evaluation

1. Evaluation
Megan Bannister

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
• I think a massive strength in my research was my survey and interviews,
this allowed me to receive real feedback from my target audience and
receive detailed, accurate answers to my questions. This meant I was able
to alter my product to be more attractive to viewers. Over half of those
who answered the survey said immersion in a game world is key to their
enjoyment, which led me to flesh out my NPC ideas and look to adding
small details throughout the scenes to for viewers to notice.
• I think a weakness of my research was the level of analysis overall, but
specifically on the existing products. I believe if I had analysed the uses of
colour more specifically that would have been beneficial to my use of
colour within my game. I also think I should have researched further into
the context around each game and the creators and found games that
were made on a shorter timescale with just one non-professional creator
to give myself a stronger idea of the level of work I should be aiming for.

4. Planning
• The strengths of my planning were the mood boards and mind maps and
schedule. The mood boards aided me in expanding ideas for the product and
solidify an idea for every character I planned to create, helping me visualise
what I was going to create. The mind maps allowed me to brainstorm
everything I could elaborate on: from whether to do film or animation to what
items to add into the game. The schedule gave me a layout for how long each
aspect of the game would take and meant I could space out my work evenly.
• A weakness of my planning was the storyboard/shot list. I found it hard to
envisage how the eventual trailer would look so creating the storyboard and
shot list was difficult. I don’t think this had much effect on the overall product
asides the speed at which compiling all the animations together and editing it
overall as a video took. To improve, I think it would be beneficial to do my
storyboard as soon as my initial ideas are complete, rather than ignoring and
procrastinating. A rough storyboard that I only end up partially following is
better than none at all.

5. Time Management
• I believe I could have managed my time better, spending more time
outside of college would have definitely benefitted my work. Due to this, I
had to catch up on PowerPoints from the beginning of the FMP work later
on in production as they were incomplete or lacking the detail I was
aiming for. I believe a main contributor to this lack of time management is
that alongside our course I am teaching myself an A-level, this is entirely
my own issue but the deadlines for both courses are within days of each
other and both require a lot of attention and effort.
• Naturally, with extra time my product would have improved. Due to the
nature of the medium I was working with, pixel art, a lot of the things I
would make would take a lot of time to complete but not actually be large
components of the product – in particular the NPC designs. With extra
time I would have included more scenes and additional characters to flesh
out the in-game world.

6. Technical Qualities
• I would say my product is technically advanced. There are easily 50 layers to each landscape –
which is after combining layers once I’m certain on each aspect. The sideways walk cycle was also
towards 50 layers to ensure it flowed as smoothly as possible, even though those 50 only
combined into 8 frames.
• I think my product needs more detailing in some areas such as the roofs and paths to make it all
look as advanced as possible. However, I am already using a strong level of detail to ensure the
game is immersive - such as the depth of water around the duck in the pond, the shine on the
windows and the perspective on the chairs- refer to picture 1. I think my most technically detailed
aspect is the house in picture 2.
• A risk I took for this game was to attempt a top-down style as it more complex than a side scrolling
style as I used for my video game animation earlier in the course and I think that risk paid off well.
An aspect I had to spend a lot more time on than expected was the perspectives of the roofs on
the houses which had to be correct or else the entire scene would look wrong. This was technically
difficult as I had to constantly adjust each roof by a pixel or two pixels at a time to make sure it was
perfect.
• I would say the least technically difficult aspect of the product was my character design, I favored
adding detail to buildings and scenery that would have more impact than on my characters. I think
their designs still convey what I’m trying to tell about each one but I think with more detail
(shading, added colours into hair and clothes) they would look a lot more advanced.

7. Technical Qualities
Picture 1

8. Picture 2

9. Aesthetic Qualities
• I think my work looks good, heavily due to the fact one of the first things I learnt
during my research was to find a colour palette and stick to it. I chose a Studio
Ghibli colour palette so that I could convey a similar aesthetic to those films of
peace and homeliness.
• In particular, I like the design of the red house (picture 2). I like this because I think
it conveys extremely well the type of house it is and gives context to the place it is
situated; you can tell it is in an overgrown area and looks old and worn down. The
design on it is intricate and technically well made.
• I also think the smoothness of the animation contributes to the aesthetic quality of
the product however the design of the characters is maybe not so aesthetic
pleasing, I would say this occurred because I chose to spend time on larger parts of
the game. Another reason for this would be that the characters are a lot smaller
than the buildings so an incorrect pixel would throw off the design, so I was
apprehensive to putting a lot of detail into the characters, but I think they are not so
out of place to throw the whole look off.

10. Audience Appeal
• An important part of pixel art to my interviewees was nostalgia but
they specified that was found just by playing pixel art, so I
succeeded in that. Interviewee 2 & 3 also state that they like open
world games, I believe my trailer shows enough to imply that it is
most definitely open world, especially with a top-down style and
multiple scenes as well as the text used in the trailer.
• Aesthetics were important to Interviewee 1, so I made sure that
every facet of the game design was detailed, and the music fit the
idea of the game.
• The trailer is also specifically gameplay related and does not
incorporate any cinematic elements that some mobile games use
in their trailers as I find these misleading. In my third interview he
explained that if he was going to pay for a game, he wants to see
the gameplay and not a completely different art style that does
not show what you will be doing.

11. Peer
Feedback

12. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
– Very smooth animation, runs fluently
– Very good town background with lots of minor detail
– Easily distinguishable sprites with emphasised movement
• What improvements could have been made to the
product?
• Background music would make the scene feel more alive
• Perhaps more variety with the grass textures on house
• Only one animation of walking sprite so difficult to get the gist
of what the product actually is

13. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
– The colour palette is very pleasing and shows places
of interest with brighter colours
– The animation is smooth with both the characters
– The shading is very good and adds depth to the 2D
world
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– Add the characters interacting to make it more
immersive
– Add some people to the town to make it feel more
immersive and lived in

14. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
– I like the colour palette that was chosen.
– Animations are smooth and never jarring.
– The house is really nicely detailed.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– Some audio would make this feel more alive, whether that be a song
in the background or ambient sound effects.
– Have the characters interact with each other.

15. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– I agree with everything in my peer feedback. At the
time of the feedback the product is a work in progress
and incomplete – most of the improvements are
things I plan to incorporate.
– I’m really happy to hear that everyone in my feedback
said that the walk cycle ran smoothly as I was unsure
of the quality of it and thought it might look off.
– I’m also happy that Feedback 2 noticed that the café is
a place of interest over the two plain buildings as that
is what I was trying to convey.

16. Peer Feedback Summary
– I was undecided on whether to have the two
characters interact but now hearing in the feedback
that this would be preferred I plan to add that into the
final product.
– Feedback 2 specified adding people into the town to
make it more immersive and feel alive, I had plans to
add one NPC but upon hearing that I will be adding a
second.
– There was also feedback on the texture of the grass
which is definitely something I would have forgotten
to return to so it is good that I was able to pick up on
that.
– I am planning to add music on top of this as one of the
final steps so two peers noticing this lacking is
important.