Assignment 13
Promotional Video
Due: Saturday, April 25th at 11:59 pm
Teams have already had one draft and revision for the concept document, so everyone is
close to being done with that document. This assignment will let the team return to the
concept document for inspiration. As with the Concept Doc, we want teams to think about
promoting your game to receive funding or interest, but this time in a slightly different
way: video.
The video that teams produce should be roughtly 2-3 minutes in length, aimed at an outside
audience. There are two different options:
-
Create a promo video that will work for a Boston FIG submission (whose deadline right now is unclear).
-
Create a promo video that would gain traction on Kickstarter or Indiegogo or similar venue for further development funding/support
In creating the video, start thinking about it in terms of the Concept Doc, which had
teams pitching ideas to an outside investor, very early in the development cycle.
Now close(r) to being done, the video can promote the team's work in other ways more
sophisticated than the Concept Document alone could. For this assignment, all of the
concepts that we have been trying to convey come to bear: audience assessment, message
constraints, branding, tone, consistency, game development story, professionalism, and
so on. Your game is going LIVE, and it is time to get the word out.
Artifacts that the teams have been capturing during term -- such as photos, early sketches,
drafts, and so on -- can and likely should have presence in the video's content. Tell the
story of the game, the team, and how it all came about and needs outside support.
Choice #1: Boston FIG Pitch
For this assignment teams must create a video that meets all of the criteria posted for
Boston FIG 2020
and the criteria for this class (described below).
To understand the genre, here are some Boston FIG video examples from GDIAC past submissions.
This 2019 promo video accomplishes its goals in a polished manner. We know who is on the
team, why it was developed, the "story" of the game, and what their hopes are for play.
The videos include development shots from paper prototyping up through various testing
phases. It’s also nice that many voices from the team members move the narrative forward.
The video's tone, tempo, and narrative (which walks the viewer through and experience of
the game and asks for action at the end) are superbly crafted.
Family Style also had a great promo video with the same features as Cluck Cluck
Moose. We bring it to your attention because it demonstrated well the impacts of
networking, using a single player mode, then multi-player mode. Watch and see how they
do this. We also see players winning, which makes for a compelling snapshot of fun.
Unfortunately, Family Style did not make it into Boston FIG because of a broken
build (don't be that group).
Another example from 2019, this is example hits a lot of the same notes as Cluck
Cluck Moose. We include it just to give you another example that fits the format
we are asking for. While we have other examples from before 2019, they do not necessarily
meet the format we are asking for (they predate this assignment).
This video from 208 is a great example, and not just because it was accepted to FIG.
It is scripted well, and it addresses quite clearly all of the Boston FIG video
requirements, including the more nuanced angles of what makes the game compelling and
unique within the market. The toggle between narrators is especially smooth (and all
the student narrators are named). The beginning of the video has good branding. The
game's objective is clearly explained, and the gameplay is covered well. There is also a
strong explanation of the project indicating that it came from a course.
Another FIG acceptance (this time in 2017), this video also has many strong points.
There are easy-to-hear narration moments and strong, clean game captures in this video.
It would have been better if the video started with identifiers for branding purposes;
however, the game's objective and unique gameplay is clearly highlighted. There is also
a good explanation of how the project come from a course (see the minute marker 0:37+).
Finally, all the student narrators are clearly named.
This video provides viewers with a very compelling introduction, which is intriguing in
and of itself. For this year’s videos, we are asking for some narration, which this video
lacks. However, in its favor, the gameplay shots and extremely strong and complimentary
soundtrack carry the moment.
Choice #2: Funding Pitch
In this alternative, teams must create a 2-3 minute promotional video that promotes the
game while simultaneously inspires micro-investors to support the game’s production.
The video needs to meet the criteria for this class (described below).
But it also should follow basic Kickstarter guidelines:
No groups from last year chose to go this route (initially). However, we do have some
professional examples for you to look at.
Wait, Family Style? Yes, after finishing the semester the team had a real
Kickstarter. And they made their (modest) goal! A lot of the strong points of the
Boston Fig video are here. But look at how they changed it to turn it into a funding
pitch instead.
Jeff Vogel is a living legend, and the instructor has played his games from the very
beginning. The nice thing about this video is how simple it is. It is far less professional
that the other examples below. The strengths of this video are his strong branding,
clarity about what makes the game unique, and he is straight forward about what he is
asking to be funded. However, we caution teams against having to much of a talking head
approach at the start.
