Wk 2: Day 2: A series of unfortunate events

Unfortunately today the servers were down for the Media Lab so we couldnt do any work. Also some of our team members didnt arrive so it means that we still have yet to decide on a theme focus. Because of this, I am going to focus my efforts on creating 'generalistic' event square logos from notes we made yesterday. This way hopefully my work can be applied to several different themes without needing to be changed.

Wk 2: Day 2: Act of God Cards

Early on in discussion Monday, our team had decided not to make cards, however looking at the basic gameplay ideas at the moment, it seems too plain. Thats when I had the idea for 'Act of God ' cards. Having asked a family member who was involved in construction work, he said that often crazy things would happen on site where he was. Having taken a few of the things he mentioned and some of my own here is a possible list of 'Acts of God' :

Discover Iron age burial ground (pay ..... (When people would find archilogical digs on a site, the building firm would have to pay for the dig to happen))
Local kids push down brickwork (pay ....)
Gales Blow the roof off (lose roof peice)
Discover rare toad colony, pay for their relocation (pay ...)
Accidently cut down preservation tree (pay ...)
Plumbers set fire to your house (pay .... (this came from something that happened to our next door neighbours - their plumbers accidently left a torch on and set fire to their house))
Lightning strike damages electrics (pay... (one of the members of the course had this happen to their street))
Accidently hire Cowboy Builders ( lose one peice to shoddy work)
Your work force suddenly flees the country - (miss a turn to rehire)
(Recent update : A construction member accidently floods your house and a fish is found in the room. Pay for repairs and a fishing license
Some local teens 'liberate' some of your street cones (miss a turn)

 positive ones:
Sell your story to a documentary show (gain money) - inspired by grand designs show on channel 4
Win Design award (money)
A local builder gives you a spare piece (gain piece)
Find gold coins (money)
You inherit a plot of land that you sell for money (money)
There are rumors about laama pouching near by. The newspaper uses you for its source (pick a player and they miss a turn trying to dispute the allegations)

I'll need to pitch this idea to my collegues so I decided to do some artwork for the symbol.

Considering how most of my artwork so far has been mainly based around symbols, I decided to continue this theme with my 'Act of God' concept. My first thought was the stereotypical hands in the air worship pose. I asked a friend to pose while I took the picture. Then using my tablet I traced their hands in photoshop, before applying the film grain effect.  After this, a stencil styled text was added, with the paint tool utilised to create the paint dripping effect. Finally I lowered the opacity of the layer to drop the intensity of the 'paint'.
Overall I was pretty impressed with the end product, and many of the people I showed noticed this more than other logos.

Wk 2: Day 2: Logo's

Considering our basic concept was based around the construction of a House being the objective, I decided to focus my attention on creating basic logos for application on the board - following the theme of simple house building.
In our meeting Monday a few ideas came up, such as Van Hire - which would allow a player to carry more than one construction piece around the board (i.e.: foundations and a wall piece, etc.), and a Demolition Crew - which would allow the player to remove one piece from the opponents board.

 

This was my concept for the Van Hire square. When speaking to everyone monday, the phrase Van empire or Van Hire made me think of the word vampire. Obviously that would be quite an obvious pun so I decided to edit the slogan to reflect this ' The necks (next) best thing for moving materials'. For the actual logo design I used the square and circular selection tools in photoshop with fill colour to construct the truck and semi circular mark. The Van Hire and slogan texts were made using one of the default photoshop typefaces. Finally I used the Neon artistic effect to create the red glow around the objects.

Another product of the selection tool and fill colour to construct the basic shape. Filling it with grey colouring, I used my tablet and the burn/ dodge tool to render it to seem more 3D. Again Photoshop effects were used for the grainy texture (Film Grain - Artistic). Finally I used two different typefaces from Photoshop to make the 'Wrecked' Demolition sign (lowered opacity for both a little to sink them into the wrecking ball).

For both of these different logos, simplicity was crucial. As board-games are often not too fancy, I decided early on to keep them more as symbols than images. Also, given that my 'theme' was the basic construction version of build it up, it needed to seem basic - as other versions would need to 'outshine' it (something learnt from looking at franchises of Monopoly.

