what you have done this week for the project?
I have almost finished with the soundscape for the game.
where and when you met with your group ?
Our group met Tuesday (10/23) to practice our presentation in the lecture at 3pm.
what you are going to do for next week
Critique the actual game prototype in terms of its design:
Game #1- Ant Colony: Our project so didn't critique
Game #2- Fins of Fury:
Balance: There was a balance between the game mechanics and the story in the prototype which made it easy for the users. The users who tested their paper prototype were unexperienced users and their feedback might not have been good enough but since the prototype was easy to follow the users were able to point things that the they could change and or fix. Although one of their aspects such as the weapon upgrades isn't really part of an advancement in the game in my opinion. But overall other than those small things they did a pretty good job in balancing the tedious aspects.
Model they use: They kept their paper prototype pretty simple in where it was basically a gameboard, dice, and the character objects to move around while also having a sheet to explain the rules.
Art: As far as art is concerned, their team is experienced in 3D modeling and the character models that were shown during the presentation were top notch. They are well ahead of the game and i'm sure their art choices will be excellent.
Mechanics: I was able to understand the mechanics they are testing because the paper prototyope was straight forward but the direction the game is going towards right now i'm thinking they should narrow it down more.
Originality: The story is original / Art is original
How well the physical prototype mimics the game: The paper protoype is a good representation of what the game will be like. Although the rules might be a little hard to understand.
Game #3-Mizu:
Balance: Their user testing was not defined at all since the game itself was modeled towards people 6 and up. Since the user testers themselves were SIAT students(20-22) this didn't help towards how they would test their game since the age groups weren't varied. Moreover how they will implement their story was also not defined in the presentation.
Model they use: Instead of using a gameboard type prototype, the way they did their paper prototype was like a wireframe. A wireframe is a skeletal rendering of every click-through possibility on a website. But in this case they used it to test their turn based fighting.
Art: Their art is well done and i dont think they will have any trouble towards their game since the characters, the enemies and the bosses are incredibly well drawn. Their team consists of a very strong artistic group.
Mechanics: The mechanics were easy to understand since i was able to deduce from their wireframe that they were testing for a turn based game.
Originality: The story and art feel like the games from the 1990's. However since this game seems like any old rpg, I dont think it will be fun since this type of game has been overused too many times.
How well the physical prototype mimics the game: Their physical prototype did not mimic their game at all. They were able to deduce themselves that they wouldn't find any flaws since how they did the paper prototype was not close to how the game will be. The scale of their project is big and since the story is soo much more involved in this game it just didn't really help since they have not narrowed down the game enough.
Game #4- Untitled which was recently called School'd:
Balance: There was no challenge at all from what the game testers told them. Even with all the amount of puzzles, obstacles and various tedious aspects they would do in the prototype it wasn't fun.
Model they use: They used a board in which they could make up new levels and such with a marker at any given moment. Since they were able to do this, the gameboard was versatile in helping test what they wanted to know from the users. They also used character objects from other games such as Darth Vader for a boss.
Art: I was only able to see a rendered scene of some crude polygon shaped objects and i wasn't impressed with what i saw.
Mechanics: I wasn't able to tell what mechanics they would use though due to the fact they had at least 6-7 and it just wasn't narrow enough to identify the amount of functions they would have in this game.
Originality: This game isn't original at all since the story and probably the art they will do for this game will basically mimic a game like age of empires or a thousand other games out there with this theme topic. Even with the amount of mechanics that they will have implemented in this game wont make it original since games like this are done all the time.
How well the physical prototype mimics the game: The physical protoype was very versatile in testing what they wanted to know from the user testers. Basically they were able to find a lot that was wrong with the game.
what you have done this week for the project?
At the moment i've been gathering sounds we will be using for our game such as beginning and opening themes and more or less more of the functionality sounds such as the shooting and blowing up sounds. At the moment i've collected around 10 sounds of each and music clips for the game.
where and when you met with your group ?
Our group met last Thursday (10/18) after our lab in room 3300 at 7:30pm. We will meet this Tuesday (10/23) to practice our presentation in the lecture at 3pm.
what you are going to do for next week
I should hopefully be finishing off the soundscape for the game. Well actually on a more reasonable scale more of the sounds that will most likely be in the game. Moreover, i will also use the opportunity of critiqueing the other presentations and hopefully gather anything useful from their presentations as useful feedback for our game and what we can change with it.
