Critical Assessment of my Peers Pt. 2

Much like the first critical assessment of my peers’ work with their digital artefact pitches, I attempted to provide feedback that would be encouraging as well as critical of their beta presentations. In my critiques, I aimed to be as helpful as possible so that I could hopefully further and widen the perspectives of my peers in order to for them to achieve more in-depth findings.

The DA topics that Jack and Saxon are researching are fundamentally very similar. Micro-transactions (Jack) and Loot boxes (Saxon) go hand in hand when it comes to the criticism that members of the gaming community provide. With both of their DA’s, I felt like they would both benefit from broadening their perspectives as a means of achieving contextual information of the specific topics they are researching. While the information they provided was great and informative, they lacked depth when it comes to a critical analysis. That then, became the bulk of my critiques.

Jack, Saxon and Mikayla all provided fantastic information with their betas, but the direction of their critical analysis wasn’t really clear, and with my comments, I tried, and I hope, that I provided them with a new perspective to explore if they so choose to do. For example, the topics that Jack and Saxon speak about have inherent roots in ethics, particularly the ethical issues behind gaming companies implementing crucial aspects of a game behind a pay wall, which can create a “pay-to-win” situation, as well as encourage a form of sanctioned gambling disguised as a video game mechanic. When it comes to analysing cultures, there needs to be a type of sociological critique behind the research.

Mikayla’s DA on the sexualisation of women in gaming culture was dense with very informative research and she clearly outlined what her DA was about and where she was getting her research. But, much like Jack and Saxon, I suggested that she be more critical with her findings and to mention a feminist perspective through her analysis, as I believe that in contemporary society, when talking about cultural expectations of women, as well as non-binary and transgender people, it is very important to mention this perspective.

Through the feedback and critiques I provided, I’m able to reflect on my own DA in what I need to do to ensure that I am approaching my researching and presenting my findings correctly and critically instead of simply providing information. I believe that my commentary for the betas were much more concise and critical than the comments I provided for the pitches, however I believe that I still maintained positive feedback.

https://jackridoutt.com/2019/09/20/the-next-micro-transactions-in-sports-gaming/ (I’m not sure if my comment is visible yet)
Beta Feedback 1

https://saxonsparadise.wordpress.com/2019/09/18/loot-boxes-a-new-direction/
Beta feedback 2

https://mikaylastott.wordpress.com/2019/09/17/the-taboo-topic-of-the-sexualisation-of-female-streamers/
beta feedback 3

One thought on “Critical Assessment of my Peers Pt. 2”

Leave a Reply to AdrianSBlog Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s