The team met to present the project to Brian and Phil on Friday 13th November. Brian said it has the potential to be an A* project, but could also flop if the academic side doesn't hold up. Phil mentioned it would be worth finding out when Pam sends the team the questionnaires, who made them and what else they have done. The team MUST produce evidence for a solid questionnaire.
On Tuesday 17th, the team's weekly meeting with Claire and Amanda took place to mainly discuss feedback on the presentation and the project in general. Claire and Amanda mentioned that one thing that might help solidify a good questionnaire were books on designing effective questionnaires from the social sciences section of Bolton University's library. They also brought up a good idea of implementing choices within the level to determine whats paranoid by having in-game statistics. One choice would be more paranoid than the other.
The level could be just a series of short scenarios utilising disturbing imagery, or could be entirely made up of still images which are then rated by the subject. The team must be aware of OBJECTIVITY and SUBJECTIVITY. The team must take into account who the tests will be aimed at - gamers might know what the tests are trying to achieve as they may recognise the techniques being used. Claire and Amanda made the team aware of the Milestone 1 dry-run presentations next Tuesday which must include what the team has decided upon and why, and what still needs to be decided upon. A handout isn't necessary but would be appreciated and helpful.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment