Vuo MiniGame

Explore

MiniGame

Examples

Spaghetti science

The Spaghetti Science MiniGame is a fun and interactive experiment where users throw spaghetti against the wall to predict how long it has to boil before it will stick. The game involves real-world interaction and is meant to entertain users while they wait for their pasta to cook. The user records their throws, can end the experiment at any time, and sees a scoreboard once the experiment is over. It encourages mindfulness of pasta cooking time and adds a fun, educational twist to the waiting process.

⁠
`Try it out in this Recipe`⁠
⁠

⁠

Explanation

1.1 Feature Name:

Spaghetti Science MiniGame

1.2 Challenge it is related to:

Simple name

Whimsical name

Challenge description

Pasta Tossing

in this one you throw pasta

A lesson on how to tell if pasta is done by tossing it against a wall.

There are no rows in this table

⁠

1.3 Feature Summary:

The Spaghetti Science MiniGame is a fun and interactive experiment where users throw spaghetti against the wall while predicting how long does it need to boil before it will stick to the wall. The game involves real-world interaction and is meant to entertain users while they wait for their pasta to cook. The user records their throws, can end the experiment at any time, and sees a scoreboard once the experiment is over. It encourages mindfulness of pasta cooking time and adds a fun, educational twist to the waiting process.

Purpose:

To provide an entertaining way to pass the time while cooking pasta. The minigame helps users stay aware of the cooking process, integrates playful experimentation, and engages the user in a unique real-world activity.

1.4 Objectives:

• Increase user engagement during idle cooking time.

• Make users mindful of the pasta cooking process through a fun, interactive experiment.

• Encourage users to explore and do something playful in their kitchen.

• Create a memorable experience through real-world interactions.

Player Behaviors/Outcomes:

• Users actively engage with the game while waiting for their pasta to cook.

• Users predict how long spaghetti needs to boil before it sticks to the wall when thrown, creating a playful and educational moment.

• The game increases awareness of pasta cooking time and potentially reduces overcooking.

1.5 Target Audience:

• Families and casual gamers who enjoy fun, real-world interactions.

• Users cooking pasta who have idle time and want entertainment.

• Parents who want to engage their kids with a fun kitchen activity while cooking.

2. Gameplay Design

2.1 Core Mechanics:

Description:

The player predicts how long pasta needs to boil before it starts sticking to the wall, then the player throws real spaghetti at the wall and checks if the prediction was correct. They record the results of each throw and aim to refine their predictions. The game plays out in real-time as the pasta boils.

Controls:

• Throw spaghetti at the wall (in real life)

• Timer and recording buttons for tracking real-world spaghetti throws.

• “End experiment” button to conclude the game when the user is satisfied.

Objective:

• Predict how long the spaghetti needs to boil before it will stick to the wall.

• Track and record the number of throws and results.

• Aim to improve predictions with each throw.

2.2 Game Flow:

Start menu/onboarding:

• Introduction screen with “It’s for science!” prompt to set a playful tone.

• Simple instructions on how to throw spaghetti, predict sticking time, and record results.

In-game experience:

1. User makes predictions about how long the spaghetti needs to boil before it will stick.

2. User starts the timer and begins throwing spaghetti at the wall.

3. User records the result of each throw.

4. The game provides prompts to encourage new, creative approaches to spaghetti throwing.

5. The player can end the experiment at any time or continue until the pasta is ready.

Game over/rewards:

• Once the user ends the experiment, they see a flashcard-style scoreboard displaying:

• The number of throws.

• Average sticking time.

• Fun facts or playful commentary on their performance.

• Option to restart the experiment during future pasta-cooking sessions.

2.3 Game Modes:

Single-player Mode:

The user plays alone, tracking their throws and improving their predictions with each new attempt.

Multiplayer Mode (Future Expansion):

Players can challenge friends or family members to throw spaghetti and compare results through a shared scoreboard.

