Interactive Gaming 2009

It's been a quick fortnight. Too quick.
I spent the first week getting 5.1 in shape (I do hope you've read my comprehensive notes rather than picking out one typo, Pete) and week 2 was spent getting 1.2 and 5.2 in better shape.

On Wednesday someone, who we'll call EV, came to Confetti to externally verify my course so that I can carry on teaching you and so that everyone is happy with the learning taking place, and finally, so that I can give you a fair mark for the hard work you diligently complete.

EV suggested that the standard of work was very high this year, and for most, the marking was representative of the work.The head of media, Jamie, was particularly impressed by 5.1 and 5.2 because of the understanding that all of you had of existing games in order to create your own. The second years are currently 12 weeks away from completing the course and the standard of work there was praised for its technical standards (but you'll see all of that in June at the Showcase).

I just wanted to take a minute, before I give you all a bashing for what you didn't do with 5.2, to congratulate you on some brilliant work guys. Bloody well done, and do not get complacent - we'll be doing it all over again this time next year as you approach the end of your course.

As you know, we've got your examiner in over the next week or so and I wanted to take a minute to look at where you are in terms of your overall development as academic writers.

Jamie Cash (the Head of Media) and I agree that the standard of writing has massively improved on this course. That's great! But I can never just leave it at that, can I? Here's some general tips for overall improvements which I hope you'll agree are pretty obvious:

1. Ridonkluous (thanks Steve Dyer and GS9-1 for the word) spelling mistakes, grammar errors and lack of punctuation.

• It's very simple, get someone from the skills team to read it before you hand it in.
• Google the top 5 common grammar errors (they are blindingly stupid yet we do it all the time!)
• Headers should have Title Case and should be bold. Brand names and names of people or things should be in Title Case. Your name should be in Title Case. Have you gone mad? Also, spellcheck your own name. You know who you are.
• Break up your paragraphs. Academic paragraphs shopuld only take up 5-7 sentences. NO MORE!

2. Section structure. Wow, this was both annoying and a bit weird.

• Follow the path of the assignment. If it asks for certain things in order to achieve a pass, merit or distinction criterion - follow it to the letter!
• Use images and diagrams in your document to explain your arguments.

3. Appendix and Appendices. If you don't understand this word (or the pluralised version) for heaven's sake don't use it! It makes you look dumber than you never did before. I'm serious. An appendix is a place to put things that you couldn't fit into the main document, such as:

• Passages of secondary research such as development blogs, reviews etc can go, in their entirety into an appendix.
• Draft designs, concept drawings like your own workings out and drafts can go in an appendix.
• Images pertaining to the main body of your work should not unless they are surplus to requirement but you want me to see them.
• Academic writing should not go into an appendix. Please save the academic stuff like comments or critiques of research for the main body of the portfolio.

4. References. We'll look at this in more detail next term. You should now start to use references in a mature sense. So cut and pasting work and passing kit off as your own is what you did 5 essays ago - why are you still doing this? Here's some tips for referencing:

• Find a good quote... Put it in speech marks. These are speech marks: "..." Then comment on the quote. Do you agree or disagree with the statement? Do you admire the designer or producer more? If so, say so and then say why. At at the end of your document, and only at the end; list your quote as a weblink or entry from a book in a bibliography. Yes, a bibliography; not a webography (that's very GCSE and First Dip), or a title of References: that doesn't make any sense. It's just a plain old BIBLIOGRAPHY!
• Footnotes and comments. If you are 100% sure how to use this part of Microsoft Word, please use it. If you are lazily using footnotes instead of referencing or quotes you are a douche. Footnotes appear at the end of each page mostly and you use footnotes to expalin things that are pertinent to the main document, so if you wanted to illustrate a wireframe style or rendering term, you could do it in a footnote.
• Provide the full link or media titlein your bibliography (Various sources won't cut it dudes)
• Don't ever use Wikipedia for anything other than linking to other documents. I don't want to see any more Wikipedia links in your bibliogrpahies please? I beg of you! It makes you look really stupid... and lazy! Gosh that's harsh.

5. La Passione. Gets some fire in your bellies. If you feel passionate about something, anything; for God's sake, share it! No one wants to read a piece of work that is bland and where you completely agree with a journalist who slates a game that you would lay your life on the line for. Let's face it, I would probably commit murder inthe name of Final Fantasy VII. PS: I really an joking, but your get the idea. Never agree with everything you read and see... It's a pointless exercise if you do.

