Collaborative Design Pratice: Task 3 - Project Ideation Prototype
Lew Guo Ying / 0365721 / Bachelor of Design in Creative Media
Index
Instruction
At this stage, the project requires us to develop our initial sketches into high-fidelity prototypes. The focus is on refining the selected ideas by improving visual clarity, layout structure, and design details.
Based on the previous ideation and sketching phase, we are expected to finalise the design direction, prepare print-ready files, and produce physical prototypes for presentation. These printed outcomes will be used to clearly communicate our concept, support discussion, and receive feedback for further iteration.
This phase marks the transition from conceptual exploration to tangible and presentable design outputs.
Game Board
We began this stage by focusing on the game board development, with our team dividing the work into three main parts. Melvin handled the main board background, KarYee focused on the mitochondria, while I was responsible for designing the key elements on the main board.
Initially, we planned to use insulin and fat as the visual metaphors for the bank and jail. However, during the design process, I realised that the function of red blood cells transporting and obtaining oxygen aligns more naturally with the concept of a bank, as it represents circulation, storage, and distribution of resources.
|
| Fig2.1 Red Blood Cell |
|
| Fig2.2 Fat |
|
| Fig2.3 Board |
|
| Fig2.4 Final Board |
After printing out an initial prototype, we tested it with our lecturer, Mr. Shamsul. During the playtest, he pointed out that the board required clearer zoning so that players could immediately understand where coins should be placed.
In response to this feedback, we explored several visual solutions and eventually decided to introduce a divided layout, similar to a yin-yang hotpot concept, to clearly separate the two functional areas. This division helps improve readability and reduces confusion during gameplay.
Alongside the structural change, we also adjusted the colour scheme and typography, including the text and logo colours, to ensure the board felt more cohesive and visually integrated. These refinements helped the board communicate its functions more intuitively while maintaining a consistent visual language.
Manual Guide
|
| Fig2.5 Manual Guide sketch |
|
| Fig2.6 Border Deco |
After completing the initial layout, I began adding decorative elements to reduce visual flatness. At the same time, I simplified a large portion of the text to avoid overly long rules that could discourage players from reading. The goal was to make the manual quick to scan and easy to understand.
I introduced our logo and mascot to strengthen the game’s identity, along with decorative borders. Since The Gluconomy combines both biology and economy, I intentionally incorporated more economic-related visual elements to balance the overall tone and prevent the design from leaning too heavily toward either theme.
|
| Fig2.7 Layout for gameboard |
|
| Fig2.8 Completed |
|
| Fig2.9 Final Manual Guide |
Box
|
| Fig2.10 Box Version 1 |
At the beginning, I researched existing traditional drawer-style board game boxes and followed this structure to create an initial box template. This allowed the team to easily mock up and visualise how the designed graphics would be applied onto the packaging. We also printed out a physical version for testing.
However, after testing the prototype, we realised that the box was too large and impractical. After further discussion, we decided to revise the structure and resize the box based on a more efficient format. The final decision was to use the short side of an A4 size as the main reference.
This revised size allows the game board to be folded into a square, while still providing sufficient space to store the cards and other components. The final box dimension was adjusted to approximately 330 mm × 210 mm, achieving a better balance between usability, storage efficiency, and production feasibility.
|
| Fig2.11 Box Version 2 |
After receiving feedback from Mr. Shamsul, he suggested using corrugated fiberboard and preferred a chest-style opening mechanism instead of the previous drawer-style box. This approach felt more tactile and suitable for a board game experience.
Based on this feedback, I redesigned the box structure, replacing the original format with a hinged, open-up box style. Once the structural layout was finalised, the design process was distributed across the team. Winnie worked on applying the visual graphics and creating the box mockups, while HuiYi helped integrate elements from the manual guide and game board into the packaging design.
Finally, the complete box design was handed over to Yanny for final colour adjustments and visual refinements, ensuring consistency across all printed materials and game components.
Printing
|
| Fig2.12 Card arrangement |
Next, I consolidated all our design files and prepared them for printing. This included arranging the front and back layouts of the cards, ensuring that all elements were correctly aligned before exporting the final files to the printing shop.
Extra attention was given to alignment, spacing, and consistency, so that the cards would not suffer from issues such as white edges, misalignment, or inaccurate trimming after printing. Once everything was checked and confirmed, the files were finalised and exported in a print-ready format.
|
| Fig2.13 diecut |
However, during the final printing stage, the printing shop informed us that die-cut files were required, which created an unexpected time constraint. Due to the urgency, I quickly prepared the necessary die-cut layouts and technical files for production.
The most challenging part was the box structure, as it required three separate layers. In addition, we had to consider the thickness of the corrugated cardboard, which affected cutting accuracy, fold tolerance, and alignment. These constraints significantly increased the complexity of the preparation process.