Week 2: Day 1 -Meeting

Today we met up as a group and decided on the boardgame that we were going to do. Josh, a team member, thought it would be interesting for our game to have a 3D aspect to it (be it board, ect) but we decided it would be tough to impliment having a full 3D board like The game of Life and others. However eventually between us we focused the games objective to be a race game, that would have elements of time limit to it. Then we implimented Josh's suggestion of 3D into it by having the game to be a race to build some object (be it house, or army or castle). We also settled on the name 'Build it Up' for our concept and we decided to try out different themes as 'homework for tomorrow.

Im going to focus on a more conventional 'build a house'' style. This is because some members are in the construction buisness and it will be useful to pick their brains for some useful information that I can impliment into the game.

Day 6: Comparing different variations of Monopoly

One of the most licensed and varied board games over the last 20 years is Monopoly. When exploring Jarrolds, Toys 'R Us and Langley’s vast board game selections, there was around ten or more variants of the game in each of their various game selections. Here is two shots at Langley’s that perfectly demonstrate this point:

 

As you can see, Langley’s have over 30 Monopoly variants - including a Make Your Own copy; but what is the reason for these board game companies to use variance of box design and other game assets to fuel sales?

Interestingly when we were speaking about our research into board games and about them in general in our group, one member stated that while she didn't actually like Monopoly, she would likely buy a Halo franchised Monopoly set. When quizzed, she said that it would be interesting to see how they would fit some aspects of the Halo universe into the board game. Furthermore she is a fan of Halo so the whole ''collectors'' appeal suddenly comes to light. Surely it is these same points that cause Hasbro’s Parker games division to find it viable for these versions to be sold worldwide.

And furthermore other companies have seen that this is a huge way to make money and have created their own 'off brand' Monopoly sets - aptly named (something) -opoly. These are shown clearly in the right picture above and are made by 'Late for the Sky'. You can tell they are not official by slight variations. The biggest is that the Monopoly sign on the side of every Hasbro's copy never changes- no matter what the style. But yet these copies (for example Cat-Opoly and Choc-Opoly) have different type faces and do not feature the famous 'Monopoly Man' logo.

So from this it is clear that, however it is made, specialised board games aimed at a certain market clearly have the demand to warrant them being on the shop shelves - even in the video game age. But what makes them different from other copies? What changes are made to game assets and box art? Should we create a board game that is reliant on slight licensing (in the style of but not directly (otherwise copyright issues rear their ugly head)) then what could be changed and how.

To find this out, I photographed some copies of monopoly I had at home; Original Monopoly, Star Wars: Saga Edition and Star Wars: Clone Wars edition. 

From the beginning there are clear differences between colour and design of the side panels of the boxes. In roughly the centre of each box there is the Monopoly logo. On the traditional box there is the slogan 'The Property Trading Board Game' clearly visible beside the Monopoly logo. To the slogans right there is the Parker games logo (and under it, the recommended age group). In the corner of the left side there is the Yellow 'Try new quick rules inside' caption. The colour scheme is simple - red and white and the presentation is simple.

The other copies are a little bolder. The Clone Wars copy has a blue galaxy sky as the backdrop, the Star Wars logo in place of the 'quick rules' caption and a circular decal with 'New Force gameplay' in Star Wars typeface. The saga addition again is different. It justifies the Monopoly logo slightly to the left, whilst switching the Star Wars logo to the right. On each Star Wars box, they have placed the slogan under the Monopoly logo.

Both copies clearly have to redesign their boxes to allow the necessary advertising of the Star Wars brand and also to appear more appealing than the traditional box - as to persuade both the new buyer and people with monopoly sets already at home that they need that copy. On the other hand the Original Monopoly copy is almost overly simple. It doesn't really need to describe or sell itself to the public, given its astronomical reputation. Instead it simply just sells through the brand name.

So it is obvious that all sides of the box are important, not just the large box cover. This is normally only presented in shops for the well-known fancy games. This will mean that whoever is designing the box art will have to focus the attention actually on the side of the box. This is what the customer will see and it must be able to 'Hook' them. Then they will slide out the box and look at the cover.

Point: Use box sides to Hook the audience. Use mystery or fancy styling’s to do so perhaps?

