Daniel Thompson evaluated his work on an FMP project involving the production of a game. His research allowed him to find inspiration from existing games. Planning helped structure his work but he had difficulties sticking to schedules. Time management was imperfect and some aspects felt rushed as a result. Peer feedback noted strengths like attention to detail but suggested improvements such as more detailed title screens and action-oriented music. Thompson agreed that the title screen and music could be improved.

1. FMP Evaluation
Daniel Thompson

2. Production Process Evaluation

3. Research
Strengths: My research allowed me to find games that already had elements
of what I wanted to add in such as ‘Age of War’. I was able to look at parts of
the games which could inspire me. Features such as unit base health and
units with specialties helped me decide on what I wanted my characters and
bases to look like and do.
Weaknesses: there were so many ideas that I liked but didn’t go together very
well so I had to pick the correct combinations – even if I didn’t like them.
I feel as if I could have put more detail into the background on the title screen
and also the animation seemed to play too fast (Needs more frames). I feel as
if the finished product would have been a lot more smoother and more
detailed.

4. Planning
Strengths: I was able to chart out what features my game would include,
when abouts I would start to create the parts and also what I wanted them to
do once in the game. I was also able to look back over everything I had stated
about the game and decide whether I wanted that to be the final product. My
planning helped my product mainly by giving me a structure to work from. My
process of making things is mostly adding bits that I deem neccesary as I go
along and it helped me start off and let me open up branches on the already
present features.
Weaknesses: The main weaknesses in my planning were sticking to my
schedules. I need to make sure i do not get distracted in the future and also to
allocate time at home to get more work done.

5. Time Management
I feel as if I did not manage my time as efficiently as I could have done and as
a result, the animation ended up being slightly rushed and I lost some of the
free time of my weekend. My project has been completed on time but it took
some extra weekend time to do. If I had more time, I would have made the
animation more smooth by creating more frames. I would also have used a
more action orientated song to go with it. the last improvement i would have
made is giving more animation stages to the units which would make their
attack look smoother as well as movement.

6. Technical Qualities
similar looking menu
selection and simplistic
style.

7. Technical Qualities
Similarities:
• Simple, easy to use and clear interface
which clearly states what unit is what.
• Each unit at the front of the queue will
be the one to fight.
• Base health to indicate how close to
defeat/victory the player is.
• Clearly indicated amount of money/Exp.
• Simplistic background style.
Differences:
• More detailed unit animations
and graphics.
• Special attack button on right
side able to use every minute.
• Unit production queue clearly
shows which units are being
made and how long until
creation.

8. Aesthetic Qualities
Personally, I think my work looks quite good for the time given. It has adequate
detail and features additions such as attack animations to give the characters
and overall game some life. It looks rather creative in my eyes with a fresh look
on defense games that we know and love but with an added twist of an
alternate universe and bizzare and wacky themes. Personally, I love the mounted
character's design and the unit menu. This is because it is more in depth than
just what the player originally sees and branches deeper into choices rather than
looking simple and boring. If I had the chance to improve anything, I would
improve the movement of the characters and the speed at which they play their
animations (adding more frames). This would give the game/animation a
smooth, more proffessional approach. I would also add extra features to the
menu, showing the player delve deeper into the options given instead of simply
showing the unit menu.

9. Audience Appeal
I think that I have appealed to my target audience very well. This wasn't originally a
hard task to begin with as I targeted age groups more than gender or ethnicity, etc.
I think the easy to navigate menus and simple fighting mechanics appeal to my
target audience of teenagers as at that age, they do not want to get into anything
complex and confusing - they would rather just get into the action packed parts.
The combat is simple and easy too for the same reasons. I tried to make it more
like the well known game 'rock, paper, scissors'. For example, rock (warriors in this
situation) beats scissors (Mounted), scissors beats paper (Archers) and paper beats
rock. This helps keep everything simple and not complex. Anyone can play and
therefore the game will attract more players both hardcore and casual.

10. Peer
Feedback

11. Feedback 1
• What did you like about the product?
– There is plenty of attention to detail and there is
decent character depth.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– There could be more to the title screen

12. Feedback 2
• What did you like about the product?
– The graphics are ‘top notch’
– The sounds were entertaining
– It was good how you put in a cursor and it moved
as if you were actually playing the game.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
– The intro is a bit too long

13. Feedback 3
• What did you like about the product?
It had really good sound effects and good
animation I liked how it showed the options as
well.
• What improvements could have been made to
the product?
The song wasn’t action like it was a little light
hearted.

14. Peer Feedback Summary
• What do you agree with from your peer
feedback?
– The music choice could have been more action packed
instead of more laid back.
– The title screen could have been more detailed and
should have been cut down so it doesn’t bore the
user.
• What do you disagree with from your peer
feedback?
I do not disagree with anything that the reviewers
said about my work.