What:

EACH TEAM is writing 3 pieces of feedback for EVERY OTHER TEAM and their own. This feedback should be 3 suggestions of what you think they should work on next. Think about what parts of the project are working well that they should double down on. What parts of the demo were confusing or mismatched what they said. And what do you think is the eye of the duck.

Self Reflection:

Unity Goals:

1. Need to make ball disappear and instantiate again so if it fails the person should get another chance to bowl
2. Try creating a bowling lane
3. Deflection from objects

Raspberry Pi Goals:

1. Create a realistic physical bowling space
2. Experiment and explore soundscapes
3. Add a points tracker for bowling
4. Prototype bowling pins to make them grander and more realistic

Ultimate Goal: Can we think of something more visceral as an input. Instead of a flick, can we have someone throw things?

Other Teams:

1: Graffiti, Mantas, Federico, Andrea

1. The connection between the inspiration (statue) and the product itself is unclear
2. The example of two users in two different places sharing an interactive experience is cool.

2: Bowling, Sareena, Shalin, Varenya

N/A

3: Futurecasting, Micol, Sami, Jing

1. There’s a mismatch between your story and what the product is communicating - the narrative discussed two strands of the future, and seemed, in the end, much more extensive than what we witnessed.
2. If things were happening and interacting with the real, physical cup, that would be have been much more impactful.

4: T Shirt, Fahmida, Abhishek, Raphael

1. Very cool idea! For the person wearing the shirt though, how would it feel for them to have the user physically approaching them to see the VR up close?
2. Are there plans to make the VR object more constrained to the size of the t shirt?

5: Cult, Surojit, Anna, Yuxi, Axel

1. The experience felt constrained because of the hardware requirements (camera on God’s head and VR goggles for the user

6: Storybook, Chaeri, Sindhu

1. What if this was part of a running narrative, where the story gets passed on and players are free to complete it whichever way they decide
2. Have you explored soundscape?
3. Could the fiducials had constrains of their own - some fiducials could allow you to do somethings, and others can allow you to do other things.

7: DataTrail, Reuben, Juliana, Raunaq

1. How does the data dump work? What are you collecting?
2. The idea is super cool! Reminded of defrag-ing a PC
3. Does “bad data” have a different color or shape vs. “good data”?
4. What’s the pace at which data is dumped? Do certain circumstances change the rate?

8: Touch, Rina, Julius, Alex

1. Have you considered using a joystick for the physical interaction?
2. The model is watching the other model being selected - there is a sense of voyeurism in the interaction. Will this interaction change the feelings of the user, and the way you interact with the product?