the teams. The crazy string weapons. The goals. The 3 level, three base system. All good.
- The Rules were clear
- Goals were well defined
- The game could have been played in a public area such as a park or empty classrooms where it would not disturb other people.
- The use of silly string was good as it fitted into the context of the game and it made the game safe
- The game needs more incentive to be played again as it felt like a one off experience
We went through a very thorough tutorial before hand with this one. The game itself is also quite complex so a good tutorial was needed but Team Sparta totally delivered. Already just hearing about the rules we were telling each other within our team that this sounded pretty cool. The game requires fast thinking which means it wouldn't suit a too young a audience and in some moments quick reflexes. Three competing teams during our playtest, each team getting sms messages which hinted towards the location of hidden money notes which if collected earned you points. As expected these notes were always hidden in 'enemy territory' (other teams bases) so this involved a lot of sneaking around as each team were equipped with a spray canister. If you were sprayed you would have to go to jail and stay there until the next sms message clue was received. At one time our whole team was sprayed at once. This hide and seek element is actually highly thrilling and combining that with having to find resources for points as well as trying to avoid/attack other teams made this a highly enjoyable game. The playing area (three floors worth of hallways) perfectly suited the three teams and our playtest was virtually devoid of problems. The game requires heavy planning, a thorough tutorial and it requires a fair bit of equipement so it won't easily be brought up but it is highly entertaining. Funnily enough they had given the game a theme were each competing team were one of the three larger game companies (Sony, Nintendo & Microsoft) which made it kinda relative to our program. In our teams opinion this was the best game we played.
This game would appeal to the informed gamer, people familiar with first person shooters on computer as well as laser gamers and paintballers. Ages 5-60 might be the most obvious group, but it would depend on the individual’s lifestyle and experience. Players might need to have an understanding of the ideas behind skirmishes/ capture the flag gameplay.
It was difficult co-ordinating group members strategically, we could be separate for extended periods spread throughout floors or trapped in jail. It proved to be too easy for one of our group members who was stalking the gamemaster as he dropped off the money to be found.
It struck a great balance being both physically and mentally challenging. I think it is immediately playable but has the potential to take longer to master. I see this game as the prime example of a game where people can come back to it again to improve their skill and tactics.
Rules
The rules are mainly clear, comprehensible, and logical.
They are easy to remember but may be harder to follow. E.G. players running out of game area for safety – or player taking too long to get to jail (no one’s in a hurry to be incarcerated!). Are
I think there were enough rules.
The rule of only one person as the silly string holder and only one player with the mobile phone, made the game quiet for long periods when team-mates were split up.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
I’m not certain if the sense of the scope of the game was established. I think the area chosen for this location based game worked well. It utilised the immediate area of RMIT familiar to us all and transformed it into something else!
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? All paraphernalia; silly string, mobile, fake money and coloured ribbon proved to be appropriate for the game to work.
These items fit in with the fun theme of the game, even down to the group factions of Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft. I’m not however, sure if they extend the experience or potential of the game.
Goals
The goal of the game was to collect the most money within the game rules. The majority of game actions make sense in relation to the goal. The goal of winning the most money seems meaningful according to the game’s capitalism theme.
Duration
The game was a lot of fun and took the right amount of time!
What was the experience like?
The experience of groups was a good bonding exercise, where we could work together for a common goal. It also had a sense of role-playing.
Gameplay.
This game had fun written all over it. Well done guys! The competition it created was an adrenaline pumping experience. This game would definitely be taken up by people willing to play!
To improve the game I would have liked maybe an extra person with a mobile to avoid missing clues. I would have liked two cans of silly string per group but understand the negative potentially causing double the chaos and mess!
I liked how the various game elements worked well together. There was enough interest and complexity between the silly string warfare, the finding and hiding of the money and the punishment of the jail.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
Any one from about 5 up to 45
Was it too hard? Or Easy ? Why?
