Looking back at our game and viewing the final program, I believe that whilst the game does work as intended and matches the plan that was eventually laid out for it, it still lacks the qualities of what one would describe a game as being. By this I mean that there is very little user interaction; once the user has selected the number of laps, the only other user interaction is to replace the cardboard boxes which the robot picks up back onto the track for it to pick up on its next pass, which could be viewed as an oversight in the plan of the game. On top of this, the game lacks any real goal or final outcome. Once the robot has completed its designated number of laps, it just stops.
In regards to the process of planning the game, we mostly ended up coming up with ideas on the spot once we had ample working code for the current plan. This meant we built upon the idea of a line follower, adding functions as we went. Looking back this was clearly the wrong way to go about the design of a game. What should have happened was we should have spent more time planning out the entire game and all its objectives and functions before starting on the program.
As for academic skills, it is my opinion that the biggest lesson learnt was to never rely on others until you understand their motivation. Whilst my assumption at the start had been that all members of the course were attending university to work, I believe that this assumption was proved false throughout the duration of this project. Whilst delegating tasks to others works in theory, the structure of the project as a whole then relies on each person completing these tasks on time (or at all) for the project to be completed.
When it comes to professional practices, this project has demonstrated the importance of using all forms of media in order to present and document my work, and to use proper version control when creating complex programs.