As a result, the final printed outcome still presented some issues. Certain parts showed slight cutting misalignment and white edges, while the ATP cash tokens were produced without rounded corners, which differed from our original design intention. These issues highlighted the importance of early technical coordination with the printing vendor, especially when working with complex packaging and die-cut components.
Tokens
|
| Fig2.14 Token and laser cut |
At the early stage, I experimented with creating a simple token prototype using a hand saw, working with wood and applying paint followed by an epoxy resin layer to achieve a glossy finish. However, the result was not as consistent or refined as expected.
We then decided to switch to laser cutting for better precision and efficiency. We used thinner wooden boards, approximately 5–7 mm thick, and I optimised the layout to maximise the number of tokens that could be cut from each board. Each team member was responsible for a different colour, and we went through a hands-on process of sanding, painting, and applying a clear coat to achieve a reflective finish.
Final Product
|
| Fig2.15 Box and board |
|
| Fig2.16 Card, cash, token |
Presentation
|
| Fig2.17 Presentation |
During our final presentation, we introduced the fully developed Gluconomy board game to Dr. Luqman, Ms. Anis, and Mr. Shamsul, presenting the project as a complete system rather than a collection of individual components. This included the main and personal boards, tokens, cards, packaging design, and the instruction manual, all working together to support the gameplay experience.
The panel responded very positively to the project, particularly acknowledging the consistency of the visual language, the clarity of the game structure, and the effectiveness of our team collaboration throughout the development process. The game was perceived as coherent, approachable, and well-resolved in terms of both design and playability.
At the same time, the feedback session revealed meaningful opportunities for further improvement. The panel suggested that the relationship between the packaging, manual, and in-game mechanics could be more tightly integrated to enhance the overall narrative and thematic immersion. We viewed this feedback as highly constructive, as it encouraged us to think beyond individual deliverables and focus more deeply on Gluconomy as a unified storytelling experience.
In conclusion, the presentation marked a strong and rewarding endpoint to the project. It validated our design decisions while also highlighting clear directions for refinement, reinforcing the importance of cohesion, iteration, and collaborative thinking in complex design systems.
Submission
Feedback
Dr. Luqman pointed out that the conceptual relationship between the manual guide, the packaging, and the core identity of The Gluconomy could be further strengthened to enhance thematic clarity and immersion. Improving this alignment would help present the game as a more unified and cohesive system.
At the same time, he acknowledged the team’s strong execution and high-quality printed prototypes, recognising the considerable effort invested in making the game fully functional and playable. This feedback also reflected that the project has reached approximately 90% completion, with the remaining 10% lying in the refinement of finer details—an intensive but crucial stage required to elevate The Gluconomy into a fully polished and mature board game experience.
Reflection
Throughout the development of The Gluconomy, it became clear that the project had reached a strong level of completion and overall quality. However, during consultations and reviews, we observed that different lecturers held varying preferences and aesthetic judgments, particularly regarding elements such as the packaging design and the manual guide. Even when we incorporated feedback from one lecturer, alternative perspectives would still emerge from others.
A similar situation occurred within the team itself. While each member contributed valuable ideas, differing opinions were inevitable. Ultimately, we found that aligning our decisions with the lecturer’s guidance was often the most practical approach, as it provided a clear direction and helped us move forward efficiently. This observation highlighted the reality that design outcomes are subjective, and it is rarely possible to satisfy every viewpoint simultaneously.
Findings
From this experience, we learned that seeking a balanced or “middle-ground” solution is often necessary in collaborative design practice. Rather than attempting to achieve a perfect solution that satisfies every aesthetic preference, it is more realistic to commit to a clear design direction that aligns with the project’s objectives and evaluative criteria.
This process helped us understand that feedback should not always be interpreted as right or wrong, but rather as reflections of different design values and perspectives. Learning to prioritise, evaluate, and make informed decisions became an essential part of managing both teamwork and external expectations.
Experience
On a practical level, this project provided valuable hands-on experience with laser cutting, particularly in understanding its efficiency, limitations, and production rules. We learned that while laser cutting is highly effective for producing precise and consistent components, it is not suitable for overly thick materials, and design files must account for spacing between elements to ensure successful cutting.
Through this process, we gained a clearer understanding of how to prepare laser-cutting files correctly, including material considerations and layout planning. Although working with acrylic paint proved challenging—especially in achieving consistent and visually refined results on the tokens—the final outcomes were still satisfactory and offered important lessons in material experimentation and craftsmanship. Overall, these technical and production experiences significantly enriched our understanding of translating digital designs into physical, playable board game components.
Comments
Post a Comment