plz read files
SIT110 – Required Coding Concepts Supporting document for Assignments 2 and 3 Introduction This document provides a list of the coding concepts required for inclusion in your Assignment 2: Creative Project Proposal and Assignment 3: Creative Project. Refer to the instructions in the respective assignment information documents. Coding Concepts Coding Concept Requirements Functions As well as the use of prebuilt functions, you must create your own functions to provide modular, repeatable actions specific to your project. Variables Appropriate data should be labelled and stored in a logical and relevant form. Loops Code must demonstrate the use of a loop that will execute code continuously unless interrupted. State change Your code must demonstrate a significant change of state for one or more objects. Object creation One or more objects must be instantiated while the aquarium is running. User interaction The code must respond to one or more inputs from the user during execution (e.g., keyboard keys). Branching code Your code should demonstrate the ability to check a condition and perform a different action in response. Interaction between objects One or more objects should be influenced by and respond to the state of another object. Arrays Use an array of objects to perform an action on all objects in that array. SIT110 - Assignment 2 Creative Project Proposal Worth: 30% of your grade Due Friday, April 20 by 11:59pm (Week 6) Individual project Introduction In this assignment you will individually create a proposal for a creative project involving a virtual aquarium built in Unreal Engine 4. In Assignment 3 you will form a group to build one of your project proposals, so you should use the Assignment 3: Creative Project assignment information to inform your decisions on this proposal and investigate the provided VirtualAquarium.zip Unreal project’s contents to see what objects you have available to code for. The project you propose should demonstrate your understanding of the coding concepts and skills developed throughout this trimester in a creative context as a small group. The proposed project must involve using Unreal Engine 4 for implementing algorithms and coding to create a 3D virtual aquarium for a PC. You are free to design and think of imaginative behaviours and actions for the objects in your aquarium that satisfy the requirements below in a creative manner. The project should demonstrate the use of multiple objects in a larger system of both autonomous and interactive elements. The purpose and format of your virtual aquarium project is up to you. For example, you may choose to focus on a realistic simulation, a game-like experience, a virtual toy, a digital performance, etc. The unit staff will be happy to hear your ideas and provide feedback. Tasks Proposal Document You will use the provided template on DeakinSync to create a proposal document of no more than 2000 words to describe and explain the following information clearly and concisely: Summary of the intended product. Asset list table of the objects you will use in your project scene. This should include some statistical details or labels to indicate how they will be used in the project (e.g., quantity or each, static or moving, interactive or passive). Assets should be selected from the objects available in the Unreal Virtual Aquarium project file. Product purpose, which should include: o Target audience identifying the intended users of your product and why it would appeal to them. o Reasoning of how your project demonstrates creativity in its design and will provide something new, unexpected or entertaining for the viewer / user / player. Explanation of at least 3 complex object’s intended behaviour and pseudocode and/or flowchart algorithm of how this will be created. This should include an explanation of which of the required “Coding Concepts” (see Assignment 2 & 3 Required Coding Concepts PDF on DeakinSync) will be used for each object. Coding concepts not yet covered in weekly topics up to Week 6 are not yet required to be planned in Assignment 2. Summary of how the larger system will function as a cohesive whole and is possible to create within the allocated time. This should be supported by diagrams, charts, etc that may help explain your system as easily as possible. Processing Proof-of-Concept Choose one object to be used in your object and demonstrate some aspects of the intended dynamic behaviour by creating a proof-of-concept of the functionality using Processing. This should demonstrate at least 2 of the “Coding Concepts” (see Assignment 2 & 3 Required Coding Concepts PDF on DeakinSync) in a detailed functional form with clear commenting. As the Unreal Engine 4 virtual aquarium project operates in 3D while we use 2D for Processing, this may require you to translate your proof-of-concept demonstration into a 2D representation. This will demonstrate your understanding of the transferability of coding concepts between algorithm plans (pseudocode/flowcharts), written code (Processing) and eventual Unreal Engine 4 Blueprints integration for Assignment 3. Submission You must submit the following files to the Assignment 2: Project Proposal submission dropbox on SIT110 DeakinSync prior to the due date and time. Note you can make an unlimited number of submissions prior to the deadline, and only the last submission will be graded. Your submission must include: 1. Project Proposal document as a Microsoft Word document (.doc or .docx). 