Prototype Critique: Jessica's Avatar Game

Here is a very late critiques of Jessica's game.

1. Name/designer: The Avatar Game, Jessica

2. Platform/category: party game

3. Core mechanic: drawing, matching (drawings to the drawer)

4. Play experience adjectives: creativity-inspiring, humorous, psychological, puzzling

5. Structure: Jessica's game has minimal structure but enough to be compelling and entertaining. However, in its prototype state, I think it succeeds more as an activity than a game. The payoff is more in learning who drew which avatar than in winning. The creation of a magic circle is minimal because there aren't enough restrictions in play to make players feel like they're doing anything other than what they might ordinarily do: draw a picture or look at a picture and try to figure out who drew it. Adding more restrictions on drawing or guessing would create more of a game by forcing players to do what they wouldn't ordinarily do. For example, if players had to draw avatars for others, both the drawing and guessing would become something out of the ordinary.

6. Best game element: I liked that drawers were given small pieces of canvas to draw on. This transformed what might have been throw-away items (like the sketches from Pictionary) into what Jessica called "souvenirs," or mementos of the game. I also liked the time restriction on drawing and guessing. That kept the game from being endless and, again, nudged the activity away from the ordinary.

7. Clarity of rules: The rules were only somewhat clear. I'd say a 5. Jessica mentioned something about the guessers having to explain what they thought certain avatars belonged to certain players. This was not carried out during play partly because the instructions weren't clear.

8. Strategy: Because the goal of the game seemed secondary to the activity, drawers did not have a reason to either make their avatars clearly their own or misleading. Guessers simply tried to do their best. Strategy did not seem to exist. If more rules were added, a strategy might emerge. Say the guessers had colored guessing chips, some of which were real and some of which were fake (marked on the back). If each drawing is guessed in turn, then a player could put his or her real chip on a drawing and fake chip on another drawing in order to bluff (i.e. mislead other players). An even simpler idea is to have players guess in turn. That would allow the guessers to use other players' votes as clues as to who the drawer is.

9. Emergent play: I was surprised at how enjoyable the game was despite its simplicity. The emergent play occurred in the conversations that arose while guessers tried to figure out the drawings, and after the drawer's identities were revealed. I think Jessica could formalize some of the conversation, perhaps adding an element of persuasion in which a guesser tries to "sell" a theory to others. How about if every guesser "owns" a drawing and tries to get as many votes as possible whatever the identity of drawer really is?

10. Further development: I would like to see more rules and variations, including the ones mentioned above. Another interesting idea that we mentioned in class is to have the drawers make the drawings for each other, or one designated drawer draw all the avatars. Jane thought that simultaneous drawing (everyone draws, then everyone guesses) would eliminate some of the down time. As I said before, more rules would make a more structured activity that would be more game-like. I'd also like to see the guessing portion developed with some kind of bidding or voting rounds. I like the idea of incorporating persuasion or influence into the game to make the decision process a little more difficult.