The tone and atmosphere of this video is a bit grand for 4152 purposes, but keep in mind
that this is a professionally made game. The strengths that we want teams to pull from this
video are the discussion of the team (their talents and skill set), the compelling parts
of the game, the early art artifacts, and how investors become part of the project.
Weaknesses include a bit too much of the personal desires of the game makers versus what
is likely compelling to investors and/or players.
Once again, keep in mind that this is a professional game company, and so some of the
video is more grand than we would expect (like the opening moments). But we have the same
strengths are here as with Project Eternity. There is a nice discussion of the game's
visual environment. There is also a great explanation at the end of how investors are
needed and where the funding money will be spent.
With a strong opening full of branding, this video appeal is a great collection of
gameplay explanation, a strong connection to place, a nod to funding/connectivity
constraints associated with Cuba, obstacles overcome, and overall inspiration.
Requirements
Regardless of which choice teams make for video, all videos will be graded by a uniform
set of criteria. We will be grading it by looking for the following features.
Opening Sequence
The video should begin with venue identifier (BFIG or Kickstarter), the team name,
game name, copyright symbol, and year. It should also have some sort of logo (such
as what you might use later in the game's store icon). Any additional branding is optional.
The difference between the team name and the game name should be very clear.
Video Content
The arc of the video's story should organized in a way that makes sense for promoting the
game for BFIG or Kickstarter. The content should include early shots of the design,
levels or other visual assets as part of the game's development story arc. It should
also reveal how far along the team is in development (See the Discarded at minute
marker 1:11 for an example).
The video should mean the criteria of the target venue. For both types of videos, we
recommend that teams follow the
Boston FIG directions.
We will look at all of the requested criteria for grading except the last one in the
"Video Entry" section on page 4.
Overall, the video should leave the audience understanding the "why" elements of the game:
-
Why is this game unique?
-
Why is this game compelling?
-
Why should people vote for/fund this game?
When you reach the conclusion, you should remindus the game name (since we may have last
seen it in the introduction).
Professionalism
The video should be edited well for visual flow, continuity, and liveliness. It should
not be shaky or jumpy. It should be easy to see (not too dark or too bright). Any on-screen
wording (captions, keywords, menus, other) should be proofread and edited.
The sound editing is just as important and should provide a clean, clear listening
experience. Any narration given shouldc clearly compliment the on-screen content.
This narration should loud enough and clearly articulated, and background
noise should be at a minimum. The narration should also be energetic, and not monotone
or overly scripted.
We ask that all members of the team are shown, if they are comfortable doing so.
For safety reasons, we will not make this a requirement, but it is great to show the
whole team, not just the leads.
Finally, the team should avoid any copyright issues in regards to other-game screenshots,
images, music, or sound effects.
Storyboarding (Optional)
In the past we mandated the format that you took to create the video. We want to see
a schedule for drafting, scripting, video shooting, and video editing. Because of
the difficulties with this semester, we are relaxing this requirement.
However, we strongly recommend that you still storyboard your video before you do any
shooting. This will cut down on any unnecessary, time consuming work. It is much
faster to storyboard than to edit video. The storyboard is just a set of slides
which serve as your evolving narrative/voiceover document. Each slide should have the
following information:
-
A visual (a drawing, a screen capture, or a set of words explaining what will be there soon) in the main area of the slide.
-
The script for the narration/voiceover (if any) present in the Notes pane.
-
Indication of who will be doing the narration/voiceover (if any) for this part of the video.
In essence, each team is making a PowerPoint/Slide Deck for a presentation, except that this
time it will be seen as part of a video. Teams can also choose to storyboard by drawing the cells
with handwritten description for the notes.
Submission
Due: Saturday, April 25th at 11:59 pm
You will notice that there is a CMS entry for this assignment, but we do not want you to
upload the entry via CMS (it cannot handle this video files). Instead, upload the video
either to YouTube or Vimeo. Then submit a link to the video to CMS as
either a PDF or a text file. If you made a storyboard, submit that as well. Make sure
that the last slide of the storyboard is a hotlink to the video.
While you only get one shot for Boston FIG, you will get to revise the video for class.
Teams will revise this video with the app store proposal in two weeks, and then again at
at Showcase.
|