Prototype UI

Early prototypes are supposed to be for hammering out the mechanics, and UI comes later, right? Not in my experience. I have never had a playtester of any design or gaming experience who could look wholly past UI to give feedback exclusively about mechanisms. On the other hand, I don't think you need to be a UI/UX professional in order to make a game prototype. But I do have some thoughts on how we can all address UI in prototypes the appropriate amount for games that will change every time they are played for at least a year. Obviously, this is a process. It takes time to integrate the necessary UI into prototypes. But it is important to be working toward a clear, usable prototype from the beginning of the process. 

The most important step in increasing player usability is to reduce visual chaos in your prototype. Pretty much every other piece of advice I have goes back to this. Declutter the play space and integrate visual organization, so that players know where to look. Of course that is easier said than done, so let's look at some concrete ways of achieving that. 

Streamline components. Yes, improving UI involves game design. It's surprising how much of the design process is changing rules to help players' experiences, as opposed to helping balance the mechanics. Streamlining components is not new advice, but it usually is presented as a cost reduction strategy. Here, the total number of components matters less than how they are laid out on the table. Fewer types of components, grouping like things together, and providing some sort of visual hierarchy are all strategies to reduce the visual chaos of a game. Potential cost reduction is just an added bonus. 

Visual organization of the layout of the game is a difficult design task for those of us who are not professional graphic designers. Thematic organization is one way to make your game stand out and help players interface with the rules. How can we impose thematic organization on our designs? There are a couple ways of thinking about this problem. My approach is to start my designs by feeling out what shapes or items need to be represented visually in the game. What is the most important visual metaphor within the theme? Some visual metaphors in my designs have been elevation/topography, a bustling open air market, and a manuscript. As is the nature of metaphors, these concepts are boiled down to very simple component expressions. I am usually trying to evoke the feeling of the metaphor; I am not trying to design a simulation. However, these metaphors provide shape to my layout, thematic anchoring to my rules, and a guide to the hook of my game. 

But if that's a little too much of a liberal arts approach to game design, here's a different way to approach thematic organization: eliminate as many rectangles as possible. Get away from the spreadsheet look as early as you can. Don't just change all the rectangles to circles, search for thematically appropriate shapes. If you can integrate affordances while you're at it, that's also a good idea. However, that treads on graphic design ground and I'm trying to keep this simple. Some rectangles will be unavoidable. Cards, boards, and dice don't need to be reinvented. Cubes, on the other hand, are usually easy to replace with tokens or standees. Layout within boards or cards is another excellent place to avoid rectangles. Even just a few objects with organic shapes gives the eye somewhere to rest that is not grid-like. Tie these shapes in with theme, but make sure that these elements facilitate gameplay rather than getting in the way. 

Use icons as memory aids. A card should tell the player how it works. Too few icons can be as much of a problem as too many. Keywords are essentially alphanumeric icons. Use just as many as you need to make the rules as clear as possible. Player aids are important for reference, but icons should be easily identified as what they represent. Sometimes that means thematic icons; sometimes it means more typical board game action or component-style icons. Icons act as visual and strategic anchors for the player by telling them what information is important. 

On the subject of player aids, try to reduce reading as much as possible. Player aids that are too long are almost more frustrating than not having a player aid. Again, too much information makes a game feel cluttered. Give players what they most need in as few words as possible. If the information is on the cards or on the board, you can leave it off the player aid. What I most need when playing a game is enough information to play a turn (usually in the form of turn order) and what my end goal is.

Add visual interest. One trick that I use to help break of the visual blah-ness of a prototype is through the use of flood fills. If I'm trying to not use too much ink, however, I stick to borders. Different colors on cards or areas of a board can help players pick out information faster than monochrome icons. We see color first. I also add in placeholder art fairly early in the process. Art can help convey the general atmosphere of a game to players. Bright cartoon art conveys a different message than dark, grotesque art. Visual interest is admittedly more important later in the process. But I want to know early on if I can make a game look interesting. Because visual interest sells games. And making interesting looking games is a skill that can be honed. Plus, flood fills and clip art don't take any more time to add to cards than icons do. 

Sometimes, in order to get better quality feedback on playtests we have to develop the UI before we're done with the mechanics. Fortunately, spending time on UI is time well spent. In addition to removing distractions that keep players from engaging with the core of our games, we are able to develop the themes, hooks, and curb appeal of our designs. 

ShippBoard Games is a board game design blog that updates most Mondays.