Collaborative Design Pratice Task 4: Client Presentation

13.12.2025 - 03.01.2026 （Week 12 - Week 15)

Lew Guo Ying / 0365721 / Bachelor of Design in Creative Media

Collaborative Design Pratice

Task 4: Client Presentation

---

Index

1. Instructions

2. Reflections

---

Instructions

MIB for Collaborative Design Pratice

Requirement:

We are required to present our final board game prototype to the client. The purpose of this presentation is to communicate our design outcome clearly and demonstrate how the game works in its completed form.

During the presentation, we are expected to gather feedback from the client. This feedback focuses on identifying potential issues, areas for improvement, and any design aspects that may affect gameplay, clarity, or user experience. The insights collected will help us evaluate whether the board game meets its intended objectives and real-world usability.

Client Presentation

For this task, we conducted two presentation and playtesting sessions. The first session was presented to the original game creator’s team, while the second session involved university students from a related field (economics and finance).

In both sessions, we presented the game concept and gameplay flow, followed by a hands-on playtesting session. After the gameplay, we gathered direct feedback to identify any areas for improvement, unclear rules, or overlooked issues in the game design.

1. Original Creator Team

Fig1.1 Client Presentation 1

The first client presentation was conducted with the original creator of the board game and their team. We presented our refined version of the game, explaining the updated concept, board structure, and gameplay flow.

The team participated in the playtesting session and provided positive feedback on the overall design clarity and visual direction. They highlighted that the separation between the main board and personal boards made the gameplay clearer and less confusing. Some feedback was also given regarding rule differences and token handling, which can be improved through clearer rule definitions.

2. University Students (Economics Related)

Fig1.2 Client Presentation 2

The second client presentation was conducted with university students from related disciplines, mainly economics and finance. We introduced the game concept and gameplay mechanics, followed by a playtesting session to observe how new players understood and interacted with the game.

Overall, the participants responded positively to the visual design and theme integration. The feedback highlighted that the game was engaging and easy to understand, though some suggestions were made regarding board clarity, token placement, and visual emphasis. These insights helped us identify small refinements that could further improve the user experience for first-time players.

Feedback from client

1. Original Gameplay Creators ( Tan Yee Qin & Her Team )

Overall rating given 10/10

Overall, we really like the pastel-toned colour scheme and the cute, themed layout of the boards and all the components, especially the mascot, which is really adorable! These elements left a very good impression on us. The design is very creative, particularly the decision to separate the base camp, daily stock, and investment areas from the main board. This makes the gameplay clearer and less confusing compared to the version we developed. Moreover, the game successfully integrates biological science concepts into the overall design, allowing players to better understand that the game is not only related to economics but also closely connected to biology. This combination helps reinforce the educational value of the game while keeping it engaging and visually appealing. Great job and we really like it very much. :) 

 However, during the test play, we noticed several slight differences compared to our previous experience with the game, such as the function of the power card “Insulin Attack,” the amount of glucose converted to ATP per round, the 15 ATP shortcut challenge and the way glucose tokens are kept after performing certain actions. Regardless, it is good to go as long as the rule is clearly defined and applied consistently throughout the game. 

 Additional recommendation (not mandatory): For the glucose tokens, a small container could be added. The left side of the container can be used for the player’s current on-hand glucose tokens, while the right side can be used for the bank’s glucose tokens. This would make it easier to take glucose tokens, so players would not need to keep taking them out from the plastic bag.

2. Target Audiences - University Students ( Consisting of 2 Design 

Students , 1 Finance Student )

A. Chong Cheng Tao ( 21, Taylor’s University Bachelor’s Of Design In Creative Media ) 

Overall rating given 8/10 

 Visually, this game is great. The art direction is consistent, creating a cohesive experience from the box to the board. I love the mascot design, it’s a smart addition to target young generation. It makes the dry subject more lively and engaging. The color usage make it easy to distinguish each status (e.g. stock up, stock down), contribute to the short learning curve. 

 The board design (the mitochondria) could be better by having a shape/outlines indicate where the glucose should be placed. Besides. I hope the colors could be higher saturation, which have a stronger impression for first time player. 

B. Teu Yu Tian ( 23, Taylor’s University Bachelor’s Of Design In Creative Media ) 

Overall rating given 9.5/10 

The overall visual feelings is cute, casual, soft and fun. I can relate them to both economic and biology theme. But at first glance, i will relate it more to biology as the blood vessel and mithochondra board is a high recognisable element. It took me a while to relate the packaging with glucose/blood sugar level, as most people are more familiar with cube-shaped sugar rather than a hexagon glucose symbol. I got the hint through the game name Gluconomy. The stock market aspect is recognized through the stock market cards, ATP cash and mascot with cash symbol. 

 The text are highly readable and colour are consistent. I like the power card and Stock market back design which arrows and lighting. However, the unique mascot design grabbed my attention, the caracters are lively and eye-catching. I also like the power card design as it using storytelling illustrations to communicate card functions in a humorous and engaging way. 

 For improvement, the token could also add facial expression to make it more customised and fun as it look plain now. The mitochondria board can be bigger, as I clutter many token on Bootcamp space, and it is non-stacakble which make it messy. 

 Overall, i think it the visual delivered the game well, I enjoyed the visual, just some small improvement could enhance the experience. 

C. Yofa ( 19, Taylor’s University Bachelor’s Of Accounting & Finance ) 

Overall rating given 9/10 

 Gameplay was really fun and intuitive. The concept of the game itself is an interesting amalgamation of two vastly contrasting fields; biochemistry and finance, which offers a new, unique experience for players. The pastel colour scheme fits the combination of themes, keeping the lighter colours typically associated with the human body with the main indicators of financial markets (e.g. green for bullish, red for bearish, etc). This clearly aligns with the normal scheme seen in a market price/volume interface. 

 The cute and whimsical-looking characters (+ the mascot) really solidifies the board game as a classic family-oriented pastime that appeals to all ages, whilst teaching the basics of both financial investment and the ATP cycle in a fun and intuitive manner. Something I would change is the 'Investment' feature of the game, as the name suggests a lower-risk action (as investment most commonly refers to growing your money slowly by putting it in safe assets with long-term prospects), which contrasts to the high-risk high-reward procedure akin to gambling that's present in the game. 

---

Reflection

Observation

During the playtesting with the original creator’s team, we observed that our interpretation of certain gameplay mechanics differed from the original version. After discussion, we aligned our understanding as a group and refined several rule details to improve clarity and consistency. The game was then replayed using the updated rule set, allowing smoother gameplay.

Findings

Through this process, we realised that no game can be completely flawless, regardless of how many iterations are made. Every iteration introduces new improvements but may also reveal new limitations. Meaningful progress comes from continuous refinement, prioritisation, and making design trade-offs based on feedback and constraints.

Experience

The gameplay experience was fun and engaging, with a strong emphasis on luck, while strategy played a secondary role. In some cases, players could finish the game within a few rounds if they were lucky. Additionally, the bank strategy proved to be effective, as it helped players avoid bankruptcy and reduce the impact of power card interference from others.