The game was of moderate difficulty to play
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
The game was both physically and mentally challenging because you have to run around and deciphers clues.
Does it have a steep learning curve?
No not once the rules have been expand to you.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Yes people would come back to play this game to hone there skills and to come up with alternat strategies and also because it was just a fun game to play.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Yes
Are they easy to remember and follow?
Yes
Are there enough or too many?
There are adequate rules to this game.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
No, not that I found.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
Yes
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
A mobile phone, silly string and team ribbons.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
They made the game more exciting.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
Yes it’s outlined clearly in the rules.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Yes.
Duration
Did it take too long?
No the game was of sufficient length
What was the experience like?
It was very fun to play and I would like to play it agene
Gameplay
Was it fun? And why/not?
Yes it was, there was a since of excitement and tension the hole time we were playing the Guidon it was an remarkably fun game to play.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Yes I would like to play it agene with even more silly string.
What could have been improved?
The game seemed to run smoothly and without a glitch.
What really worked about it?
Just the whole concept of the game was fun, you had to work as a team to work out the clues and you all had come up with ever changing strategies.
The game was very fun and challenging the whole time.
A sort of hide and seek meets treasure hunt sort of game. Which consisted of a few groups looking for clues (money bills). The team that found the most clues would end up being the winner. Personally the game I felt was a little hard to understand but had moments where it was quite fun.
Who would the game appeal to?
The game would appeal to ages who are highly energetic I would say year 7 – 10.
Was it to hard? Or Easy? Why?
The game wasn’t extremely hard but required much running around from people.
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
It was physically challenging since each team had to run away from each other. And the mental challenge was trying to work out where each money bill is (aka each clue.)
Does it have a steep learning curve?
Trying to learn the game was the issue, took a lot of time but once it was understood it became a little more understandable.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill ect?
Due to the amount of time and effort it took for the game to actually start I would say that people wouldn’t come back to it. A one off due to the amount of time.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Basically the rules weren’t very clear or understandable. Once the game went on you got a little more of an understanding on the game, but still didn’t have a full knowledge.
Are they easy to remember and follow?
No, for a lot of the time you have to really think about what is going on. But once you understood the clue or what you were looking for the game had good moments when having to get away from everyone and find the clue first.
Are there enough or too many?
There were to many rules.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
Yes
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
No
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
No
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
Yes
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
Yes
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
To find the most clues (money bills)
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Yes
Do the goals seem meaningful?
The goal is meaningful since it is the main objective of what you had to do in the game.
Duration
Did it take too long?
Yes
What was the experience like?
Gameplay
The experience was ok. I felt that a better area to move around would have been appropriate rather then the levels of each building.
Was it fun? And why/not?
It had moments where it was fun but I felt that the duration started to make the game very repetitive. What would of made the game better would have been a more vast area so you could actually move more then 2 stories of the rmit building.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Personally I wouldn’t due to what you had to understand.
What could have been improved?
The location, and not as many rules.
What really worked about it?
Where the clues were located and the system to at which each group found out where the next clue was.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
This Game could be played by any person who is able to walk/run. It is some kind of treasure hunt and catch people. Also some kind of Ego-Shooter game.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
Does it have a steep learning curve?
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
The Game itself was not really hard. You just have to hind and seek and work with your team member. One of your team member has some kind of weapon which can be used to catch other team members and if they have money to rob them. When this happens, those players also have to go to a place like a prison which is guarded by a game master. You get clues, where the money is hidden by another game master. So it was physically and mentally challenging.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Are they easy to remember and follow?
Are there enough or too many?
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
It was a bit more complicated than the other games I payed but I was really clear and it made sense. It was not really hard to remember and once you played it, you were into it.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Is it over an appropriate area?
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
The place should be not too big. You need starting points which are also the teams personal “homes”. There they can store the money they found or robbed.
