Concepting
My initial concept was less based around the theme we were supposed to work inside of, and instead the advice we had been given by our teacher earlier in the semester. This is the time to take chances, make something weird, and have fun with it.
With an open mind to taking chances, I suggested we make a game about mazes where the player could destroy, or burn, areas to go faster. After group input and iteration we decided to make the maze a forest, and if we had time other ecological areas that could be burned.
With an open mind to taking chances, I suggested we make a game about mazes where the player could destroy, or burn, areas to go faster. After group input and iteration we decided to make the maze a forest, and if we had time other ecological areas that could be burned.
Designing
I initially designed the tools for the game; this includes the flamethrower, the axe, and the flame repellent. Originally there could have also been explosives, a chainsaw, and a flare gun however those were cut in the design process.
Flamethrower: This would shoot out a cone shaped flame which, when in contact with a tree, would set it on fire and have a chance to spread to any of the surrounding trees. This would make the flamethrower the quick and dirty way of doing things, which was in line with our theme of climate change.
Axe: This would chop down a tree in three hits. This would make it slower than the flamethrower but provide the control it lacked.
Flame Repellent: This would prevent any tree sprayed with it from catching on fire. The repellent has a limited number of uses to make each use thought out and careful.
Axe: This would chop down a tree in three hits. This would make it slower than the flamethrower but provide the control it lacked.
Flame Repellent: This would prevent any tree sprayed with it from catching on fire. The repellent has a limited number of uses to make each use thought out and careful.
The explosives were tossed aside because we wanted to focus on climate change for the theme, which the flamethrower accomplished.
The chainsaw idea ground to a halt because the axe accomplished the same action and was more in tune with our design principle. The principle being that the flamethrower would destroy more, faster, and without as much control, whereas the axe would destroy in a slower and more controlled manner. The chainsaw would be too fast.
Lastly, the flare gun was a stretch goal that would have ruined the balance of the game and wouldn't have fit well thematically, so it was cut.
The chainsaw idea ground to a halt because the axe accomplished the same action and was more in tune with our design principle. The principle being that the flamethrower would destroy more, faster, and without as much control, whereas the axe would destroy in a slower and more controlled manner. The chainsaw would be too fast.
Lastly, the flare gun was a stretch goal that would have ruined the balance of the game and wouldn't have fit well thematically, so it was cut.
Proctoring
From the playtests:
Players either had feelings of terror or joy when they realized how much the fire would spread and how much it could destroy.
Both feelings stemmed from the destructive nature of the fire and it's uncontrollableness. So, while we succeeded in making the mechanic evoke emotion in the player, which is crucial to forming a connection with the game, people wanted to have more fun with the flamethrower. Which led us to increase the fire spread chance.
In subsequent playtests players voiced complaints that it felt counterintuitive for something that's fun, burning down forests with a flamethrower, to decrease the score at the end of the game. However, this is exactly what we were looking for in the design. The fun, easy, and fast path to "victory", didn't actually let the player win.
For the less pyromaniac inclined player, once they had realized burning trees would decrease their score they exclusively used the axe. We still decided to add in a clearer scoring system, because why stop at good when it could be great.