          Then having done that the Cover/Back needs to make them WANT to buy it

      

The traditional Monopoly box is pretty simple. It retains it's mainly red and white colour scheme and has a photograph of the board taking up around two fifths of the cover. Above it the Monopoly logo takes up most of the space (once again the logo is in large typeface below it). In the top right corner it advertises its 'quick rules' in an identical fashion to how it was presented on the side.

The Clone Wars edition continues the sky backdrop onto the cover of the box. The Monopoly Logo is identical in Size, Position and Style to the original box. Below there is the Star Wars logo centred and the 'Battle of the Force gameplay' decal.  To either side characters have been picked from the film and placed around the various logos. It is from these that it is easy to tell that this copy had been crafted around a film, as they are direct screenshots.

This board game box-design is the most extravagant as it is made from slightly holographic/shiny card that reflects in the light. Furthermore the characters have been drawn and rendered in such a way that is both dramatic and realistic. The artist has chosen to use several movement lines to force your eyes into the centre of the box, and perspective based poses to depict a sense of drama. In the bottom left corner, there is a small golden area that advertises the detailed brass figures inside. This clearly is meant to be seen as a powerful selling point, else the box design wouldn’t have been as disturbed by the inclusion (compare the blue company logo to the bottom right with the area used for the figure advertising to determine how valuable they think that is).

Obviously, the design variations continue onto the back panels of the board game boxes, however it mainly retains the same template for each of the three versions. A large image of the playing surface takes up around just under half of the space, and the background colours continue onto the base. Furthermore details of the game are written to the left of the image. The back is somewhat less impressive than the front - as by the point where the customer is looking at the back; the key battle has been won (for the game to have been slid out of the display and taken into consideration). It is at the back where all that needs to be done is the game needs to be described, and other features advertised.

    Still, the Star Wars editions have tried again to improve upon the original copy - offering a much more dynamic camera angle for the playing surface picture and in the case of the 'Saga Edition' some space has been devoted to advertising the Collectors figurines. This widens the market of the game to collectors, beyond fans of Star Wars. This isn’t evident on the Clone Wars Editions - simply being just a promotion of the second film.

Having studied the box artwork, and how it specifically uses each piece of space wisely to target particular people and views, I know that designing and making the box will not just be a task for one, but maybe three of our eight people. Much time needs to be devoted to all of those sides as it is an integral part of the board game - as a product. Of course, the course is games art and design, so the emphasis is on making a working game and its assets - however if we had to make this like a real product - which would be a good mind-set, then assigning some of the team to creating the box would be important.

 

Now that I've looked pretty in depth at the outer layer of advertising and superficial colour - now it’s time to analysis the inner box.

The traditional Monopoly inners is comprised of red, moulded plastic in a way that allows slots for the property cards, the money, the metal playing pieces, the chance/ community chest cards and the Houses/ Hotels. This basic template is identical in the below edition - just black material has been used. The way Hasbro has produced this means that it is up to the player to organise the way they want to place each object before play. This could either reduce or significantly raise the set up time - but the result will be down to the player.

One 'con' to this is that the assets can be mixed up if the box is turned in transition, which can be irritating.

The saga edition's moulding is similar, but is altered to house the limited edition figures.

Here are the 'Houses' and 'Hotels' from the three Monopoly versions. The 'Clone Wars edition (far left) features a tall futuristic apartment block as the house, whilst the Hotel is a large spiked structure. These are presumably based off similar structures from the planet 'Coruscant' - a location in the second Star Wars film. These buildings, whilst being made of the same cheap, hollow, moulded plastic are a far cry from the simplistic original monopoly buildings. Those buildings are identical but for the fact that the red 'Hotel' is larger and not green. The Saga Edition Houses are similarly as complex as the Clone war's, if not more. The smaller white building is reminiscent of the buildings on Tatooine, whilst the 'Hotel' is a grey, small cityscape. The mechanical moulding process is obviously much more detailed for the Saga Edition than the other two.
         But as was evident with the way the box was presented, the Saga Edition is clearly aiming for the collectors market. This is all the more blatant when you consider the playing pieces below.