Than a place which can be used as a prison. You need some kind of a weapon (which marks the aimed player). We used some kind of a Spray, where stripes shoot out. Those were in different colours. So you could see which player was hit by which team. We played it with 3 different teams. Each consists of 4-5 players. So in total 15 players. Also you need a mobile phone to receive information/clues where the money is hidden.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Do the goals seem meaningful?
The Goals of that Game were clear. The team who got the most money won.
Duration
Did it take too long?
The Game ended when all money were placed by the game master. So in my case, the game took nearly an hour to play.
What was the experience like?
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
What could have been improved?
What really worked about it?
It was really a lot of fun. I personally liked that game the most. It was really about commitment, team play and interactive. Everyone had their personal tasks. So one player had the “weapon” (it was not allowed to hand this another player) and the other ones tried to find the money which were hidden by one of the game master.
So the player with the weapon could send other team members to prison or rob other team members while the other ones try to find the money or bring the money safely to their base and hide it there somewhere so nobody could find it.
First the name is lost beyond me. The aim of this game was probably the most enjoyable of the bunch as it required us to go on a treasure hunt. And who doesn’t like a treasure hunt. Although it was quite hard and the clues sent to us via mobile phone text msg couldn’t have been more cryptic. As well as hiding places for the money (objectives) being next to impossible to find, especially in a uni the size of rmit. The use of silly string was genius as silly string is always fun and more often that not involved running around and screaming like a moron. Also helped to develop tricky traps to lure enemy teams into a barrage of silly string fire from a hidden location. Puzzle solving was required which involved thinking, very entertaining, but quick thinking on the move as well as staying aware of other teams whereabouts so as to not be thrown in jail.
This game was probably my top choice of the 3 tested as it was fun, sociable, silly, intelligent, and immature. Loved it.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
I think to everyone from 8 and on til 40 or something when they don’t like to play anything
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
Depends on the opponent, but the game itself is not really hard
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
More physically than mentally
Does it have a steep learning curve?
nop
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Yeah,sure,although rather than to improve their skill,it will be just to have fun
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
yes
Are they easy to remember and follow?
yes
Are there enough or too many?
enough
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
no
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
Well,yes,we ran everywhere and didn’t have any complaints
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
Well,just the basic,mobile funs,something to be the gun,and the bills
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
yes
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
no
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
yes
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
yes
Do the goals seem meaningful?
Well,it wont change your view of life but within the game yes
Duration
Did it take too long?
nop
What was the experience like?
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
Yes,it was
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
yes
What could have been improved?
Maybe to change the scenario
What really worked about it?
That you have to be paying attention all the time
Guidon game assessment
In the third session, I was gamemaster (with Rachel Collis) for my team's game, Guidon. The first 5 minutes were spent explaining the rules to the three teams, handing out team bracelets and silly string, and establishing mobile phone numbers so clues could be sent out via SMS. With each team at their base, I set off with the flags, while Rachel guarded the jail.
I only had two minutes headstart on the players, but I'd already hidden one flag before the session started so I had some breathing room. I had a list of locations that the team had prepared along with appropriate SMS clues. However, when it came time to actually play the game, the unpredictable element of where the players were forced me to abandon the planned locations and choose new ones where I could place the flag without being seen. Consulting the plan was also slowing me down, so the new ad hoc system made my job easier. I managed to place a flag once every 5 minutes, and by the end of the game I had placed nine of the ten flags.
The most time-consuming thing as gamemaster was writing the SMS messages. I found I could get them out in a timely fashion if I chose a location, typed out the clue on my mobile, then simultaneously hit 'Send' and place the flag. I had my own “Go directly to Jail” can of silly string to prevent players from following me around. This was such an effective deterrent that I never actually had to spray anybody. Unknown to me until the end of the game, one crafty player managed to tail me from a distance for part of the session, and win the game for their team. I guess that's my fault for not paying more attention.
For the most part, I could go about my business alone. The players were limited to the hallways and stairwells of levels 9, 10, and 11 in buildings 10, 12, and 14. By using floors 8 and 12, I found I could get from building to building without drawing attention to myself. I could also use the elevators which the players were resitricted from using, but these usually took too long to arrive to be effective.
