Objective
For a while, I keep hearing people complain that their generation had it the worst, while older or younger generations had it easier. But the more I thought about it, the more I realised that every generation had their own struggle, just in very different forms. That made me want to create a game that allows players to step into another generation’s position and feel how different life conditions, expectations and opportunities can shape people’s decisions. Unlike The Game of Life, which I used as an inspiration point, I did not want this project to portray life as a neat universal path. Instead, I wanted it to show that the same life event can affect different generations very differently, and that understanding this difference might open up empathy, especially between children and parents.
Process Breakdown
Framing the Core Idea
I started from the familiar structure of a life simulation board game, because this instantly gives players a shared understanding of what they are about to do: move through life, make choices and deal with consequences. But unlike the original reference, this version had to centre generation as the main mechanic. So rather than asking what a generic player would do, I began asking what changes when that player is a Baby Boomer, Gen X, Millennial or Gen Z. This became the heart of the concept.Designing the Rules
Once I had the premise, I started mapping out the rules of the game. I had to decide what stats would matter, how players would move, what kind of checkpoints and choices they would encounter, and how those same spaces would affect each generation differently. In this first version, players move by spinning a wheel from 1-3 and inputting the result into the app. I then designed life decisions, branching checkpoints, and a system of Life events and Era events to model both personal and collective pressures. At this stage, the game was much more focused on the strategic and simulation side of play, and it did not yet include the communication prompts that later became important for encouraging conversation.Building the First Board
After that, I drafted the first physical version of the board. The goal here was less about visual refinement and more about testing whether the structure of the game worked at all. I needed to know if players could understand the logic, whether the progression felt meaningful, and whether the generational differences were visible enough in actual play. So the first board was mainly a functional prototype that allowed me to put the system in front of players as quickly as possible.First User Test
I then ran the first playtest. The game was fun, and players were especially interested in comparing how the same choices or situations produced different outcomes depending on generation. However, because this version did not yet include specific communication prompts, there was much less talking than I originally hoped for. Players were focused more on surviving and playing the system than on discussing their own experiences or reflecting on each other’s. This was useful because it showed me that the simulation part was compelling, but the communication part still needed a stronger scaffold.Problems with the Stat System
The first test also exposed quite a few balancing issues. Some penalties were too harsh, some combinations of effects did not make much sense, and in certain situations players could get soft locked or feel frustrated because they had too little room to recover. In other words, the game had challenge, but not always in a productive way. This first version taught me a lot about where the system was too punishing and where I needed to redesign the relationship between board spaces, stats and player freedom.Key Takeaways
- The first iteration proved that the intergenerational life simulation concept was engaging, but it also revealed that the stat system was still too unstable and that the game needed more direct mechanics to support conversation.