Sanity Test for Colours & Shapes

Follows the expected structure, using layout and color so you know exactly where you are in the rules.

Requirements are present.

While the game is abstract, the characters introduce the premise with wit and enthusiasm.

Objective is clearly summarized. The illustrations energetically underline the main points.

Components are listed. I like how the bonus cards are noted as swappable content. I'm not sure that you need to tease the BLC, though, especially since the space gets a little tight on that spread.

Components are depicted, but seem a little smaller than they should be. Again, I think this is because teasing the BLC eats a chunk of the layout. If you can shrink that down it might give the images a little more room to breathe.

Simple setup, well-described.

Not sure about the term "active game", simply because it sounds like it might be a technical term relating to the game itself. You might be better off with "game in progress".

The "active game" is a little busy relative to the other images, and there are a lot of boxes happening in the build the deck graphic. I'm not convinced this is a problem but the first spread of setup images feels a little cluttered relative to the second spread. The second spread is excellent -- the steps themselves are very simple but the images are full of personality.

The "Experience" header doesn't quite tell me what this section is about. It might make more sense to call this whole section "Ways to Play". That would also let you drop the subhead and give the spread a little more whitespace. The four modes themselves are clearly described.

The How to Play Overview might benefit from mentioning scoring as part of making a match. It's covered on the next page, but I did pause during the overview and wonder, "So how do I score points? Do the Black cards trigger scoring or something?" The White explainer's explanation of the page is a little redundant, so you might be able to re-deploy him to emphasize where the scoring opportunity is.

In the White Cards play example, you note that "You can also make a match using 3 White cards" etc. That's a new rule, and not part of the example, so you might want to separate it from the example text so player's don't miss it.

The "Special - Black Cards" subsection doesn't quite flow with the rest of the logic in the Rules section. You're treating it as a separate item, when it's really an elaboration on the previous "Play a Black Card" rule. You might want to remove the subhead so the two images flow together as one rule. This will also make it easier to see that "Pass on Your Turn" is a different action.

I'm not sure you need the "cards in hand cost points" reminder in the Game Over subsection. Players already have plenty of incentive to empty their hands. If you do include it, you might want to make it more of a strategy tip: "Cards left in your hand cost points at the end of the game cost points, so try to get ride of them!"

I love the world-building in the characters section, especially the little soap opera of Indigo. Totally unnecessary but totally awesome.

Once the Yellow player has looked at a hand, is Yellow's card switch power a "must" or a "may"? In general, must the powers be used when triggered, and must all steps of a power be taken if it's possible to do so? (There are very few cases where you wouldn't want to use these powers, but it might come up occasionally with the powers that trade cards from the hand.)

Broken record time: the graphics continue to tell the rules well. :)

Let's math! End game and scoring calculations are covered.

The Game Over spread looks fantastic -- I think it's my favorite -- but it should mention the "reach X score" win conditions from the Experience / Ways to Play section above.

Are there any tiebreakers in scoring? Their existence or absence should be noted.

Not just understanding how to play, but excited to do so. :)

Watch out for the occasional typo: "oportinuty" and "unyeilding" jumped out in the orange and yellow character rules. Also "complementary" (a sneaky one) and "pressence" in violet, and "maintianing", "burdon", and "haranessing" in Black/White. There may be others, so you'll probably want to find some fresh eyes for a proofreading pass.

The writing occasionally teeters on the edge of two wordy, especially the white explainer's section introductions. But that feels more like character than bad writing.

Exceptional presentation on so many levels, but the personality of the example players stands out. There's so much happening that the layout gets a little tight sometimes, but it's always at least functional.

The overall pitch is good but might lean a little to heavily on "family friendly" accessibility angle. That's a good thing to bring up, but it might obscure the message to the purchaser about why THEY will enjoy the game. You might want to talk a little more about the game's pace, or how the character powers provide a twist on a relatively simple matching game.

The Father Geek quote definitely helps with the pitch, because it talks about both the accessibility and the "layer of logical thinking". But you might want to talk up what aspects of the game provide that layer a little more.

The backdrop is a little busy, and I wonder how it would look with slightly fewer cards scattered around. But overall it looks good.

Good logo that blends in well with the background shot.

Professional action shots that show off the cards and the product well. There are a lot of shots here, probably a few more than you actually need. You might want to trim out your three least favorite and see if the smaller set is stronger as a whole.

The description is long. It covers all the important points, and anyone who reads all of it will get a good picture of the game and its strengths. But I suspect a lot of people won't read all of it.

If you had to cut the description down to half its current length, what would be the most important and effective points that you would keep? If you look at what you have from that perspective, I think you'll see some cuts you can make and ways to rearrange the information. If you can do a graphic approach similar to the way you did the rules, that might be especially helpful.

The retro commercial is a hoot, and brings out the grown-up-fun aspect in a way that I'm hoping the ad text will support. Note that at some point you might want to reshoot the product shot at the end to include the current box. The unboxing and tutorial are also solid, but the commercial is the one that makes the sale, and I think it's wise to have it up front.