33 thoughts on “Candy Land Mods

    1. Although we didn’t get enough time to finish the game, I thoroughly enjoyed playing it. I loved the expansion upon the original concept and delving deeper into the fantasy world. Nice job.

      Rating: 5
    1. Your game definitely made me laugh. I thought the discussion questions were very thought provoking.

      You could improve the game by creating more questions to contemplate. You could include other Candy-land characters besides Lord Licorice, like Mr.Mint or King Candy.

      I think your game deserves more than just ten minutes. I feel like each question could end up taking anywhere from ten minutes to an hour to answer.

      Rating: 3
    1. What I really enjoyed about your game was the addition of a last player if two players successfully make it to the castle. I enjoyed how it would be two players moving the gingerbread man.

      What could be improved is maybe just simplifying the rules on your website. Had you not been there to tell us how to play the game I don’t think I would have picked up on having to use the remaining gingerbread man to win twice.

      Rating: 4
    1. My favorite aspect to your rule set was the ability to bump other players back to start, which I felt added an aspect of risk to being in first place and encouraged strategies which involved playing it slow and staying behind other players. Giving each player a hand of cards was also a great way to add strategy to the game! Unfortunately, having so many options of where to move allowed players to easily bypass the obstacles you created around the board, making it so that the obstacles rule was only rarely used. Furthermore, the ability to gain two more cards in return for a candy card put me at a distinct advantage from my first turn and made the game feel weighted in favor of whoever gets the most candy cards.

    1. I loved how interactive your game was and the collaboration with other students to make it one big game. The use of the board and players was used in such a creative fashion but was still very fun and competitive.

      Rating: 5
    1. I appreciated the aspect of having only one loser in your game– I think that’s pretty original as I cant think of any other multiplayer game that plays that way. Also, the comedic aspect of your game was great, and seemed to make the stakes of being the loser much higher.

    1. I really enjoyed how your game transforms the Candyland experience into a sort of role-playing environment. I feel that the utilization of the game cards as action, in conjunction with the ability of players to team up and work towards a common goal, stretches the board game experience in unique ways. While I find the instructions to be slightly challenging to keep track of as the game unfolds, I believe the game is well suited for an older group of players. I’d be interested in how you’d assign player roles/playstyles to different characters.

      Rating: 4
    2. I loved to play your game during class and I’m glad you took such a creative turn with the assignment. Being only a card game and discarding the board actually added to the experience and was very fun to strategize and make alliances with others.

      Rating: 5
    1. What I enjoyed about your game was that each character has both advantages and disadvantages. I also thought the gamble addition was really cool.

      I think the rock, paper, scissors instructions could be written in a way that makes it a bit less confusing, but other than that I enjoyed the simplicity of superheroes and just making sure you remember your advantages and disadvantages.

      Rating: 4
    1. I think the way you differentiated the functions of single and double square cards was incredibly unique and added a great strategic element to the game. However, the risk to reward ratio made them very hard to use. Having a one in six chance of success encouraged most of us to just play it safe and stick to the single cards until the vagueness in the wording allowed the rule to be exploited using negative numbers. Furthermore, the victory condition seemed a bit arbitrary, since once one person snags three of the cards, they seemingly can’t be beaten. I think you could fix these issues by tightening up the wording, increasing the chances at succeeding on a double square card bet, and allowing one player to steal cards from another in some way (perhaps landing on their space).

  1. What I liked the most about you games was that it fit literal art students. I liked that because that is just something that does not exist. I also like the effects in your page, it makes it look like a real game page.

  2. I really liked how each color had its own rule, it made tha game more interactive and easy for people to learn the rules since they were still simple due to the matching card color and the card.

    Rating: 5
  3. I really like how interactive your page is especially with the background changing color! It makes it pretty cool! My favorite part of you game was your gamble! I though that was just a nice digital addition!

    Rating: 5
  4. The first modification of Candy Land I played was more like one of a set of three. It involved mostly physical activity and card gathering. Not to say I didn’t like it, but it wasn’t too enjoyable for me. I get what the creator intended to do, but it was a bit too much. Compared to the game I created, it was too… laborious I might say. The next game was a bit more interesting, though slightly more targeting. It followed the Candy Land path, but the goal was to not get to the end otherwise you’d being racist. I found it insulting, even if I was 20 years old. I think it’s wrong to incorporate morality into what I believe is strictly a kid’s game. Luckily, this game’s recommended age is 16 and up, so whoever plays it can realize it’s only a game and isn’t antagonizing anyone. As for a certain Twine game I discovered, it was pretty cool. It was Christmas themed and through one play-through, I realized it was to test your character. I chose options that went according to my selfless nature and got to the end no problem. Maybe, if I make a game with that in mind it’ll turn out great.

  5. The first game was fun and simple. It didn’t detach itself too much from the original game and proved to be quick and entertaining.
    The second game was amazing and surprisingly complete on a theoretical level. Each action had an interesting consequence, which made the game challenging. Made me want to play more.
    The third game was fun as it brought in a RPG aspect to it. Not sure if the moving, or combat system was optimal, but the story telling part was fantastic.

  6. Candy Land seems to be a perfect template for adjustment, in the same way that a deck of cards has an infinite amount of potential games within it. I wish that I had taken notes on each individual game, as I am having a difficult time discerning them in my memory, but each one essentially uplifted the game by adding strictly-defined rule changes and player traits that would not be out of place in a more complex board game. I ultimately found that connections made between the colors of the player pieces and colors of the cards were the most interesting rule changes, as these correlations are not explored in the original game. Having various player pieces correspond to rules invoked by various cards drawn was a fascinating addition, and one that definitely advanced the necessary skill level.

Comments are closed.