[tom_mellior]

Thinking about this some more, I think the UI should really be more about marking the selected cats than counting them. Then there could be nice diagnostics saying "you missed these ones", or "you marked this one which is X but not Y".

[robbrown451]

I think that would be a different game (or puzzle, or whatever you call this), and a dumbed down one. Maybe better referred to as "one that is aimed at younger kids."

Taking away the counting is reducing the thinking they have to do. If that's your goal, ok, but I personally think the counting, while mixed in with the "set logic" part, is an important component.

I could agree that you could have two modes, where that is one of them.

[tom_mellior]

I don't have kids myself, but based on the 2-4 year olds in my family I would say that the logical reasoning part would be the challenging bit, not the counting of the solutions. I agree of course that marking and counting is strictly more work than marking only, but I disagree that the counting bit is somehow essential to this game.

[chrisbward]

You could also do both: circle the cats to indicate that they meet the condition but then you have to count your circles and press the corresponding number button so you still have to do the counting (but not the memorising). This means you're less likely to make a mistake due to forgetting to count a correctly identified cat.

[CriticalCathed]

Aimed at younger than 2-4?

[robbrown451]

Do you think that the age range of 2-4 implies that it becomes appropriate exactly on their second birthday, and becomes no longer appropriate right on their fifth?

I would assume that the range has blurry boundaries. And yes, I think it would shift it lower if you remove the counting element. I have no doubt that my own daughter, when aged 2.5 years old, would have struggled with it a lot more with the counting, than without. When she was 4.5 years old, she would have been a lot more bored with it if it didn't have the counting.

I suppose there are other ways of putting it as well. I used "dumbed down" first, but that could be interpreted badly, like "appropriate for dumber kids", when I really mean "younger".

But the point remains, you make it less challenging, make it take less cognitive effort, decrease its learning benefit, etc if you simplify it by removing the need to count and make it so the child only has to touch objects.