To combat the problem of silly string being left everywhere, we decidedly quickly before the game that points would be deducted from teams who failed to clean up their own mess at the end of the game. While this rule sort of worked, the silly string is still a major limitation on where the game could be played.
The player response to the game was generally positive, though a few people complained that they were stuck in jail too long. Unfortunately, I couldn't get to the jail after I sent each clue like I should've. In hindsight, this could've been fixed if I'd also sent the clue to Rachel to let her know that the jail could be emptied.
I was a game master so didn’t get to play the third round game. I was in charge of the jail which meant that I just made sure nobody cheated by leaving jail early. Everyone seemed to enjoy the game, however some said that the rule that you couldn’t leave jail until the next clue was out was silly. What we didn’t think about was the fact that I wasn’t told when the next clue was out, which was a bit of stuff up. Otherwise it was great and went according to plan.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
Ages 12 and up, anyone who enjoys a treasure hunt style game.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why? It was very challenging (Medium), as you had to dodge other teams but also solve clues along the way.
Was it physically or mentally challenging? It did both of these fantastic, it was exhausting running from people and to the treasure areas but also mentally challenging because you had to figure out where the treasure was from the clues you were sent.
Does it have a steep learning curve? Learning how to understand how the game worked was instant, but playing it correctly took the time.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical? Very clear rules and the game was well thought out.
Are they easy to remember and follow? Very easy to remember and follow.
Are there enough or too many? They had thought of everything with the rules and was at a good amount.
Do they get in the way of playing the game? No they don’t they actually help the game play.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established? Yes from the very beginning you know exactly what your after its just how to get to it that you have to find out.
Is it over an appropriate area? Yes the 3 floors of building 10-14 was a perfect “arena” for their game.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? Yes the silly string can was a major player in the game and was very fun in large fire fights.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game? Yes the items fit in great with the game
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game? Extend the experience
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is? Get the most money to your base, hide it and keep it there until the time runs out. You get more money from working out clues and being the first one to the scene.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal? Yes they make total sense.
Do the goals seem meaningful? Yes, the goals for some reason motivated everyone in all the teams quite a lot. Maybe it was the thought of silly stringing someone into jail.
Duration
Did it take too long? No it was a good length
What was the experience like? Very exhausting (running, stairs) but incredibly fun and would do it again in a flash.
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not? It was a lot of fun because of multiple factors, the silly string weapon was a great idea. The clues using SMS was also a great idea, gave it a feeling of a real treasure hunt and properly organised location based game.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
I think they would as it is a really good fun game, but it would be very hard to do it in that area with strangers to the building due to most of the clues required prior knowledge.
What could have been improved?
The use of the lifts so we didn’t get so tired.
What really worked about it?
The sense of real teamwork and sticking together and working out the clues as a team as fast as you can.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
- 25 and below? For anyone who enjoys an active lifestyle since this game involves a lot of running.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
- Hard for couch potatoes, easy for sportsmen/women. Again, heaps of running.
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
- Physically!
Does it have a steep learning curve?
- Not really.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
- Definitely for some. It’s quite thrilling actually.. ☺
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
- Yes.
Are they easy to remember and follow?
- Yes.
Are there enough or too many?
- Just about the right amount.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
- No.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
- Yes.
Is it over an appropriate area?
- Yes.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
- No.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
- Yes.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
- No.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
- Yes, to get as many $100 bill as possible and at the same time to avoid getting “tagged” by other teams.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
- Yes.
Do the goals seem meaningful?
- Yes.
Duration
Did it take too long?
¬- No.
What was the experience like?
- Tiring but thrilling.
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
- Yes and No. Yes because it’s very thrilling, and no because there was a little too much running to do.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
- Yes I don’t see why not!
What could have been improved?
- Less running perhaps?
What really worked about it?