2. Processing source code file (.pde). of your proof-of-concept for 1 object. Marking Rubric for Assignment 2 CRITERIA FAIL PASS CREDIT DISTINCTION HIGH DISTINCTION<2.5 points 2.5 points 3 points 3.5 points 4-5 points proposal document (30 points) product summary and asset list may be absent or missing significant required content. summary provides general idea of the intended product and lists assets required. may lack some clarity. summary provides clear idea of the intended product and lists assets required. summary provides clear idea of the intended product with detailed asset list. summary provides clear and concise idea of the intended product with highly detailed asset list. product purpose may be absent or missing information on target audience or creativity. provides basic identification of target audience and creativity. may be lacking some detail or a mismatch between product design and audience. identifies target audience and creativity. may be lacking some detail but clear evidence of purpose informing design. identifies clear and detailed target audience and creativity. strong evidence of purpose informing design. identifies clear and detailed target audience and thorough justification of creativity. purpose is highly intertwined with project design. intended object behaviour - explanation may be absent or missing critical information. object behaviour is explained for at least 3 objects but may be somewhat ambiguous or have some conflicts with algorithm pseudocode/flowcharts. object behaviour is explained clearly for at least 3 complex objects. may have some minor conflicts with algorithm pseudocode/flowcharts. object behaviour is explained clearly between 3 complex and varied objects. no notable conflicts with algorithm pseudocode/flowcharts. interesting object behaviour is thoroughly explained between 3 complex and varied objects. design is insightful with no notable conflicts with algorithm pseudocode/flowcharts. intended object behaviour - algorithm pseudocode and/or flowcharts may be absent or missing critical information. provided but may have some minor omissions or errors. may be some issues that would affect functionality. provided with minimal omissions or errors. plans would generally provide good functionality and are communicated well. provided with minimal omissions or errors. plans would provide effective functionality and are communicated well. provided with no notable omissions or errors. plans would provide effective functionality and are communicated very effectively. larger system summary missing or may be lacking evidence of planning for objects as part of a larger system. system summary present with some planning for integrating objects as part of a larger system. may appear somewhat disjointed and lacking unity. system summary present with clear planning for integrating objects as part of a larger system. demonstrates simple connections or interactions between objects. system summary present with thorough planning for integrating objects as part of a larger system. demonstrates interesting and dynamic connections or interactions between objects. system summary present with thorough planning for integrating objects as part of a larger system. demonstrates complex, interesting and dynamic connections or interactions between objects that provide a whole greater than the sum of its parts. communication and presentation may have numerous and significant spelling, grammatical or formatting errors. some spelling, grammatical or formatting errors throughout. additional proof-reading is required. some minor spelling, grammatical or formatting errors throughout. some additional proof-reading is required. very few minor spelling, grammatical or formatting errors throughout. presentation is professional and polished. no notable spelling, grammatical or formatting errors. presentation is thoroughly professional and polished. processing proof-of-concept (10 points) coding concepts may be missing or with major omissions or errors. may not clearly demonstrate any of the listed objects in your proposal document. simple proof-of-concept functionality provided for at least 2 coding concepts planned as part of the proposal document. may have minor errors or not be fully representative. representative proof-of- concept functionality provided for at least 2 coding concepts planned as part of the proposal document. detailed representative proof- of-concept functionality provided for at least 3 coding concepts planned as part of the proposal document. detailed and highly representative proof-of- concept functionality provided for at least 4 coding concepts planned as part of the proposal document. communication & structure commenting may be absent. code may be very inefficient in structure or have numerous repetitious, unfinished or broken elements. commenting is present in although may be simplistic or used inconsistently points="" 2.5="" points="" 3="" points="" 3.5="" points="" 4-5="" points="" proposal="" document="" (30="" points)="" product="" summary="" and="" asset="" list="" may="" be="" absent="" or="" missing="" significant="" required="" content.="" summary="" provides="" general="" idea="" of="" the="" intended="" product="" and="" lists="" assets="" required.="" may="" lack="" some="" clarity.="" summary="" provides="" clear="" idea="" of="" the="" intended="" product="" and="" lists="" assets="" required.="" summary="" provides="" clear="" idea="" of="" the="" intended="" product="" with="" detailed="" asset="" list.="" summary="" provides="" clear="" and="" concise="" idea="" of="" the="" intended="" product="" with="" highly="" detailed="" asset="" list.="" product="" purpose="" may="" be="" absent="" or="" missing="" information="" on="" target="" audience="" or="" creativity.="" provides="" basic="" identification="" of="" target="" audience="" and="" creativity.