My individual report of how the design process is incorporated when creating a board game version of an escape room. Focuses on the importance of understanding your audience and their emotions, the prototyping process, and working as a group to successfully complete a design-based project. This paper was my culmination report for my Cornerstone of Engineering I course. As a continuation of this course, I am serving on the infrastructure committee for our Cornerstone of Engineering II class-wide project, an actual escape room.

1. An assessment of the design process in the creation of
a puzzle-based board game
Mary O’Reilly, Thomas Hantgin, Leo Yamazaki
College of Engineering
Northeastern University
Boston, USA
oreilly.ma@husky.neu.edu
Abstract
When designing any type of puzzle, it is
crucial to start with no boundaries. A good idea has
no small goal to fulfill, but rather many greater goals
and possible paths to follow that will eventually lead
to an unforeseen success. Each idea team members
can come up with should be recorded, and then team
members may choose to develop different ideas
further and later present on the possibilities of their
concept. Following the finalization of a theme for an
escape game, team members should again go
through the brainstorming process, but this time to
come up with puzzle ideas. At this point in the design
process, team members may choose to split up and
work on puzzles individually to prototype faster.
Prototypes should be tested at least two times,
ensuring all aspects and changes work in unison.
After the first prototype, more detail may be added
to the puzzles to bring to life the chosen theme. Once
the second prototype has been tested, it is crucial the
team members pay close attention to detail, making
sure that there is no evidence of an outside world,
and instead the player is completely immersed in the
world the team has created. Using user-collected
data, the proper changes can be made to each new
iteration of an escape game to ensure user-
experience and enjoyment is high. Riddle and hint
cards can be created once a strong base of puzzle
development has been set up.
Key terms: Design process, escape game, AutoCAD,
AutoDesk Fusion360, Arduino, Viewmaster
I. Introduction
Before an individual or team can determine the flow
of a game or any of the game’s details, they must first
determine what the overarching goal of their project is.
In this case, the goal was to create a world that mentally
captures a player in a world that they must use their
intellect and riddle-solving skills to escape. The time
frame for escape, or puzzle completion, in this scenario
was thirty minutes, and the project included five puzzles
in addition to a decoder. Using a combination of
AutoCAD, Arduino, and Autodesk Fusion, puzzles
were completed after originally starting as paper
prototypes. User-collected data was key in ensuring the
proper changes were being made to each prototype of
the escape game.
II. Determining a Theme
The most important key in creating a successful
escape game lies within the theme the creators choose.
Theme generation is, in the design cycle, the equivalent
to problem formulation. As a group, each team member
had two minutes to think of as many theme ideas as
possible. Once this was complete, team members
compared their lists and examined which ideas were
unique to each list and organized all ideas into three
categories. The three categories in this scenario were
ecosystems, man-made, and mental/visual. Following
the creation of categories, each team member was
granted five minutes to further develop two of his or her
theme ideas. For example, the theme ideas of a
recording studio and an ambulance were brainstormed
to the extent of two possible puzzle ideas and the
player’s end goal. Once the five minutes were
completed, group members shared their ideas and then
stopped working for the day. It is crucial that, when in
the idea generation phase of formulating a problem or
theme, team members dedicate time for mental breaks
to allow for creativity flow subconsciously and for other
ideas and influences to enter and assist in idea
generation.
Once all members had had a break, a meeting was
called where each member presented an idea they had
thought through more thoroughly. The idea presented at
this meeting that was ultimately decided on as being the
theme for the assignment was the recording studio
theme. Immediately, the group began brainstorming
possible puzzle ideas by naming objects that one would
expect to find in a recording studio. Objects
brainstormed included a drum set, a microphone, a
guitar, and a piano.
It was not until two or three group meetings that the
idea of incorporating a specific musician was brought

2. into light. After organizing puzzles and realizing that
strictly having general music studio related puzzles
would be repetitive and boring, the team decided to
make the theme artist-based. Originally, the group
decided on the artist Notorious BIG, however, to
broaden the possible audience, a more popular artist
was chosen – The Beatles. As The Beatles are a timeless
group, this allows for the game to be enjoyable for
people of all ages.
III. Defining Puzzles and Skill Sets
The teams for this assignment were based on a push
assignment, meaning the teams were formed and an
idea was created around this team. This allowed for the
team to determine each team member’s personal skill
set and base puzzles on these skills. For example, if one
team member was proficient in Arduino and another in
AutoCAD, puzzles could incorporate heavy amounts of
these technical skills. This is, in fact, what would up
occurring during the team’s puzzle formulation process.