- The use of text messaging to communicate (between the game master and teams)
This game was heaps of fun it was definitely more my type of game. I believe it would appeal to anyone above the age of 7/8 years that could follow the rules and strategies and anyone who likes to be active, or who is competitive.
Physically challenging and easy rules to remember, I don’t think you would play it again to improve skills but you definitely would be better at it the second time I think you would return to play based on the fun factor, I felt a real comparison to zone 3 laser games, with the silly string as a weapon to catch you.
Easy to follow the rules fairly clear only I wasn’t sure if there should have been a time limit to get to jail as you could essentially keep wondering around no one policed it…. But I am not sure how successfully it could be implemented as you are on 3 levels n one can see.
Infact the jail was fun because our team used it as a way of not getting sprayed in-between getting text clues f you were sitting in jail people assumed you were meant to be there. But our team members could leave whenever they like.
The game area was a heap of fun I luved having 3 levels to play over and two stairwells it meant you could run circles and back track and in fact as our team split up a lot as a strategy, it worked well our team won the game but there was a particularly clever strategy by Weiqing he shadowed Joel who was the game master putting out the money to collect and he at times had found the money before the clue had been texted. It was a lot of fun to see people running around with the silly string I think that was excellent I am not sure how some of the other RMIT people felt at times they kind of seemed curious….
One problem I had was that a tactic was if I was chased run into the girls toilets problem was I was on a different level than I realised and ran into the men’s oops I ran back out very quickly still it did save me from being caught lol..
The goals were clear it all made sense the more cash you found you won… Though I had no idea we were deducted for silly string on the floor! We picked up some from other teams had we realised could of picked there’s up and spread it further around so they had more points deducted could have been a good strategy.
It went quickly I think the duration was long enough to establish strategies, to learn to work well as a team in that situation but not too long in that you got bored it was just right….
It was a lot of fun, I would definitely play it again just for fun.
Now this game involved some amusing running around…. kind of a location based team oriented first person shooter with only one weapon carrier per team all wrapped up in the very “non play space” of 3 levels of RMIT city campus….This premise indeed added to its hilarity and playfulness. The terror of being tag with silly string invoked some strange behavior, being in a flow state we yelled and screamed our way around hallways and hiding spots behind doors and corners of rooms… of course frightening non-game playing student’s and academic staff a like. Critic… Not knowing from the out set how much money was going to be dropped/hidden was frustrating, I was thinking that was would be lots of bills to find all over the place, but I believe there was only 5 in circulation in the game I played, our team had two lost one. A highlight of our game was when a competing teams silly string master surprised us all in an alcove and quickly took us all OUT! The whole team was sent to jail….
Who would the game appeal to?
Most ages and people who love laser tag.
Was it hard? Or easy? Why? It was hard but for good reasons such as designating which roles were suited to each team member and judging weather it was better to guard the base or go on a spraying rampage. There was room for intuition and tact and maybe even a little primitive force. The clues were a little too hard though and I think a lot of the “winning” came down to just scouring the halls at random instead.
Was it physically or mentally challenging? Both.
Does it have a steep learning curve? No, not too steep.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc? Definitely.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible? For the most part, except when it came to “Gaol” – the game really lagged because those who were sprayed and had to go to Gaol had to wait for the next clue which wasn't’ really clear unless you were the one holding the mobile
Are they easy to remember and follow? There were quite a few rules so it wasn’t the easiest to remember them all but they were easy to follow and
Are there enough or too many? Enough - just needed to be made a little clearer.
Do they get in the way of playing the game? Sometimes but in general no.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established? Yes, over three levels. Three bases. No elevators. Quite simple and clear which was good.
Is it over an appropriate area? Yes I think so. Using three levels that we were all kind of familiar with was good because we really had the chance to use some interesting location-based tactics. I.e. knowing where we could hide etc.
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? Aha yes. Silly string was great fun.