="" may="" be="" lacking="" some="" detail="" or="" a="" mismatch="" between="" product="" design="" and="" audience.="" identifies="" target="" audience="" and="" creativity.="" may="" be="" lacking="" some="" detail="" but="" clear="" evidence="" of="" purpose="" informing="" design.="" identifies="" clear="" and="" detailed="" target="" audience="" and="" creativity.="" strong="" evidence="" of="" purpose="" informing="" design.="" identifies="" clear="" and="" detailed="" target="" audience="" and="" thorough="" justification="" of="" creativity.="" purpose="" is="" highly="" intertwined="" with="" project="" design.="" intended="" object="" behaviour="" -="" explanation="" may="" be="" absent="" or="" missing="" critical="" information.="" object="" behaviour="" is="" explained="" for="" at="" least="" 3="" objects="" but="" may="" be="" somewhat="" ambiguous="" or="" have="" some="" conflicts="" with="" algorithm="" pseudocode/flowcharts.="" object="" behaviour="" is="" explained="" clearly="" for="" at="" least="" 3="" complex="" objects.="" may="" have="" some="" minor="" conflicts="" with="" algorithm="" pseudocode/flowcharts.="" object="" behaviour="" is="" explained="" clearly="" between="" 3="" complex="" and="" varied="" objects.="" no="" notable="" conflicts="" with="" algorithm="" pseudocode/flowcharts.="" interesting="" object="" behaviour="" is="" thoroughly="" explained="" between="" 3="" complex="" and="" varied="" objects.="" design="" is="" insightful="" with="" no="" notable="" conflicts="" with="" algorithm="" pseudocode/flowcharts.="" intended="" object="" behaviour="" -="" algorithm="" pseudocode="" and/or="" flowcharts="" may="" be="" absent="" or="" missing="" critical="" information.="" provided="" but="" may="" have="" some="" minor="" omissions="" or="" errors.="" may="" be="" some="" issues="" that="" would="" affect="" functionality.="" provided="" with="" minimal="" omissions="" or="" errors.="" plans="" would="" generally="" provide="" good="" functionality="" and="" are="" communicated="" well.="" provided="" with="" minimal="" omissions="" or="" errors.="" plans="" would="" provide="" effective="" functionality="" and="" are="" communicated="" well.="" provided="" with="" no="" notable="" omissions="" or="" errors.="" plans="" would="" provide="" effective="" functionality="" and="" are="" communicated="" very="" effectively.="" larger="" system="" summary="" missing="" or="" may="" be="" lacking="" evidence="" of="" planning="" for="" objects="" as="" part="" of="" a="" larger="" system.="" system="" summary="" present="" with="" some="" planning="" for="" integrating="" objects="" as="" part="" of="" a="" larger="" system.="" may="" appear="" somewhat="" disjointed="" and="" lacking="" unity.="" system="" summary="" present="" with="" clear="" planning="" for="" integrating="" objects="" as="" part="" of="" a="" larger="" system.="" demonstrates="" simple="" connections="" or="" interactions="" between="" objects.="" system="" summary="" present="" with="" thorough="" planning="" for="" integrating="" objects="" as="" part="" of="" a="" larger="" system.="" demonstrates="" interesting="" and="" dynamic="" connections="" or="" interactions="" between="" objects.="" system="" summary="" present="" with="" thorough="" planning="" for="" integrating="" objects="" as="" part="" of="" a="" larger="" system.="" demonstrates="" complex,="" interesting="" and="" dynamic="" connections="" or="" interactions="" between="" objects="" that="" provide="" a="" whole="" greater="" than="" the="" sum="" of="" its="" parts.="" communication="" and="" presentation="" may="" have="" numerous="" and="" significant="" spelling,="" grammatical="" or="" formatting="" errors.="" some="" spelling,="" grammatical="" or="" formatting="" errors="" throughout.="" additional="" proof-reading="" is="" required.="" some="" minor="" spelling,="" grammatical="" or="" formatting="" errors="" throughout.="" some="" additional="" proof-reading="" is="" required.="" very="" few="" minor="" spelling,="" grammatical="" or="" formatting="" errors="" throughout.="" presentation="" is="" professional="" and="" polished.="" no="" notable="" spelling,="" grammatical="" or="" formatting="" errors.="" presentation="" is="" thoroughly="" professional="" and="" polished.="" processing="" proof-of-concept="" (10="" points)="" coding="" concepts="" may="" be="" missing="" or="" with="" major="" omissions="" or="" errors.="" may="" not="" clearly="" demonstrate="" any="" of="" the="" listed="" objects="" in="" your="" proposal="" document.="" simple="" proof-of-concept="" functionality="" provided="" for="" at="" least="" 2="" coding="" concepts="" planned="" as="" part="" of="" the="" proposal="" document.="" may="" have="" minor="" errors="" or="" not="" be="" fully="" representative.="" representative="" proof-of-="" concept="" functionality="" provided="" for="" at="" least="" 2="" coding="" concepts="" planned="" as="" part="" of="" the="" proposal="" document.="" detailed="" representative="" proof-="" of-concept="" functionality="" provided="" for="" at="" least="" 3="" coding="" concepts="" planned="" as="" part="" of="" the="" proposal="" document.="" detailed="" and="" highly="" representative="" proof-of-="" concept="" functionality="" provided="" for="" at="" least="" 4="" coding="" concepts="" planned="" as="" part="" of="" the="" proposal="" document.="" communication="" &="" structure="" commenting="" may="" be="" absent.="" code="" may="" be="" very="" inefficient="" in="" structure="" or="" have="" numerous="" repetitious,="" unfinished="" or="" broken="" elements.="" commenting="" is="" present="" in="" although="" may="" be="" simplistic="" or="" used="">