2.744
Concept Sketch Reviews
Home > Assignments > Concept sketch results > Reviews for Eduardo Orozco

Eduardo Orozco
team mango
[review]

StoryboardConcept Sketches
 Operation Levers Resetting Conveyors Operating Arm Presentation
Average Rating
 
Client 1:
Client 2:
Reviewer 3:
Reviewer 4:
Reviewer 5:
1-marginal     2-ok    3-good     4-very good    5-outstanding

Storyboard Operation: innovativeness and potential

Client 1:

This is an interesting expansion of the game "Operation", but it seems to eliminate the manual dexterity that is central to the original. The teamwork and coordination could be fun though.

return to top of page


Client 2:

This is an ambitious concept! I wonder if it will alienate people too much though due to the gross-out factor. You'll have to go very cartoony with the theming to avoid that.

Did you make the controls hard to use because you want to make the game more difficult? I'm not sure it's necessary - three people working together to maneuver an object in 3D space is already pretty challenging! Maybe consider backwards controls for an expert-level version of this.

I would recommend that you not be explicit about the time. If you do have a visible timing mechanism, make it qualitative, like an hourglass (virtual if necessary), instead of quantitative. I think it's more suspenseful if groups can't quite tell how much time they have left. It's already pretty macabre to put a time limit on someone's life (even if it's just a medical dummy!) - no need to put too fine a point on it. Speaking of...I think you should take out the dead patient references completely. Stick closer to the original version of Operation, where the only consequence is hearing a silly buzzer.

One other question is how you plan to make this a game for more than 3 people? Are there other tasks that could be incorporated depending on group size?

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

This seems like a really fun concept! I appreciated that you included both the win and lose state in the storyboard in order to give us a sense of the overall experience. I think this idea has a lot of potential and people would be very excited to play it and have a real life experience playing Operation. One concern I have with the game is that it seems ideal for 3 people. The Open World experience can have groups with as few as two members, and it seems difficult for a two person team to complete this task if the levers are all far away from one another and need to be moved simultaneously. At the same time, if there are more than 3 people, what do the others do? If there can be a way to engage the others while also making it possible for 2 people to complete the task on their own, this would be an excellent room!

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

The storyboard is easy to understand and well thought out. I love the idea of the wonky levers controlling the arm. It sounds like a fun game that will get everyone involved! It reminds me a bit of a physical version of the app 'Spaceteam,' which also has to do with team coordination and wonky controls.

One suggestion would be to replace the timer with something more medical (a heart rate monitor maybe? It would go with the flatlining at the end) to fit in with the theme more.

return to top of page


Reviewer 5:

Love the idea of creating a life-sized version of operation. I also like how the controls are purposefully confusing, which I can see being fun and frustrating to use.

return to top of page



Potential, feasibility, user experience and human factors shown in the concept sketch, Levers

Client 1:

Making interesting lever slots would complicate the feeling of direct feedback. Perhaps instead of custom slots though, these levers can be straight slots with a spring return? That way players would have to hold a precise position while retrieving the pieces, maintaining the original dexterity element of this game.

return to top of page


Client 2:

I already mentioned that I think the levers don't need to be quite this complicated, but playtesting will determine that for sure.

Think about if you will need to reset the levers at all - will you move the magnet head back to a neutral position between plays? If so, you'll need to move the levers at the same time so the mapping doesn't get thrown off. (I'd actually recommend against a reset for exactly this reason...)

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

I really like the idea of levers with motion that isn't intuitive. I think this would be fun for users once they get over the initial frustration! Do you imagine this would still be mechanically connected to the arm or would it be electronic? There is a room in Boda Borg (Potions room 2) with mechanical levers like these that act normally and they are already extremely difficult to control precisely (and thus extremely frustrating), so this will definitely require some testing to make sure it's feasible.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Love the idea of these crazy levers! My suggestion is that either all three should be relatively normal yet counterintuitive (such as the top-down lever controlling side-to-side movement), or that all three should be completely weird (like the snake-shaped lever). In the first, it might take a while for the players to figure out that things aren't going as planned, which might be fun, and in the second, players have to purposefully figure out which is which. Both are different nuances so I'd say just pick one of the two instead of mixing and matching.

return to top of page


Reviewer 5:

Good idea, clear, makes sense. Only thing to keep in mind is lever durability, since I can envision people yanking on it pretty hard in frustration.

return to top of page



Potential, feasibility, user experience and human factors shown in the concept sketch, Resetting Conveyors

Client 1:

These look fiendishly difficult to make work. Confirming the presence of the pieces, avoiding double-ups or jams, dealing with dropped pieces mid-table, and sorting by type seem like a whole lot to accomplish on an interactive of this scale. Perhaps this can be simplified slightly using the same round ball for everything and a gravity return system to a lifting pedestals for each virus location. Even this may be too much to handle though.

return to top of page


Client 2:

There is quite a bit of complexity here. I don't doubt that you could get this to work, but I think it will be a struggle to implement within budget constraints. Also think about maintenance - someone will have to be trained on this specific mechanism and have replacement parts on hand to fix it when it breaks.