6. Question everything. See point 5.

7. Missed deadlines. This is a low down dirty shame and in the coming week, you will all see exactly who is failing to present work on time. I am literally through with it and I'm ready to start picking off the deadwood. Is meeting a deadline too hard for you? Probably. Do you have a part-time job, are you a carer or have children to bring up? No. Sooooooooooooo, is meeting a deadline too hard for you? No. Are you spending time on Facebook, gaming in the evenings or whatever? Yes. Sooooooooooooo, is meeting a deadline too hard for you? No. No is the answer. Get a grip. You are taught for 12-16 hours a week, this is classed as a FULL-TIME course meaning that 12 hours a week should be spent doing homework, extra studies or doing assignments. It's embarrassing isn't it? Being called out like that, so get used to it you repeat offenders, because your life is about to get much worse. However, if you do have REAL, believeable reasons for missing deadlines you MUST see me well before the deadline itself; not on the day or after the event. Diatrbe over.

Like I said in the first paragraph, your work is to a really high standard but I'd like to see you off this course in 12 months or so as very well-versed academic writers and expert practitioners. It is possible, and I will do it. You may have to come over to my way of thinking kicking and screaming.

Oh heck! Will I mark a piece of work with some mention of VOIP please?

Does anyone use VOIP? It's been around long enough for you to at least try it and be able to write about it and yet, no one (so far) has even given it a mention.

I'm like, sat in my living room pacing up and down because I'm so eager to find at least one assignment that documents or sets out exactly what I've asked for in the assignment.

I wonder whether you'd be surprised to know that some of you have avoided the question on all counts, preferring to do your own thang. Do your own thang? What the hell?

Give me GS8 any day of the week over you lot on this assignment.

Random is the only way that I describe the assignments I've seen so far. It's weird because I thought or hoped that you might be able to produce work that flowed and had meaning in terms of the implication of ethics and law. It hasn't been apparent so far and I'm 10 assignments in. Incidentally, where are all of the other assignments I wonder? Not everyone handed work in, did you know that? Probably 15 or 20 if I'm lucky. So expect a few shoutings at when I return/Monday.

I guess I have been making a natural comparison between the work that GS8 did last year and what you guys have done in assignment 1.2. Is that a fair comparison to make? If so, they really rocked at the assignment which will probably have some issue with how I have taught you ethics and law.....

Mmmmm..... Just thinking aloud.

Mmmm, this appeared to be quite a tough gig for some of you. There are only a handful (possibly 4) distinctions offered from 44 submissions. Oh dear! How did that happen? Well, let's have a look:

Criteria 1 - what you need to do here is look at a variety of games developers and explain how they work. How are they financed? How does one become a managing director? Who looks after the well being of a company? How is a company forged? Do you need good ideas, or money to succeed?

Can any of you, hand on heart, tell me that you ticked all of these boxes? Even though some people got distinctions, no one answered every question above. Most of you fail to answer a single question above and pretty much all of you completely forgot to even bother with this part of the assignment. How come?

Criteria 2 - It's great that everyone mentioned different jobs in the industry but who actually mentioned what these jobs do, and who does them? Also, how many of you compared the jobs and job roles across the indsutry (because each job and employer is different).

My main area of disappointment was despite standing in front of you for 2 hours a week for 12 weeks, some of you still managed to copy and paste big old sections from wikipedia, bungie.net and others. If you are one of those people, you might want to rethink your options because this course may not be for you.

I want individuals like Bobby L (Distinction), Bobby W (Distinction), Cam (Distinction) and others who are prepared to go away, think about the question and deliver a sterling piece of work.

Some people tried really hard (and some a little too hard). Relax! You have 2 years to work, and work hard, but shirking out and copying from websites is a bit low.

Some people have yet to submit assignment 1.1! Gasp! Oh, and just one person failed to submit the work in the required format; so their work was marked last!

Wow, what a weird end to week 2 on the games course. I must tell you that I was hugely disappointed that although I gave you a very fair and just deadlines, some of you still couldn't make it. For you guys who missed the deadline without letting me know beforehand, you will be meeting with me on Monday.

The second huge disappointment of the day for me, was without question, the GS9 attendance to the film at the Broadway. With the notable exception of GS9-1 (you guys are awesome!), the only faces I saw and really appreciated were:
Joe Straw - GS9-2 REPRAZENT
Jacob Henry - GS9-2 REPRAZENT
David Correia - GS9-3 REPRAZENT
William Larcombe - GS9-3 REPRAZENT
Robert Ward - GS9-3 REPRAZENT
I think that there may have been one more, but the great news for you lot is that you all got Confetti points.

Those that couldn't (/be bothered to) make it, that's a shame, but it has somehow shaped how I see you doing over the course of this next year. Putting work first, for me, on deadline day isn't an option, it's a mere oversight/bout of laziness that needs to be capped! More on assignments in my next entry!

Oh a weird note though, I really didn't expect to see the ones (outside of GS9-1) to be sat there watching Let The Right One In.

Any thoughts about the film? Put a comment below...

See below for the content of todays session and for our weekly notices, with a short explanation of what they mean:


Weekly student notices are there to inform and hopefully guide you in the general direction of stuff to do during your time at Confetti. Please keep checking the blog for each week's notices which could range from excursions to different places to parties to money off bargains and such-like.