My reflection of Silvia’s reflection on my presentation:
Silvia’s thoughts and feedback on my presentation were grounded in the best way. I left feeling ever more encouraged and aware of what I need to do moving forward.
One of the biggest successes of my project so far was that the emotional and narrative core of my project, using comics and gameplay mechanics to deal with mental and physical health, was clearly coming through. That meant a lot to me. She also pointed out how she saw this project as not just something fun or aesthetic but also as a way of using interactive storytelling as a bridge between design and healing. I especially liked her comment: “design can make hard topics more human,” as that is exactly why I started working on this project.
On the “theory” side of it all, I appreciate that my use of “Research through Design”, “Transmedia Storytelling”, and “Expressive Art Therapy” made sense and felt relevant. Silvia’s suggestion of looking into “Narrative Psychology” also makes sense as the next step, especially because of how people form meaning through stories, something I am literally building my thesis around, bringing that into gameplay. I will hold onto her question about whether players will feel the influence of these theories through interaction, since I am only putting this project forward as a potential research project.
Another valid point she raised was about the “skeleton” of the whole experience. I have been too focused on character development, aesthetics, testing, and branching scenes, but I think I need to take a step back and map out the broader narrative. Right now, it feels like a collection of ideas and iterations, without a clear backbone that would take the audience from start to finish. That is going to be my immediate next step going forward.
Silvia also mentioned researching beyond the design world, and looking into the psychology and how people process interactive content emotionally. That is a gap I had not fully explored or addressed, and I think pulling a little more from the interdisciplinary research, i.e., cognitive psychology, emotional design, or the study of empathy and user agency in game design, could strengthen my design and have a better impact.
I will save the most impactful comment for last, which was the most personal as well. She reminded me to care for my own mental health while working on a thesis that is so emotionally charged. That hit different. It reminded me that this project was personal, yes, but that shouldn’t mean that I must shoulder it all alone or lose myself in the process. If the project is about healing, it should extend to how I make it too. Thank you for the review, Silvia. Thank you for being concerned and keeping a check on me!
My reflection on my review of Ryan’s presentation:
Watching Ryan’s presentation made me realize a few key areas where I could sharpen my own process: in structure, clarity, and delivery.
One of the strongest points in Ryan’s project was the use of the iterative design process. Each of his projects showed a clear path from ideation to execution to reflection, with each stage reflecting a part of his research questions. I realized that while I have been experimenting a lot, I don’t make the “iterative” process clearly visible. Seeing how he maps out his cycle of work reminded me that I should probably also document and communicate that more clearly in my work. This could be helpful for me as I continue building my narrative structure.
Ryan’s use of theoretical research methods made me reflect on how my theories are being used as well. Advising him to use the two theories I have worked on in the past on some human-interaction projects made me wonder if I could also benefit from them further. However, I also think that they could make me go into tangents that might make me lose sight of what’s a priority for me moving forward, but still something to think about. It does make me wonder if I could use those theories to explore more on the emotional and cognitive psychology frameworks to enrich the interactivity and engagement in my project.
An interesting comment I left Ryan with was to explore intentional failure or unpredictability in his final projects as a learning aspect. That could also be applied to my project. Maybe if I allow parts of the game to feel unstable and ambiguous on purpose, especially in scenes that are meant to reflect mental health struggles. Similarly, while leaning on aesthetics choices, it makes me think of how emotional triggers like humor, discomfort, or even absurdity could be used to deepen user engagement. I might think more about that.
The last thing that I pointed out that I now think I could benefit from as well is thinking about the accessibility for non-experts. I could also check in on how “playable” and readable my project is to a broad audience. Especially because I’m mixing serious topics with quirky or unconventional art styles, I want to make sure the visual language is welcoming to all users instead of being rather confusing.
It is funny to think how assessing someone else’s work could also affect the way we see gaps in our work.
Coming up next…
- Next, I will be working on refining the narrative structure. I have started working on it already, but not enough to be documented for this post.
- I will be following the zoomed-out approach when working on the narrative, so I keep an eye on the structure. This should prevent me from getting lost in the complexities of the branching structure.
- After a certain point, I think I might even go back and forth with the narrative and the storyboards to keep the iterations going as I feel both those things might define one another in some way.