Here's an idea that I don't think you will like, given that you spent a lot of time designing this ;)...what if you abandoned the idea of loose virus particles and replaced them with simple contact points? You could prompt the visitors to move the magnet to each point with instructions to "fix the funny bone" etc. This makes it easier to scale the difficulty in the room by increasing the number of points the users have to hit, as well.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

This concept is hard to understand from the description and pictures and seems over-complicated for the use case. This could result in a lot of additional and unnecessary failure modes. I would instead explore altering gameplay slightly in a way that can handle the reset for you. For instance, if you had guests flip viruses over or move each one to a different location in the body instead of having to remove viruses and move them to a separate bin, the room could automatically reset without any additional changes needed. This would also decrease the time the room is empty and allow more throughput of guests. It's good that you're thinking about how the room will reset, but I would explore alternate methods of resetting before deciding to pursuing this one.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Conveyor belt and lift system makes sense (might be better to also include a quick diagram of where exactly the belts and lifts will be located and which three places on the body they will go to). I'm just worried that it's pretty complicated, which means that there are a lot of places where it could go wrong, and it might take too long to reset between turns?

Possible suggestions could be to have the viruses be lights/buttons that the arm has to reach down to deactivate without touching the organs, or the arm has to tap the organ which flips it from an infected organ to a healthy one. This does take away some aspect of the game in the sense that players won't be lifting objects and placing them in a bin, but it narrows down the number of parts you have to worry about and makes the reset a lot simpler. Anyway, I think the fun/challenging part of your game is figuring out how to manipulate the arm, which stays the same in both cases.

return to top of page


Reviewer 5:

Great idea, if maybe a bit overengineered. Perhaps you can reuse the electromagnetic arm to move the pieces back into place, or maybe have a lower-tech slide system underneath that uses gravity to put the pieces back into place (kinda like a arcade pool table)

return to top of page



Potential, feasibility, user experience and human factors shown in the concept sketch, Operating Arm

Client 1:

This is a pretty common design and can probably be made to work, especially using off-the-shelf parts. It would be pretty fun to operate all by itself.

return to top of page


Client 2:

Continuing on with ideas that I don't think you'll like...consider what this would look like if it were a purely analog device. Replace the motors with hand cranks (with some mechanical connection to the rods) and you'd have a much cheaper, easier-to-fix device. If you made the contact points I mentioned above into magnet switches, you could replace the electromagnet with a permanent magnet and retain the ability to sense the magnet's proximity.

Don't get me wrong - I think your idea is much cooler than mine. I'm just aware of some of the constraints that we/you will face, and I'm suggesting a few ways that you can make this game work within them

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

This concept makes sense and is a clear extension of the concept from the storyboard. Having control in the X, Y, and Z directions is a great idea, but again I would make sure that it can be done by 2 players and more than 3 players. An alternate to the electromagnet option is the arcade claw option- this could potentially give a 4th or 5th person something to do as well. You'll have to do some experimentation with the sizes of the beams in the structure and make sure that the bending that occurs in them isn't significant enough to skew the game.

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

This is a cool idea and would provide a challenge for players because they'd have to try and operate in 3D space. Mechanisms make sense; it's based on a 3D printer/something that already exists so I'm not worried that things won't work.

return to top of page


Reviewer 5:

I like how the inspiration is from a 3d printer, which is a tried and true implementation. No major concerns with this (except maybe the amount of maintenance that could be required). Great sketch too, with lots of shading.

return to top of page



Sketching technique, clarity of storyboard and concept sketches, and their web presentation

Client 1:

These sketches are generally good, and most convey a sense of the intended function. The description of the gameplay experience is extremely clear and easy to follow.

return to top of page


Client 2:

Beautiful sketches, especially your concept designs. I really like your sketch of the modified 3D printer mechanism - it really shows a lot of attention to detail. On your storyboard, I'm not sure that you need to have every tile as a hyperlink to itself, but I understand why you did it.

Overall, well done.

return to top of page


Reviewer 3:

Overall sketching was really good-great use of two point perspective! The shading in concept 3 was particularly awesome. The website was easy to use and understand, though more personalization would have been nice to see. The storyboard was clear and it was great that you had links from the storyboard to the concept sketches and vice versa. Concept sketch 2 wasn't super clear in conveying what was going on, so I would modify that by adding arrows to indicate the order of events so that viewers can figure out exactly what's happening!

return to top of page


Reviewer 4:

Website was clear and easy to understand. One note is that both the storyboard link and the concept sketches link led to the storyboard, so the latter should be fixed. Really well done on the sketches!

return to top of page


Reviewer 5:

Great website overall, everything was clear and concise.

return to top of page