The audience feedback provided valuable insights into how to improve the documentary. Key learnings were that the interview segment needed work due to poor acting quality, and acting overall could be improved. However, the title sequence and transitions used were well-received by most of the target audience. If remaking the documentary, attention would be given to strengthening the interview segment and actor performances based on this feedback.

1. Evaluation
What have you learnt from your audience feedback?

2. Introduction
To get audience feedback for our coursework, we
decided to use a combination of traditional
questionnaires and social media such as
YouTube, Facebook and Twitter.
Some proved more successful in terms of the level
of feedback received, but some produced
minimal/no results.

3. Questionnaires
The first method we used to collect our target
audience research was to use the traditional
method of creating a questionnaire for group to
answer after watching the extract of our
documentary. We divided the questionnaire into
10 questions to cover what we wanted their
opinions on. This method gave us the most
results out of every method we used.
We received a total of 23 responses, however, 2 of
these did not complete any questions after
question 6, so the results will be affected by this.

4. Question 1: Did the hosts keep you interested the whole
way through?
Did the hosts keep you interested throughout?
16
The majority of our target
14
12
audience believes that the hosts
10
kept them interested throughout
8 the documentary. This can be a
6 result of a number of things, such
4
as the script, the choice of hosts or
2
the limitation of distractions.
0
Yes No No Preference

5. Question 2: How was the audio? Was the narration
always clear?
How was the audio? Was the narration always clear?
The majority of our target
audience believes that the quality
Positive Feedbac k
Negative Feedbac k
of the audio used throughout the
documentary was at a proficient
standard to be clear. Despite four
people disagreeing with this, we
believe that if we were to re-make
the extract, the audio would not be
a primary concern.

6. Question 3: What did you think of the title sequence?
We received a range of text responses for this question, some basic but some more
analytic.
Positive feedback
Some of the feedback we received thought that the title sequence we created was good
in some ways. For example, some of the responses we received describe the title
sequence as “very good & matched the theme of the documentary” and that it “clearly
outlined the context.”
Negative Feedback
The whole point of the audience feedback was to see what could have been improved
on. Constructive criticism we have received for our title sequence included “could have
been a lot faster?” and “it dragged on a bit”. If we were to re-invent the title sequence,
we would be sure to reduce the duration of the title sequence to a pace that suited our
target audience.

7. Question 4: Did you find the on-screen graphics suitable or
distracting?
Afterasking our target audience
Did you find the on-screen graphics suitable or distracting?
this question, the majority of them
were paying attention to what was
Distracting
being said in the extract and
weren’t affected by any of the
on-screen graphics occurring
throughout.
Suitable
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

8. Question 5: Did you feel that the file footage used was
appropriate to a gaming documentary?
Was the file footage used appropriate for the documentary?
Despite a few people being
unsure about what file footage
was used, 20 of the 23 people we
25
20
asked felt that the file footage
that we included/credited was all
15 appropriate to the topic covered
in the extract.
10
5
0
Yes No No Preference

9. Question 6: Were the backing tracks suitable for the
documentary in general?
The
Were the backing tracks suitable for the documentary? graph to the left shows that our target
audience were in agreement that the
18 backing tracks used were suitable for the
Frequency
16
14
tone and topic of the documentary. Not
12 everyone agrees, however, and there is
10
one person who is unsure.
8
6
4
2
0
Yes No No Preference

10. Question 7: Did the interview segment hold your interest?
The
Did the interview segment hold your interest throughout? target audience has clearly
identified that the interview segment
is the weakest segment of the
documentary, as more than half of
those who asked for responses from
told us they didn’t pay attention to
Yes
the interview. Some people even
No
No Preferenc e
added comments, telling us it was
due to things such as “poor acting”
and “long-winded speeches”. If we
were to remake this extract, we
would spend more time re-vamping
the interview segment to meet the
demands of our target audience.

11. Question 8: Were there any parts or segments of the
documentary that you found distracting?
The audience was split between
which parts they found
distracting. Some found the
background tracks distracting,
others said it was the interview
segment. In the end, however,
the majority claimed there
Were there any parts/sections of the documentary that you found distracting?no distracting segments in
were
the documentary,
No
Yes
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Frequency

12. Question 9: On a scale of 1-5 (with 1 being “abysmal and 5
being “fantastic”), what would you score our documentary?
(ring around your answer)
We
On a scale of 1 to 5... how would you rate our documentary? received good ratings for our
documentary extract. In total, the
ratings averaged out at 3.35, which is a
acceptable rating. However, it shows us
that we need to work on some
1 out of 5
segments on the documentary in order
2 out of 5
3 out of 5
to push it’s rating to a 4 out of 5.
3 and ½ out of 5
4 out of 5
5 out of 5

13. Question 10: Is there anything you would have liked us to
have added to our documentary?
For this question, we decided to have one last attempt at seeing what
else we had missed out of the documentary extract we’d created. We
ended up discovering we had missed some subtle things, as well as
having a poor attempt at others. Responses we received for this
question included “different locations – in the home – natural
environment for game playing” and “use more up-to-date games.”

14. YouTube
In an aim to generate extra
responses, we decided to upload a
smaller copy of our extract to the
social site YouTube. We attached a
few questions for viewers to answer
in the description bar beneath the
video.
Although we didn’t receive a lot of
responses from the YouTube
community, we received some
responses nonetheless.

15. Responses from YouTube
From the comments left on the video, we learn a few more things about what we
could improve on. The top comment, for example, shows us that the quality of the
acting was debatable, but also tells us that they felt the scripting of the documentary
was sufficient.
From the second comment, we learn that they liked the transitions used in the video,
but again the quality of the acting was noticeable. As this problem keeps arising, it is a
problem we would tackle if we were to remake the extract.

16. What have you learnt from your
audience feedback?
Things to improve on in the future
From the responses we received, we are now aware of the more common problems
people are identifying in the documentary. One of these being the poor quality of the
interview segment, which mainly came down to a combination of poor choice of actor
and failed technology, as the original plan to Skype the interview with our original
interviewee failed, due to the fact the quality was severely bad, leaving us no other
choice but to script the responses. Then came the fact that our actor continuously
looked down at the script, despite us telling him to attempt to avoid doing that, as he
hadn’t learnt his lines properly. Thus why there were so many transitions in this
section.
A second thing noticeable (mainly from the YouTube comments) was the quality of
acting overall. They were not specific, however, to which actors this applied to. It is safe
to assume though that our actor interviewee was one of these. Next time it would be
better to examine a number of people’s acting skills before making a decision..

17. What have you learnt from your
audience feedback?
Strong points of the documentary
If we were to remake the documentary, there are certain segments
that would not require change, one of these being the title sequence.
Despite a few people disagreeing, the majority of the target audience
clearly responded in a way that complimented it, as it was relevant
and very realistically timed.
Another segment not needed to change is the type of transitions used.
The majority of our target audience enjoyed the transitions, and
didn’t find them at all distracting or irritating. They were also very
relevant to the topic, which is why we spent a good amount of time
choosing what transitions to use based on the relevance.