Active Experimentation/what happened
Now gathering all the data we had working on this game for the past month and a half we created a paper prototype. For this prototype to work we finalised the story and how it would work and which pages would the player would need to go to.
Page 1 was the intro telling the story and what has happened.
Page 2 was a list of suspects, this was added a little later as we found out from early testing that having only one or two suspects did not offer much variety or a challenge. So for the prototype we increased the number of suspects to six three males and three females.
Page 3 scene of the crime.
page 4 shadow, kid, paint.
page 5 cafe, a piece of cheese two options available go to p 11 or p 9
page 6 bathroom, fuzz two options available go to p 14 or p 10
page 7 long hair, cafe or bathroom.
page 8 storage room.
page 9 roof tiny paw prints and invitation to basement two options available go to p 13 or p 6
page 10 shadow or bathroom
page 11 janitors closet, pot of gold (end)
page 12
page 13 basement, tiny mouse party (end)
page 14 who do you think it is options available page 15-20
page 15 -20 list of suspects only one is correct.
While we had a prototype of our story was completed and playable for the members of our group we had realised that other groups in our class were sometimes lost and/or confused. Now this was a big problem if others were finding it difficult at this stage then we needed to fix and add some new things. The paper prototype is the bare bone of what we envisioned as the final piece in our minds would of been clearer since it would have solid directions and also many illustrations to help guide the reader.
What needs improving
much clearer format we for this prototype we just used text maybe if we used diagrams and symbols on to where to go next and such. Also some drawings to show progress.
What now.
While some things did not work we had progress in other areas because now we have a story and pages set out so the basics work and if we sorted the faults this could very well work with no problems. Doing a prototype is always necessary because now we know our faults and what works and how we can go on and improve it, not only that but it also first time you actually see if this idea would work or not if it don't work on paper then it wont work where ever we end up taking it.
Now that we had actively experimented the game we found flaws this meant that we had to go back to reflective observation and pin point the games errors to find out where and when they were happening and to fix it.
Kolbs learning cycle was perfect for the situation it really helps plan out what we were doing and what we needed to do next. For example getting into groups brainstorming ideas having a experience then looking back finding out early how we work as an individual and as part of a group. It was effective to reflect not only very early on but every time we did something productive. Once we had everything set we added the objectives, procedures and rules in order to be able to have a playable game. Once we had everything set we experimented and we found our flaws but this expected as we don't know if it works till we test it.