The first puzzle that was decided on was the
keyboard puzzle (Figure 13) which is also featured first
in the overall schematic of the escape game. The
keyboard puzzle originated as an idea during the five-
minute in-depth brainstorm as previously mentioned. In
this brainstorming session, however, the idea was that
the piano would incorporate the usage of reading sheet
music. When discussed in a group, it became evident
that this would not be a quality escape room puzzle, as
a basic knowledge of sheet music and music notes is
required. The puzzle, after much thought and
deliberation, became the opening puzzle to the game –
the correct keys played on the keyboard would open a
box that would contain the rest of the escape room’s
hidden materials.
The next puzzle that was defined in the
brainstorming process was the yellow submarine puzzle
(Figures 19-20). The Yellow Submarine puzzle was
created using Photoshop to hide yellow submarines in
three of the seven pictures that the user must identify in
the correct order. This puzzle was originally thought to
work through a Viewmaster that would have been
purchased.
The third puzzle that was thought into creation was
the Come Together puzzle (Figure 18). This puzzle is a
spin off of a Beatles tour map. Taking place in 1967,
The Beatles’ Magical Mystery Tour travelled
throughout North America. For this puzzle, the player
is to put together a puzzle of the continental United
States. The player is additionally given a riddle card on
which he or she writes the city abbreviations according
to the numbered markings on the puzzle.
Next, the microphone puzzle was thought through
in its entirety (Figure 23). The microphone puzzle, like
the keyboard puzzle, was one of the two puzzles
brainstormed in depth during the five-minute
brainstorming session before deciding on a theme. The
original concept between the microphone puzzle was
that the handle of the microphone would be a key that
would fit into a lock and unlock another puzzle or box.
This evolved into the microphone being the container
for another puzzle. Instead of the microphone solving a
puzzle, it would instead introduce one.
The final puzzle that was brainstormed, somewhat
under pressure to meet deadlines and requirements, was
the Hey Jude puzzle (Figure 25). This puzzle
incorporates the use of a telephone keypad that the
player must input the correct phone number into to
complete the game and return home.
In conclusion of initial puzzle generation, many
aspects were thought on a buy instead of a create level.
It was not until working with paper prototypes that it
was realized how easily some features that were
brainstormed with the intent of purchasing could be
laser cut or 3D printed. After formulating puzzle
concepts, the team had a clear process for how the
escape game would be completed and the actual
application of skill sets was up to each team member as
roles and puzzles were split up to cover more ground by
each date of prototype testing.
IV. Paper Prototyping
The first round of prototyping was completed using
entirely paper. The keyboard puzzle was a piece of
paper folded in half with squares underneath the correct
“keys,” (Figure 1) and players were expected to abide
by the honor code in determining whether they
completed the puzzle successfully. Instead of a box
opening, the player was told on a card that they could
open the box containing the rest of the game’s puzzles.
The Come Together puzzle consisted of many
pieces of paper cut up with the outline of the continental
United States printed out on one side (Figure 3). The
player was then given a film with various dots that was
to be placed over the paper map to reveal the tour
locations. The paper version of the Yellow Submarine

3. puzzle incorporated a flimsy origami Viewmaster with
printed out Photoshopped images that could be slid
through the small opening on the Viewmaster’s side
(Figure 4).
The microphone puzzle was a paper cone with a
crumpled piece of paper atop (Figure 5). The
magnifying glass had not yet been obtained, so the
puzzle was very easy to complete. Instead of the image
with the decoder code being hidden inside of the
microphone, the picture was given to the player on a
riddle card. This version of the microphone puzzle did
not use the microphone at all, as none of the pieces at
this stage fit inside of the microphone.
The paper prototype of the Hey Jude puzzle (Figure
6) used a similar concept as the keyboard puzzle -
players were expected to check their own answer on the
answer guide to see whether they escaped and returned
home.
In addition to creating five paper puzzles, a paper
decoder was also made. The decoder, however, was
made before the logic behind decoders was completely
understood. This caused the paper decoder to have
multiple holes on the top wheel (Figure 7), instead of
just one. This resulted in many answer cards being
revealed with the input of only one code.
Although these puzzles were faulty, flimsy, and
much smaller than the final puzzles would wind up to
be, paper prototyping is a key step in the design process.
