CS/INFO 4152: Advanced Topics in Computer Game Development

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:

  1. Create a promo video that will work for a Boston FIG submission (whose deadline right now is unclear).
  2. 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.

Cluck Cluck Moose

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

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).

Weather Defender

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).

Discarded

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.

Felongeist

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.

City of Light

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.

Family Style

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.

Queen's Wish: The Conquerer

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.

Project Eternity

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.

Dungeon Defenders Awakened

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.

Savior

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.