The Issues brought up by others [Shortened]:112103 wrote:So what I would suggest: D&P and IGD students can participate in a voluntary 3 credit class every block B and D, which creates a prototype for the next Gamelab. Those who finish a prototype get 3 credits, thus have to participate in only one block of the next Gamelab.
When Gamelab starts, teams are formed around existing prototypes, and team leaders are students who did not take the prototyping class, thus will be in Gamelab both blocks.
- - Year 1 Gamelab (A+B/C+D) is worth 4 credits,
- - Isn't this also taking artist and programmers out of the conception phase?
Code: Select all
- [quote]Last thing, if you have a solid team leader, even on day 1 everyone will have more than enough work to do and no one should be working at 30%.[/quote]
- - What, exactly, is preventing designers/IGDers from doing this themselves? Don't you think it is kind of the designer's job to come up with an initial plan, and therefore kind of unnecessary to lure them with 3 credits?
- - I see the logic behind needing a pre-production phase, but personally I'd be worried about problems in practice due to inexperience.
- - This is wrong, I can tell from experience working at multiple AAA studios that every person in the team is involved in the design process.
- - Gamelab has always been doable without overtime
There are two different groups that come to IGAD, those with experience in their area, and those without. Gamelab mixes these groups up and from week one you are put in to a working environment where the team them self are responsible for there own mistakes, and are challenged to spend the remainder of that course [2B] creating a game. [First year].
From the few weeks I'v been at IGAD working in a team I have fount little issue with the task given, however that is largly due too the team them self and the variety of skill that the team has. In the first year getting a good team in game lab in each department: [Programming] [Art] [Design] with at least one person in each area having some prior experience is almost vital.
The issue is a lot of the students come too IGAD without prior experience, mostly out weighing those that do, and with that comes other variables such as personality and other potential issues that happen within a team. This clearly isn't truly Representative of a true working environment in industry, where the entire team would have experience behind them.
So then I can see the reasoning for a "Pre-Production" course, however the execution of this course has to be on the mark for it too work.
Looking at the challenges this brings, such as the split between Game Lab and PP does mean additional staffing/scheduling, the ratio of students as well as others.
The Second year actually do something akin too this oddly, they in Block A & B create two prototypes, which if selected are continued in Block C & D. While they may be in the same environment, and are expected somewhat too have the same level, if not higher as a first year:
Code: Select all
First year are meant too have an Alpha Done by the end of Block A Second year have a prototype done by the end of Block A
This is the schedule taken from the course documentation.Project and Deliverables Timeline:
Block A - Day 1 Team Formation - Assign roles, sign for responsibilities, chose a concept, decide on game idea, start writing game design document, draw concept art, start research (tech, art).
Block A - Day 2 Concept Pitch - Proceed with initial game design, write game design document, proceed with research, decide on middleware & tools
Block A - Day 3 Elevator Pitch - Present game design document. Adjust documents based on feedback. Start prototyping: build placeholder assets, code experimenting.
Day one starts with a team coming together and assigning roles, coming together as a group and deciding on a concept for a game (not the final project), start writing some documents, draw concept art and doing some research.. Essentially on day one teams are given an entire day to just come up with an idea, and look in to it, Not much experience needed there as a whole.
Day two resumes from day one, but than allows the supervisors to give feedback on a game, help address issues and potential flaws that might have been brought about from either having too much ambition with the lack of information on execution, or simply inexperience in design and production.
Day three gives the team time to address the issues in their game, and than present this readdressed ideas too the supervisors using the research, concept art and perhaps even some programmed mechanic examples, and get even more feedback and support.
... So than with all this extra help, time and a considerable less amount of pressure compared too the second years, having two blocks on a game with support. Even that sounds like a lot of help considering the level at which we are learning, where there is indeed a need to DO work outside of assigned time, IF each Credit for game lab is worth 28 hours of work, meaning 112 hours of time expected, than once you subtract the presentation times, the hand in times and others from game lab, you are actually left with some missing time, and you do actually have time outside of gamelab to do these jobs. Honestly, the first year get's a lot of lee way compared too the higher ups, so I don't think the issue is with "GameLab" or needing another course, I think the main issue is not even the lack of experience, but instead the lack of realization that at this level of education, the given tasks are not meant to be impossible, they are very achievable. So instead I think the main focus should be on addressing those students who believe that the task is asking too much of them, and getting to realize they might actually have underestimated what it means to be doing this level of education.