Without wasting time, money, and materials, designs
are tested, and future flaws can be predicted and thus
avoided. Paper prototypes are examples of functional
prototypes, to an extent, as a similar function is
provided, and it allows for a handheld, cheap, quick
version of an idea. By creating functional prototypes of
puzzles, designers can detect what aspects work, what
do not, and can better visualize changes that need to be
made.
V. Implementing Changes
The information collected during paper prototyping
allowed for an easy transition into laser cut, 3D printed,
and official-looking puzzles. Changes that were
implemented after the paper prototyping session
included laser cutting more components than originally
expected and rethinking the puzzles that were planned
around purchasing major components. For example,
after creating the paper keyboard, the team realized that
instead of purchasing a toddlers’ keyboard, it would be
easier and cheaper to laser cut a smaller keyboard. The
keyboard was thus designed using AutoCAD (Figure
12), and many layers of the same design were cut and
glued on top of one another.
Additionally, the Yellow Submarine puzzle was
completely rethought. Instead of purchasing a
Viewmaster with the Photoshopped images loaded
inside of it, the group decided instead to turn the Yellow
Submarine puzzle into a set of postcards sent from The
Beatles to their recording manager, Sir George Henry
Martin. This way, there is a break from the laser cut,
wooden puzzles and provides the player with a bright
combination of pictures to study and spot the
imperfections in. Handwritten postcards in the escape
game also allows for a more personal, humane touch to
the game. This allows the player to feel as though he or
she has a close relationship with The Beatles, as they
are holding precious artifacts and memories. For this
reason, although no technical skills are incorporated
into the puzzle, the Yellow Submarine puzzle is crucial
to the goal of the escape game as it immerses the player
into the created world at an emotional level.
Not only were paper prototypes a solid base for the
Yellow Submarine and keyboard puzzles, but also for
the Come Together puzzle. When using the paper
prototype of this puzzle, it was found that very few
people knew which states were where on the map
without having an outline of each individual state
(Table 1, Questions 3 and 5). The most important part
of prototyping comes in the form of what the designer
learns from the audience and implementing changes
that fix any issues that arise. After the paper prototyping
phase, is was clear to the design team that players were
getting stuck on the Come Together puzzle (Graph 3)
and were finding this puzzle more frustrating than
enjoyable. Using one team’s suggestion (Table 1,
Question 6, Team 2) and another team’s biggest
frustration (Table 1, Question 3, Team 3) after testing
the paper prototype, the design team decided to laser cut
the Come Together puzzle to increase stability and ease
of completion.
Thus, the Come Together puzzle was created on
AutoCAD by importing an image and tracing on top of
it to ensure to-scale lines and boundaries. This was
completed on the engrave layer, and allowed for more
precise pieces to be created. For this prototype, the
puzzle pieces were created very randomly and were
very small. Pieces all looked very similar, in a triangular
shape and was laser cut on clear acrylic such that
boundary lines were very difficult to see when

4. attempting to put the puzzle together (Figure 8). More
detail on this can be found in Leo Yamazaki’s paper,
which focuses more specifically on AutoCAD and laser
cutting.
As for the decoder, with more time to spare to
understand the logic behind how a multilevel decoder
wheel works, a new design was created. The second
decoder prototype used poster board as the material, and
was a functional prototype. It was determined at this
phase that, for a four-wheel decoder to function
correctly, the order of symbols must either be even-odd-
odd or odd-even-even working from the outer, largest
wheel into the smallest wheel on the decoder. As many
puzzle solutions had already been determined by this
point in time, the realization of the mathematical logic
behind a decoder resulted in many solution codes
needing to be altered to fit the even-odd-odd pattern.
Each decoder symbol was assigned an odd or even digit
between 1-8. Additionally, the top wheel of this decoder
only had one open slot, fixing the previous issue of
multiple solution cards being revealed at once and at
inappropriate times in the game.
VI. Testing Again and Learning from
Feedback
The second phase of prototyping was extremely
beneficial in creating an escape game that gives the
player the best experience possible. During this
prototyping session, three other teams tested the project
and completed a survey allowing the designers a view
into how the game flows from a player’s point of view.
Specifically, questions aimed to increase player
enjoyment and decrease player confusion were asked
(Table 2). When going over data, it was clear that the
rules and instructions for starting the game were still
causing players frustration (Table 2, Question 1).
Additionally, data from Graph 6 shows that players did
not believe the game to be solvable in thirty minutes and
data from Graph 10 shows that players found riddle
cards to be on the more difficult end of the scale. These
three pieces of data were taken together to conclude that
the lack of a clear instruction manual and the presence
of difficult riddle cards and no hint cards to compliment
them, was causing users to take too long to complete the
escape game.
