Module Database Search
| MODULE DESCRIPTOR | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Module Title | |||
| Quality Assurance for Games | |||
| Reference | CM2122 | Version | 1 |
| Created | October 2023 | SCQF Level | SCQF 8 |
| Approved | August 2017 | SCQF Points | 15 |
| Amended | July 2022 | ECTS Points | 7.5 |
| Aims of Module | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| The aim of this module is to provide students with a comprehensive understanding of quality assurance processes and techniques specifically tailored to the game development industry. Through theoretical exploration and hands-on application, students will gain the knowledge and skills necessary to effectively ensure the quality, functionality, and user experience of games. | |||
| Learning Outcomes for Module | |
|---|---|
| On completion of this module, students are expected to be able to: | |
| 1 | Distinguish quality assurance methodologies unique to the game development process. |
| 2 | Undertake diverse testing protocols, including functionality, compatibility, performance, and user experience testing. |
| 3 | Arrange detailed test plans, test cases, and comprehensive reports to track and communicate testing progress and outcomes. |
| 4 | Rate user experience aspects, including gameplay mechanics, controls, and overall immersion, to enhance player satisfaction. |
| Indicative Module Content |
|---|
| Human factors and user requirements, design culture and technology, user centred design, accessibility and compensatory strategies, social, political and economic factors, current professional practice in design. |
| Module Delivery |
|---|
| Key concepts are introduced and illustrated through lectures and practical labs. Through a combination of theory, practical exercises, and collaborative projects, students will gain the expertise necessary to excel in the field of quality assurance for games. |
| Indicative Student Workload | Full Time | Part Time |
|---|---|---|
| Contact Hours | 30 | N/A |
| Non-Contact Hours | 120 | N/A |
| Placement/Work-Based Learning Experience [Notional] Hours | N/A | N/A |
| TOTAL | 150 | N/A |
| Actual Placement hours for professional, statutory or regulatory body |
| ASSESSMENT PLAN | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| If a major/minor model is used and box is ticked, % weightings below are indicative only. | |||||
| Component 1 | |||||
| Type: | Coursework | Weighting: | 100% | Outcomes Assessed: | 1, 2, 3, 4 |
| Description: | This coursework involves students using UCD techniques to design a real application. | ||||
| MODULE PERFORMANCE DESCRIPTOR | |
|---|---|
| Explanatory Text | |
| The calculation of the overall grade for this module is based on 100% weighing of C1. An overall minimum grade D is required to pass the module. | |
| Module Grade | Minimum Requirements to achieve Module Grade: |
| A | The student needs to achieve an A in C1. |
| B | The student needs to achieve an B in C1. |
| C | The student needs to achieve an C in C1. |
| D | The student needs to achieve an D in C1. |
| E | The student needs to achieve an E in C1. |
| F | The student needs to achieve an F in C1. |
| NS | Non-submission of work by published deadline or non-attendance for examination |
| Module Requirements | |
|---|---|
| Prerequisites for Module | None. |
| Corequisites for module | None. |
| Precluded Modules | None. |
| INDICATIVE BIBLIOGRAPHY | |
|---|---|
| 1 | NORMAN, D., 2013. The Design of Everyday Things, revised and expanded edition. MIT Press. |
| 2 | KRUG, S., 2013. Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability. New Riders. |
| 3 | SHNEIDERMAN, B. et al., 2013. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. Pearson. |
| 4 | COOPER, R., 2007. Design for Inclusivity: A Practical Guide to Accessible, Innovative and User-Centred Design. Gower. |
| 5 | COLEMAN, B. and GOODWIN, D., 2017. Designing UX: Prototyping: Because Modern Design is Never Static. Sitepoint. |