LO4 - Presentation

Presentation Slides:

Peer Evaluations:

As part of the Task, we were required to peer evaluate the presentations we were witness too. I was absent for some of the presentations, and as such, I didn't evaluate all of the presentations within the class. I evaluated 6 in total. The criteria of which I had to mark them were Genre, Content, Style, Narrative, Character, Techniques, Technical qualities, Aesthetic qualities and Creative qualities.

I began by observing George's presentation. I found him to be strong in all categories, but lacked in character and aesthetic qualities in comparison to the rest. I found his Narrative to be particularly strong, but not to an extent that it deserved a Excellent rating.

The next presentation I observed was Ben's. I found him to have many very good qualities, but I found his Style, Narrative and Techniques to be merely good. I found them to be of a considerably lower quality than the other marking criteria.

The next presentation to be observed was Rehana's. I found her presentation to be one of the stronger ones, with most of her work being very good, but her content was excellent due to its detail and use of game terminology.

Upon watching Ashley's presentation, I found his to be similar in quality to Rehana's in regards to overall proficiency.  It was very good overall, but I found his character good and his style excellent. 

Raimond's was next to present and I found it to be the best presentation I observed. All the criteria with the exception of Content, Style and aesthetic Qualities were very good, with the prior being excellent. He also presented with arguably the most confidence and maintained a professional disposition throughout.  

Following the best presentation, was undoubtedly the worst (Beside my own). I found Lewis to perform with confidence and have strong style and aesthetic qualities, but everything else was either good or merely satisfactory.  His slides contained little detail in regards to writing, however, his artwork was strong and indicative of artistic talent. 

Self Evaluation:

I felt that my presentation was lacking in multiple factors. Firstly, I rushed my speaking, which resulted in a presentation which was hard to understand. I felt that I didn't maintain suitable eye contact with the audience or the camera. I felt that my lack of eye contact resulted in a presentation that lost any sense of professionalism. I believe that my presentation could have also featured more slides to improve the length which in my case barely went past the 3 minute minimum. The positives of my presentation are that I felt that I covered all of the main points and that I gave the audience an accurate representation of what I feel my game could of become. I felt I could of expanded some of the points that came up, especially the narrative in more detail, While I feel that everyone understood the premise of the story, I feel that I could of expanded on it a little more and given those watching the presentation, more of an idea of what my game narrative entails.

Stakeholders:

The premise of the pitch was to sell my game to either potential stakeholders, or stakeholders that already have an investment within my games production. I decided that my stakeholders would be Bethesda Game Studios and CD Projekt Red. I chose these companies for several reasons. Firstly, they both have made games set in times where knights or other medieval counterparts have been featured. I feel that this game would suit their demographics and I feel that the game content would suit their usual age ratings, with games from both stakeholders being primarily rated 18 especially CD Projekt. I feel that since my narrative is heavily politically themed, it would appeal to CD Projekt Red. This is because The Witcher series is known for its politically themed narratives that investigate the politics of warring kingdoms and species. My game's narrative would comfortable compliment The Witcher in this regard.