Today, I'm going to share my thoughts (and terrible drawings) on a university project recently completed - The Angry Birds Design Challenge.
The goal was to create a new unique level, with new birds, pigs and scenes. There was also a physical portion of the Challenge which was basically crafting a catapult.
This Design Challenge was done in groups of 7 and we decided to split up the tasks amongst the group. My task was the Traversal Manager - meaning I was the one in charge of maintaining sketches of the physical portion of the challenge.
We began utilizing the "empathy", "mindfulness" and "collaboration" design thinking mindsets to assist us in designing our respective birds/pig and scenes (based on how we split the task). Using these mindsets we entered the "Empathizing", "Defining" and "Ideating" design thinking modes to craft ideas.
Our group had previously decided to go for a Medieval theme and having studied immensely of mythological history (Western, Norse, Roman, Greek, etc.) I decided to craft 3 birds for the fun of it.
Across a wide array of birds and pigs, our group decided to select the Knight Bird (Ideated by Alan) and the Dragon Pig (ideated by Neddy) to create the classic story of the Knight vs the Dragon.
The Final product was something the group could collectively be proud of. When we added the falling stalactites and the Knight Bird's power to teleport and swing with his Iron Sword, we knew we had made an amazing product.
However, I was in managing and keeping the designs of the physical catapult as well as creating new designs. We went through many different prototypes and sketches - From Slingshot designs to catapults.
Using the "Show Don't Tell", "Experimentation" and "Collaboration" design thinking mindsets, I had initially created several designs for catapults in the ideation stage. This was done before I had empathized or defined with the group on what type of device we want. The designs were intricate with notes on functionality as well as a list of materials required to build it.
Then entering into the "Empathizing" phase of the Design Thinking Mode, the group was asked if they rather a catapult more focused on power (distance covered) or accuracy (for consistent shots). The group agreed on a focus on power with us agreeing, we would have time to practice so we could get consistent on our weapon.
As I had ideated several ideas before I empathized with the group, we had immediate ideas to try and test. Thus we entered the "Prototyping" design thinking mode.
Using the "Collaboration" and "Experimentation" design thinking mindsets, we tried all different types of catapults and slingshots that was ideated. In the "Prototype" and "Test" stage of the design thinking modes, we tested each based on the criteria - power and accuracy. Most of the designs we created and built utilized pure power and considering accuracy second upon reflection.
This Design Challenge had several positives and negatives. Due to this being the first ever Design Challenge, we had jumped around the design thinking modes (Ideating before Empathizing and Defining) which was disruptive to our progress.
Our Group's application of Empathy was fairly poor, as we were mainly designing ideas that would please us and we thought were amazing ideas.
Our Group's ability in the "Define" stage of the design thinking modes was also poor, as we had failed to properly redefine or even define a definite problem.
Our Group's ability to ideate ideas was well done, as we have created many ideas which we were able to prototype (draw them) and test them with the group.
Finally our group had performed "rapid prototyping and testing" as design thinkers as we created many catapults of different designs and failed fast. We generally did not try and improve an existing idea (unless it was minor changes) but worked on a completely different design.
The team had worked well together across this Design Challenge, we had chased each other on facebook and set deadlines on each portion of work. I could have been a better team member by following the design thinking process and remembering to both empathize and define the problem before beginning to ideate and prototype the various catapults. This would have allowed our team to be more productive at the same time as we would be testing prototypes that would have been on track on completing the task better.
And that concludes the thought process and the designs behind "The Great Angry Birds Project"
Malcolm.
