Core Statement
Player Experience Goal
Create a fast-paced, chaotic social experience where players feel pressure, compete intensely, and laugh at mistakes.
Target Audience
Casual players and friend groups looking for a short-session party game with high interaction and low learning barrier.
System Overview
Design Reasoning
Why use a split-screen mode?
To maximize social interaction and allow players to constantly observe and react to others’ performance.
Why Undo Button?
To reduce frustration and support fast-paced experimentation instead of punishing mistakes too harshly.
Why Random Orders?
To prevent memorization and create unpredictable situations that lead to chaotic and humorous gameplay.
Why Simple Controls?
To ensure players can understand the game within seconds, supporting party-game accessibility.
Iterations
These iterations demonstrate how player feedback directly informed changes to clarity, difficulty progression, and motivation systems.
Iteration 1
Problem:
During the order memorization phase, players were originally given only 5 seconds. However, feedback showed that the main difficulty was not remembering the ingredients or their order, but distinguishing different ingredients visually.
Change:
The order display was redesigned to include a layered animation, where ingredients appear one by one in sequence.
Reason:
In the original design, the cognitive load of recognition (identifying ingredients visually) was higher than that of memory, which was not the intended gameplay experience.The goal was to reduce the effort required for visual interpretation, allowing players to quickly process information and focus more on memorization.
Iteration 2
Problem:
At the beginning of the game, players were unable to remember the controls, which made them struggle during the assembly phase.
Change:
A progressive difficulty system was introduced. The first round now generates orders with only 3 ingredients (minimum complexity), and each subsequent round increases the number of ingredients by one.
Reason:
This change was made to create a smoother player flow, allowing players to start in a low-pressure environment and gradually transition into a high-pressure gameplay experience.
Result:
Players were able to adapt to the controls more effectively and, after becoming familiar with the mechanics, were more confident in tackling more challenging rounds.
Iteration 3
Problem:
Players expressed a desire to have a chance to catch up after falling behind early in the game.
Change:
The scoring system was adjusted so that while the original scoring rules still apply, each round awards progressively higher total points compared to the previous round.
Reason:
Since the difficulty progression already creates a positive gameplay flow, the scoring system should reinforce this experience.Score serves as a key feedback system, and increasing its impact over time supports player motivation.
Result:
Players who fell behind early were still able to recover after adapting to the gameplay, which increased engagement and encouraged more active participation in later rounds.
Result:
Players reported that the updated order phase removed the difficulty of distinguishing ingredients, enabling them to focus more effectively on memorizing the order.
PLO 5: Player-Centered Design Thinking
Player Experience Issue
During playtesting, players reported that both the order memorization phase and the burger assembly phase felt too time-constrained.
Although these issues appeared similar on the surface, further analysis revealed that they were caused by different underlying problems.
In the memorization phase, players struggled to quickly interpret burger orders.The visual presentation made it difficult to distinguish layers and ingredients, forcing players to spend excessive time analyzing the structure.
In the assembly phase, the issue was caused by unstable difficulty pacing.The number of ingredients generated per round was too random, sometimes overwhelming players with complex orders too early.
This resulted in frustration, as players were unable to effectively manage multiple demands at once.
Although these issues appeared similar on the surface, further analysis revealed that they were caused by different underlying problems.
In the memorization phase, players struggled to quickly interpret burger orders.The visual presentation made it difficult to distinguish layers and ingredients, forcing players to spend excessive time analyzing the structure.
In the assembly phase, the issue was caused by unstable difficulty pacing.The number of ingredients generated per round was too random, sometimes overwhelming players with complex orders too early.
This resulted in frustration, as players were unable to effectively manage multiple demands at once.
Design Changes
To address these issues, I implemented two key changes:
1. Improved Order ReadabilityI designed a layered animation system where ingredients are presented sequentially, making it easier for players to understand the structure of each order.
2. Refined Difficulty ProgressionI adjusted the order generation system to ensure a more controlled progression, where complexity increases gradually from simple to more challenging combinations.
This replaced the previous random system with a more intentional difficulty curve.
1. Improved Order ReadabilityI designed a layered animation system where ingredients are presented sequentially, making it easier for players to understand the structure of each order.
2. Refined Difficulty ProgressionI adjusted the order generation system to ensure a more controlled progression, where complexity increases gradually from simple to more challenging combinations.
This replaced the previous random system with a more intentional difficulty curve.
Impact on Player Experience
These changes significantly improved player experience in two ways:
Players could understand orders more quickly and confidently, reducing cognitive load during memorizationThe smoother difficulty curve allowed players to adapt gradually, transforming frustration into a sense of achievable challenge
As a result, gameplay felt more fair, readable, and engaging.
Players could understand orders more quickly and confidently, reducing cognitive load during memorizationThe smoother difficulty curve allowed players to adapt gradually, transforming frustration into a sense of achievable challenge
As a result, gameplay felt more fair, readable, and engaging.
Reflection
This process highlighted the importance of distinguishing between surface-level feedback and root causes in player experience issues.
Although players initially described both problems as “not enough time,” deeper analysis revealed that clarity and pacing were the real issues.
In future projects, I would incorporate more structured playtesting earlier to identify these underlying problems more efficiently.
Although players initially described both problems as “not enough time,” deeper analysis revealed that clarity and pacing were the real issues.
In future projects, I would incorporate more structured playtesting earlier to identify these underlying problems more efficiently.