The playtest of Biomes 4.1 revealed that the game had three key strengths and three key weaknesses.
Strength 1: Quests provided focus
A good game is a focused experience. Players need to know what they can and should be doing to win the game. In 4.0, 4.01, and now 4.1 players have engaged with quests to make concrete progress and win the game. Quests focus players around what they can and should be spending their resources on to win the game. For example, in 4.1 the Tug of War quest was discovered and shortly became 1 round away from being lost. Players immediately changed their strategy to spend the resources required to ensure the quest would be won. This is the kind of focus that quests were intended to bring to Biomes. Quests will be a key strength of Biomes going forward.
Weakness 1: Too many rules
Prototype 4.1 of Biomes had too many rules. This was evidenced by the difficulty players had in learning and remembering all of the rules of the game. In particular, many of the systems in 4.1 had multiple rules with the same result. For example, in prototype 4.1 enemy killer tribes, enemy stealer tribes, and the dragon each had unique rules with the same result of stealing secrets. This would be a poor design decision for a finalized game but works well for prototyping to test out and compare multiple rules sets in fewer prototypes. That said, future prototypes will need to ensure players can engage with the rules by simplifying the rules that do exist and limiting the number of systems being experimented on.
Strength 2: End-game had challenge
With 4.1 the end-game goals were rewritten to provide more challenge to players. The basic theory of game design in effect here is the theory of game flow. Game flow says that, to keep players engaged, you need the right amount of challenge to their skills. Too much challenge and players get frustrated, too little and they become bored. Previous iterations of Biomes had boring end-games because players had nothing new to challenge them once they collected all of the keys. 4.1 addressed this directly by challenging players with a dragon to slay before it destroyed them. The result was a much more engaging and fun end-game for players to overcome.
Weakness 2: Discovery avoided
Players avoided discovering new secrets in 4.1 and the reason for this was two-fold. Firstly, secrets were optional and weak which meant discovering one was a waste of an action. Secondly, discovery was dangerous due to the possibility of finding a trap. In terms of risk and reward, the risk was too high and the reward was too low. When keys were mixed in with the other secrets discovery was a high-risk and high-reward mechanic, it was satisfying. But when the keys were moved to the quests the risk of discovery was not proportionally reduced. To resolve this the risk and reward of discovery will need to be re-balanced and the secrets will need to be strengthened and made more integral to the game.
Strength 3: Players engaged in teamwork
Prototype 4.1 resulted in a lot of teamwork. Players worked together to find the Fountain of Prosperity, win the Tug of War quest, collect all of the shields, and defeat the dragon. As a part of the essential experience this is very encouraging. However, teamwork seemed to be the salient strategy of the game. Players of 4.01 used both teamwork and divide-and-conquer to achieve victory, which made that prototype feel more balanced strategically. Going forward I will need to keep an eye on what kinds of strategies players use to win and which strategies they avoid. Ultimately, Biomes should have multiple strategies available, viable, and encouraged to give players meaningful choices.
Weakness 3: Exploration discouraged
Discovery and exploration are intended to be the leading experiences of Biomes. In 4.1, exploration was useful for finding all of the quests but became useless shortly afterwards. Even more, players were discouraged from exploring because they avoided discovering the secrets on the tiles. Players do not need to explore every tile but players should always have a reason to explore a new tile. Exploration will need to be adjusted in future prototypes to provide more incentive especially once all of the quests have been found.
Conclusion
These strengths and weaknesses will provide direction for the next prototypes of Biomes. Next time we will take a look at the changes for prototype 4.2 and how each of these strengths and weaknesses are addressed.