Grand Game Release (12 op)

Osaamistavoitteet (Opintojakso)

Student is able to work as a member of a game production team to control scope and complete a game project within the time allotted. Student is able to develop his toolset and skills towards a game industry professional.

Sisältö (Opintojakso)

Game project,
teamwork,
game release,
scope.

Arviointikriteerit, tyydyttävä (1-2) (Opintojakso)

The student is able to identify what kind of toolset and skills is needed in game industry.
The student can describe key concepts of games.

Arviointikriteerit, hyvä (3-4) (Opintojakso)

The student is able to apply identify what kind of toolset and skills he needs become a game industry professional.
The student can demonstrate a clear understanding of how to create and populate an interesting game world for the player to explore with at least one working game mechanic.

Arviointikriteerit, kiitettävä (5) (Opintojakso)

The student is able to apply develop his toolset and skills to become as a professional game developer.
The student has skills to complete a 3D game project within the time allotted.
The student is able to work as a member of a game production team to control scope and complete a game project within the time allotted.

Aika ja paikka

Online, Teams/Zoom
GameStudio at Kuntokatu (C3-13)

Tenttien ja uusintatenttien ajankohdat

Game project

Arviointimenetelmät ja arvioinnin perusteet

The course is evaluated based on the project results and student project reports and reviews

Arviointiasteikko

0-5

Opiskelumuodot ja opetusmenetelmät

Independent project work in teams

Oppimateriaalit

Online resources at Moodle

Opiskelijan ajankäyttö ja kuormitus

12cr, about 325 working hours
Project checking
Project work in teams
Project presentations

Harjoittelu- ja työelämäyhteistyö

Gareth Noyce (TripleEh)
IGDA
Local Game Companies

Kansainvälisyys

Gareth Noyce (TripleEh)

Arviointikriteerit - tyydyttävä (1-2) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

The student contribution to the project is not significant and peer reviews are poor. The student has problems with time management and deadlines but is able to deliver at some point.

Arviointikriteerit - hyvä (3-4) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

The student contribution to the project is significant and peer reviews are good. The student can manage his/her time and meet most deadlines.

Arviointikriteerit - kiitettävä (5) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

The student contribution to the project is significant and displays a high quality standard and the peer reviews are excellent. The student can manage his/her time well and meet the required deadlines.