So far, Hasbro's has thought well and hard about how it can best fit in key aspects of the Star Wars universe - while keeping the production costs the same. I say this considering how, while Clone wars and Saga essentially become increasingly fancier, the materials, templates and actual manufacturing remains roughly the same. The card used is the same, as is the playing surface material. All that changes is what the mould looks like for the plastic assets, a few small rules and what is actually printed. The biggest variation is in the way the playing pieces have developed but even this isn’t hugely different.

The original monopoly piece is hollow and made of a thin silver metal. The Clone Wars 'Obi Wan' is similar, but with a different material used. The only variation is really with the Saga edition Obi Wan. It is made of a darker, fancier looking metal. Furthermore it is larger and features a coloured base. Also, it is clear that the moulding is far superior - offering greater likenesses and more extravagant characters can be made (General Grievous). This is where Hasbro's has had to pour more time into - to truly make it appeal to collectors in addition to their expected market.

Day 5: Playtesting from Day 3 (Cluedo)

The second game we played was Cluedo. Again the decision was chosen by my friends and I think once again a few things altered their decisions to why they wanted to play that game over others. Firstly the previous game 'The Worst Case Scenario Survival game' would have effected their decision. It was a question and answer ''race game'' and Cluedo is far removed from that genre. It is a Mystery / Strategy game. Also it would have likely have been Cluedo's reputation that also made them want to play it. It is well known and a ''classic''.
Like TWCSSG it was exceptionally quick to set up and familiarity with the game meant that the rules were refreshed in about a minute, meaning all players knew how to play (a problem with Scotland Yard was that they had to be ''guided'' by another player). The game comprised of:

-A large board divided into eight rooms. In the centre there is the logo and a graphic of a set of stairs.
-6 playing pieces (in this edition, each piece represented a character)
-2 dice
-A series of notepad paper with each object, a tick box and a notepad design printed onto them
-A series of cards with each object, character and place on them
Several metal representations of the objects

The game took the longest out of the 3 to set up but this said the actual set up time was low. The rules were that each player would pick their character. Then one player would shuffle the cards, placing three into the card folder to be hidden, and distributing the rest to the players. The players would then note down which cards they held. Each turn the players would move to around the board trying to traverse the rooms. In each room they would announce 1 Person, 1 Object and their current room. If any of the players had those cards they would show one of them (By doing this, players slowly eliminate all but 1 Person, 1 Object and 1 Room). At this point (or any during the game) the player can announce their final conclusion. They then look at the cards in the centre. If they are correct, they win – else they are kicked from the game (as they know who it is).

The game played well, and was good as it relied on strategy (whether to pursue your own thoughts or throw out a red herring).  The game time was 30 minutes each time (we played twice). This game time was perfect as it wasn’t too short and was long enough to warrant a second play.

Day 5: Playtesting from Day 3 (Scrabble)

The final game we played yesterday was Scrabble. The reason for the choice was this time down purely to the timespan of the other games (with Risk and Monopoly known for their long gameplay) and the fact that 'Who wants to be a Millionaire?' was essentially a similar genre as The Worst Case Scenario Survival Game. In a way this was good as it pointed out two key deterrents for players; Long gameplay time and duplicate gameplay styles.

Scrabble was easily the quickest to set up as it was made of few actual pieces when it comes to the setting up stage:
The Board
The bag of Letter tiles (within the bag there was 100 tiles containing each letter of the alphabet at least once)
And 4 Letter Stands

The rules of gameplay were similarly simple. Each player would have to have 7 tiles on their letter stands. Using those letters they would have to construct the best scoring words (by the points per each different letter (i.e.: E = 1 point, J = 8 points)). Once one word is down, players would then have to build their words off those words. In this way the player constructs the area of play. The winner is the player to have the most points when everyone runs out of tiles.

This game didn't play well and revealed the critical fault of building your own map as players. You can build an 'Unplayable' map by accident. Many times during play, players would have to lend each other letters so words could be made and play could continue. This is a big fault and led to another. The game ran on for one and a half hours - by which point players had grown tired of the game.

This was interesting and pointed out the flaw with relying on the player too much to make the game. They can accidently create faults and complicate the game to the point of losing the important enjoyment factor.
factor.