As previously mentioned, the Come Together at
this point in the design process was very complicated as
pieces were randomly created and made from a clear
material. User feedback about this design was very
negative (Table 2, Questions 3 and 7), so the design was
altered to instead have the state outlines be the various
puzzle pieces, with some pieces having multiple states
on it.
Additionally, the keyboard puzzle during this
iteration was very flawed and this was due to a mishap
in the early stage of the design process. In the early
stages of creating this escape game, data about audience
interests and puzzle solving techniques was collected,
yet no information was gathered that would assist in
bringing the ideas to life. The skills to back how the
game would be created were there, but the technical
processes were not. Failure to collect information on
what materials are easily laser cut and how long it takes
to laser cut parts, caused the keyboard puzzle and box
to be incomplete at this stage in the prototyping process.
As can be seen in Table 2, complications with this
first puzzle took up the majority of responses on the
second prototype survey. This made the team motivated
to complete all puzzles early for the final edition of the
escape game, but led to very little useful data to be
collected about the specifics of the puzzles. This being
said, the responses from this survey allowed for the
designers to better clarify riddle cards and create a
stronger game flow.
VII. Completing Game Flow and Final Touches
An escape room may have the most technical and
aesthetically pleasing puzzles, however, these details
are insignificant if the game doesn’t flow easily from
one puzzle to the next. Game flow was considered from
the very beginning of the design process. As the player
makes his or her way through the game, they are adding
on to information that they figured out in the previous
puzzle. For example, the keyboard puzzle controls the
rest of the game in the sense that the only way to unlock
the rest of the game is to first complete that puzzle. This
is seen again in the transition between the Come
Together and Yellow Submarine puzzle. Riddle card C
(Figure 29) is given to the player during the Come
Together puzzle, as the clue for the Yellow Submarine
puzzle is the answer to the Come Together puzzle.
Game flow is an important aspect to designing an
escape game as its presence delves the player a little bit
deeper into the created world with each puzzle solved.
Playing an escape game that has a true progression of
puzzles and details ensures that the player doesn’t just
play the game, but has a unique experience while doing
so.

5. Riddle card C is also an example of one of the
aesthetic touches that was added to this escape game.
The Beatles were popular during a time in history where
pop culture was bright, peace-and-love oriented, and
colorful. For this reason, this escape game incorporates
these same thematic details. For example, many of the
puzzles are color-related. If the user sees a blue line
under a letter or code, he or she should make the
connection that the only other blue piece in the entire
game setup is the decoder. Additionally, the first riddle
cards that are supposed to be picked up are on red paper.
Instructions as to how the user knows to make these
connections can be found in the user-guide given to
players at the start of the game.
Color is not only incorporated in puzzles and
riddles, but also in the aesthetic features of the game.
Having pieces that look like they belong together is a
key factor in keeping the user immersed in the game
created. For this reason, the box (Figure 16) was
detailed using acrylic paint to symbolize some of the
peace-and-love motifs that The Beatles were passionate
about.
Designing the decoder (Figure 28) to resemble a
record player was another final touch added to this
game. Instead of having a plain, wooden decoder, the
team decided to incorporate the theme into this aspect
of the escape game as well. The final decoder ties all of
the puzzles back to the recording studio theme. The
decoder symbols were chosen to be music symbols to
enhance the effect of the theme.
The last thematic touch that was included in this
escape game was the naming of puzzles. Everywhere
that was possible, puzzles were named after a Beatles
song that the puzzle was based on (ie. Yellow
Submarine puzzle) or that the puzzle was a pun for (ie.
Come Together puzzle).
VIII. Conclusion
Designing this escape game was extremely
enjoyable and a personal interest was sparked in the
overall design process behind creating an effective
escape game. The process began with setting a goal: to
create an escape game that would completely immerse
the players in a different setting. Next, a theme and
puzzle ideas were brainstormed, and one set was further
developed. Defining skill sets and a process followed
this step in the design process, which preceded the
actual creation of paper prototypes. Creating paper
prototypes eliminated the risk of wasting materials and
allowed the team to really see what would and wouldn’t
work. Repeating the prototyping phase and testing each
prototype allowed the team to learn what was effective
in enhancing the player’s experience through survey
data. Changes were implemented based on the survey
data collected. Aesthetic details were added to the final
edition of the escape room once all puzzles were
working properly.