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game? Certainly. It’s a nice kind of weapon dare I say it. It also encourages player to be a little sparing and wise about how they use it.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game? A little.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is? To have the most items by the end of the game, to guard your team base from being ransacked and also your team member from being held hostage. Clear enough.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal? Yes, directly.
Do the goals seem meaningful? Yes! Fake $100s …even strangers thought so.
Duration
Did it take too long?
Nope. It probably could have kept going but that was fine.
What was the experience like?
Fun and exciting. Annoying when you had crazed sprayers who didn’t play fairly.
Was it fun? Why/not?
Yes. It was fun because it combined a lot of different elements of gameplay – physically (stairwell warfare, reflex action, stealth, camouflage, co-ordination) and mental (designated roles, communication with other team members, solving clues).
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Definitely.
What could have been improved?
Maybe the clue could have been designed a little better. Not so vague. Also, the time limits between clues and the Gaol limitations.
What worked?
The colour codes to separate the teams. The crazy string weapons. The goals. The 3 level, three base system. All good.
- The Rules were clear
- Goals were well defined
- The game could have been played in a public area such as a park or empty classrooms where it would not disturb other people.
- The use of silly string was good as it fitted into the context of the game and it made the game safe
- The game needs more incentive to be played again as it felt like a one off experience
We went through a very thorough tutorial before hand with this one. The game itself is also quite complex so a good tutorial was needed but Team Sparta totally delivered. Already just hearing about the rules we were telling each other within our team that this sounded pretty cool. The game requires fast thinking which means it wouldn't suit a too young a audience and in some moments quick reflexes. Three competing teams during our playtest, each team getting sms messages which hinted towards the location of hidden money notes which if collected earned you points. As expected these notes were always hidden in 'enemy territory' (other teams bases) so this involved a lot of sneaking around as each team were equipped with a spray canister. If you were sprayed you would have to go to jail and stay there until the next sms message clue was received. At one time our whole team was sprayed at once. This hide and seek element is actually highly thrilling and combining that with having to find resources for points as well as trying to avoid/attack other teams made this a highly enjoyable game. The playing area (three floors worth of hallways) perfectly suited the three teams and our playtest was virtually devoid of problems. The game requires heavy planning, a thorough tutorial and it requires a fair bit of equipement so it won't easily be brought up but it is highly entertaining. Funnily enough they had given the game a theme were each competing team were one of the three larger game companies (Sony, Nintendo & Microsoft) which made it kinda relative to our program. In our teams opinion this was the best game we played.
This game would appeal to the informed gamer, people familiar with first person shooters on computer as well as laser gamers and paintballers. Ages 5-60 might be the most obvious group, but it would depend on the individual’s lifestyle and experience. Players might need to have an understanding of the ideas behind skirmishes/ capture the flag gameplay.
It was difficult co-ordinating group members strategically, we could be separate for extended periods spread throughout floors or trapped in jail. It proved to be too easy for one of our group members who was stalking the gamemaster as he dropped off the money to be found.
It struck a great balance being both physically and mentally challenging. I think it is immediately playable but has the potential to take longer to master. I see this game as the prime example of a game where people can come back to it again to improve their skill and tactics.
Rules
The rules are mainly clear, comprehensible, and logical.
They are easy to remember but may be harder to follow. E.G. players running out of game area for safety – or player taking too long to get to jail (no one’s in a hurry to be incarcerated!). Are
I think there were enough rules.
The rule of only one person as the silly string holder and only one player with the mobile phone, made the game quiet for long periods when team-mates were split up.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
I’m not certain if the sense of the scope of the game was established. I think the area chosen for this location based game worked well. It utilised the immediate area of RMIT familiar to us all and transformed it into something else!
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate? All paraphernalia; silly string, mobile, fake money and coloured ribbon proved to be appropriate for the game to work.
These items fit in with the fun theme of the game, even down to the group factions of Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft. I’m not however, sure if they extend the experience or potential of the game.
Goals
The goal of the game was to collect the most money within the game rules. The majority of game actions make sense in relation to the goal. The goal of winning the most money seems meaningful according to the game’s capitalism theme.