2.4 Challenges/Obstacles:

Challenges:

• The user faces the challenge of predicting how long the spaghetti has to boil before it will stick. Each throw may behave differently based on real-world factors (humidity, angle, etc.).

• As the game progresses, users are prompted to experiment with different throwing techniques or spaghetti types, adding variety.

Escalation:

• Over time, the user may try to refine their predictions, introducing more complexity into their approach.

⁠

Chef MiniGame

Overview

The Reviewer Challenge is an engaging minigame designed to enhance the cooking experience by introducing interactive assessments of the user's culinary progress. This feature gamifies the cooking process, encouraging users to strive for excellence while receiving dynamic feedback from virtual reviewers.

Gameplay Mechanics

1. Initiation During Recipe Execution - Trigger Point: Midway through the cooking process, users receive a prompt indicating that their current cooking steps will be reviewed. - Purpose: This checkpoint serves to maintain user engagement and provide real-time feedback, simulating a realistic cooking environment where external evaluation can influence the cooking journey.

2. Reviewer Characters - Variety of Reviewers: The reviewers are represented by distinct characters or groups, each possessing unique levels of requirements and expectations. - Requirement Levels: These levels determine the stringency of the review process. Characters with higher requirements have stricter criteria for evaluating each cooking step.

3. Step-by-Step Evaluation - Photographic Evidence: Users are prompted to take a photograph of each step they complete in their recipe. - Randomized Assessment: Upon submission, the reviewer evaluates the step based on a chance mechanism. The likelihood of a step being marked as "succeeded" or "failed" is inversely related to the reviewer's requirement level. - High-Requirement Reviewers: Lower probability of success, encouraging users to adhere closely to precise cooking techniques. - Low-Requirement Reviewers: Higher probability of success, allowing for more flexibility and encouraging creativity.

4. Dynamic Reviewer Trust System - Repeated Interactions: As users interact with the same reviewer multiple times, the reviewer's requirement level decreases. - Increased Acceptance Rates: Lower requirements translate to a higher chance of steps being marked as succeeded. - Trust Building: This progression signifies that the reviewer is becoming more familiar with and trusting of the user's cooking abilities, fostering a sense of achievement and progression.

User Experience Flow

1. Starting the Recipe - User selects a recipe to cook within the application.

2. Mid-Recipe Prompt - Approximately halfway through the cooking steps, the user is notified that their progress will be reviewed. - Introduction of a reviewer character based on predefined selection criteria or user preference.

3. Step Submission - After completing each cooking step, the user takes a photograph and submits it for review. - The reviewer evaluates the submission, providing immediate feedback on success or failure.

4. Feedback and Progression - Successful steps contribute positively to the user's cooking progress, while failed steps may require reattempts or offer tips for improvement. - Continued interaction with the same reviewer leads to decreased requirement levels, symbolizing growing trust and proficiency.

Design Rationale

The Reviewer Challenge minigame introduces a layer of interactivity and accountability to the cooking process. By simulating external evaluations, users are motivated to maintain consistency and strive for higher standards in their culinary endeavors. The dynamic trust system not only rewards users for continued engagement but also personalizes the experience by adapting the reviewer's strictness based on the user's demonstrated skills.

This feature aims to make cooking more immersive and enjoyable, transforming routine recipe execution into a rewarding and game-like activity that fosters skill development and user satisfaction.

Implementation Considerations

- Reviewer Diversity: Develop a diverse set of reviewer characters with varying personalities and requirement levels to cater to different user preferences and cooking styles. - Feedback Mechanism: Ensure that the success or failure feedback is constructive, possibly offering tips or hints to guide users toward improvement. - Balancing Chance and Skill: Calibrate the probability mechanics to balance randomness with user effort, preventing frustration while maintaining engagement. - Progress Tracking: Incorporate a system to track user interactions with reviewers, visibly displaying the progression of trust levels to reinforce the sense of achievement.

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.