main-p1feedback

Feedback on Project 1

The main elements of this assignment were having geometry, getting things to move hierarchically, having views working, and being able to add rocks.

After that, some people made more interesting machines, adding some extra cool features, had extra machines, …

With very few exceptions, no one did anything that made up for deficiencies in getting the required elements of the assignment done. Pretty much, people did cool stuff only after getting the required elements working.

Also, very few people did the requirements “out of order” - which means there’s a pretty simple ordering of project quality (with a count of how many students are in each category) :

• Above and Beyond expectations (3)
• Meets requirements well (4)
• Meets requirements (9)
• Only implemented add rock on excavator, but otherwise meets requirements (3)
• Partially implemented rocks (3+3)
• No add rocks, but views OK (3)
• No view, no rocks (5)

Uncommon cases:

• Cool (but flaw in meeting the requirements) (1)
• Basic stuff in place, geometry issues (1)
• Missed deadline, unusual assignment (1)

You will receive email from the TA with which category you fell into (although, you should be able to guess).

Rather than trying to decide how much to penalize people for not handing things in correctly, having unreadable code, or other mechanical issues, we simply noted these problems - we’ll penalize repeat offenders.

So, we are going to defer creating the curve until we see how things work out with later projects (projects are “curved” independently). Generally, “meeting requirements” earns a B.