Duration
The game was a lot of fun and took the right amount of time!
What was the experience like?
The experience of groups was a good bonding exercise, where we could work together for a common goal. It also had a sense of role-playing.
Gameplay.
This game had fun written all over it. Well done guys! The competition it created was an adrenaline pumping experience. This game would definitely be taken up by people willing to play!
To improve the game I would have liked maybe an extra person with a mobile to avoid missing clues. I would have liked two cans of silly string per group but understand the negative potentially causing double the chaos and mess!
I liked how the various game elements worked well together. There was enough interest and complexity between the silly string warfare, the finding and hiding of the money and the punishment of the jail.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
Any one from about 5 up to 45
Was it too hard? Or Easy ? Why?
The game was of moderate difficulty to play
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
The game was both physically and mentally challenging because you have to run around and deciphers clues.
Does it have a steep learning curve?
No not once the rules have been expand to you.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Yes people would come back to play this game to hone there skills and to come up with alternat strategies and also because it was just a fun game to play.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Yes
Are they easy to remember and follow?
Yes
Are there enough or too many?
There are adequate rules to this game.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
No, not that I found.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
Yes
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
A mobile phone, silly string and team ribbons.
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
They made the game more exciting.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
Yes it’s outlined clearly in the rules.
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Yes.
Duration
Did it take too long?
No the game was of sufficient length
What was the experience like?
It was very fun to play and I would like to play it agene
Gameplay
Was it fun? And why/not?
Yes it was, there was a since of excitement and tension the hole time we were playing the Guidon it was an remarkably fun game to play.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Yes I would like to play it agene with even more silly string.
What could have been improved?
The game seemed to run smoothly and without a glitch.
What really worked about it?
Just the whole concept of the game was fun, you had to work as a team to work out the clues and you all had come up with ever changing strategies.
The game was very fun and challenging the whole time.
A sort of hide and seek meets treasure hunt sort of game. Which consisted of a few groups looking for clues (money bills). The team that found the most clues would end up being the winner. Personally the game I felt was a little hard to understand but had moments where it was quite fun.
Who would the game appeal to?
The game would appeal to ages who are highly energetic I would say year 7 – 10.
Was it to hard? Or Easy? Why?
The game wasn’t extremely hard but required much running around from people.
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
It was physically challenging since each team had to run away from each other. And the mental challenge was trying to work out where each money bill is (aka each clue.)
Does it have a steep learning curve?
Trying to learn the game was the issue, took a lot of time but once it was understood it became a little more understandable.
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill ect?
Due to the amount of time and effort it took for the game to actually start I would say that people wouldn’t come back to it. A one off due to the amount of time.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Basically the rules weren’t very clear or understandable. Once the game went on you got a little more of an understanding on the game, but still didn’t have a full knowledge.
Are they easy to remember and follow?
No, for a lot of the time you have to really think about what is going on. But once you understood the clue or what you were looking for the game had good moments when having to get away from everyone and find the clue first.
Are there enough or too many?
There were to many rules.
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
Yes
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
No
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
No
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
Yes
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
Yes
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
To find the most clues (money bills)
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Yes
Do the goals seem meaningful?
The goal is meaningful since it is the main objective of what you had to do in the game.
Duration
Did it take too long?
Yes
What was the experience like?
Gameplay
The experience was ok. I felt that a better area to move around would have been appropriate rather then the levels of each building.
Was it fun? And why/not?
It had moments where it was fun but I felt that the duration started to make the game very repetitive. What would of made the game better would have been a more vast area so you could actually move more then 2 stories of the rmit building.
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
Personally I wouldn’t due to what you had to understand.
What could have been improved?
The location, and not as many rules.
What really worked about it?
Where the clues were located and the system to at which each group found out where the next clue was.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
This Game could be played by any person who is able to walk/run. It is some kind of treasure hunt and catch people. Also some kind of Ego-Shooter game.
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
Does it have a steep learning curve?
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
The Game itself was not really hard. You just have to hind and seek and work with your team member. One of your team member has some kind of weapon which can be used to catch other team members and if they have money to rob them. When this happens, those players also have to go to a place like a prison which is guarded by a game master. You get clues, where the money is hidden by another game master. So it was physically and mentally challenging.
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
Are they easy to remember and follow?
Are there enough or too many?
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
It was a bit more complicated than the other games I payed but I was really clear and it made sense. It was not really hard to remember and once you played it, you were into it.
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
Is it over an appropriate area?
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
The place should be not too big. You need starting points which are also the teams personal “homes”. There they can store the money they found or robbed.
Than a place which can be used as a prison. You need some kind of a weapon (which marks the aimed player). We used some kind of a Spray, where stripes shoot out. Those were in different colours. So you could see which player was hit by which team. We played it with 3 different teams. Each consists of 4-5 players. So in total 15 players. Also you need a mobile phone to receive information/clues where the money is hidden.
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
Do the goals seem meaningful?
The Goals of that Game were clear. The team who got the most money won.
Duration
Did it take too long?
The Game ended when all money were placed by the game master. So in my case, the game took nearly an hour to play.
What was the experience like?
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
What could have been improved?
What really worked about it?
It was really a lot of fun. I personally liked that game the most. It was really about commitment, team play and interactive. Everyone had their personal tasks. So one player had the “weapon” (it was not allowed to hand this another player) and the other ones tried to find the money which were hidden by one of the game master.
So the player with the weapon could send other team members to prison or rob other team members while the other ones try to find the money or bring the money safely to their base and hide it there somewhere so nobody could find it.
First the name is lost beyond me. The aim of this game was probably the most enjoyable of the bunch as it required us to go on a treasure hunt. And who doesn’t like a treasure hunt. Although it was quite hard and the clues sent to us via mobile phone text msg couldn’t have been more cryptic. As well as hiding places for the money (objectives) being next to impossible to find, especially in a uni the size of rmit. The use of silly string was genius as silly string is always fun and more often that not involved running around and screaming like a moron. Also helped to develop tricky traps to lure enemy teams into a barrage of silly string fire from a hidden location. Puzzle solving was required which involved thinking, very entertaining, but quick thinking on the move as well as staying aware of other teams whereabouts so as to not be thrown in jail.
This game was probably my top choice of the 3 tested as it was fun, sociable, silly, intelligent, and immature. Loved it.
Who would the game appeal to? (age groups, demographics)
I think to everyone from 8 and on til 40 or something when they don’t like to play anything
Was it too hard? Or Easy? Why?
Depends on the opponent, but the game itself is not really hard
Was it physically or mentally challenging?
More physically than mentally
Does it have a steep learning curve?
nop
Would it be a game people came back to play again to improve their skill etc?
Yeah,sure,although rather than to improve their skill,it will be just to have fun
Rules
Are they clear, comprehensible, logical?
yes
Are they easy to remember and follow?
yes
Are there enough or too many?
enough
Do they get in the way of playing the game?
no
Magic Circle
Is a sense of the scope of the game established?
yes
Is it over an appropriate area?
Well,yes,we ran everywhere and didn’t have any complaints
Is any special paraphernalia needed for it appropriate?
Well,just the basic,mobile funs,something to be the gun,and the bills
Do such items fit in with the theme of the game?
yes
Do they extend the experience or potential of the game?
no
Goals
Do you know what the goal of the game is?
yes
Do the game actions make sense in relation to the goal?
yes
Do the goals seem meaningful?
Well,it wont change your view of life but within the game yes
Duration
Did it take too long?
nop
What was the experience like?
Gameplay.
Was it fun? And why/not?
Yes,it was
Would anyone play it if they weren’t being forced to?
yes
What could have been improved?
Maybe to change the scenario
What really worked about it?
That you have to be paying attention all the time
Post a Comment