I have an Essay written out, I didn’t get a very good grade but my teacher is allowing me to resubmit it and gave me feedback on what to work on. Bellow is the feedback given from my teacher.
-Aim for more creative titles–something that speaks to the philosophy of your game, rather than the game franchise itself. After all, the cover image says FC24, so we’ll know the game on sight -good job reaching a thesis early! “At its core, FIFA embodies a philosophy that mirrors the real-world ethos of football: unity through diversity, the celebration of talent from all corners of the globe, and the relentless pursuit of excellence.” Maybe this is an idealistic philosophy? Multiculturalism? “Philosophy of Unity” works, but it’s not especially descriptive for audience. -good discussion of women’s teams -missing space before “The availability” -should this claim be tested/proven: “This inclusivity enhances the sense of unity among the game’s community, fostering a culture of respect and appreciation for diversity in sports”? Gaming online is often full of hostile rhetoric/insults/meanness. Is the FC24 community distinct in its civility? How do we know? In real life, football fans sometimes shout racist chants and engage in violent brawls in the stands. Is there a difference between the idealism of the governing bodies (which have their own financial fair play and bribery scandals) and the behavior of fans? Does that bleed over into online gaming, too? A rebuttal section would help answer those questions/counter-arguments. -watch for overuse of “testament” -This is an interesting claim: “…it educates them on the art of creating unity from diversity, reflecting a broader philosophical inquiry into the essence of successful teams both on and off the digital pitch.” Evidence here would help. -How, specifically, does this work: “The game’s emphasis on chemistry underscores a profound philosophical lesson – that success is not merely the sum of individual talents, but the product of how well these talents synchronize to create a cohesive unit”? Does the game lower a team’s chemistry score if it has players from different parts of the world? Screenshots/videos + discussion of the math/algorithm affecting chemistry here would be ace. -How does it accomplish this? “The game teaches valuable life lessons about the importance of diversity, the strength found in unity, and the critical role of strategic planning in achieving success.” -Are players disciplined enough to stay in their assigned positions on the field, or do all players rush forward to try to score? “Pro Clubs offers a unique opportunity for players to join forces with friends, each controlling a single player on the pitch, to create a cohesive team.” Maybe there aren’t full 11 on 11 games, allowing players to jump between defense and offensive positions as needed? -Screenshots or interviews or videos would help prove this true: “Through shared challenges and triumphs, players develop a deeper connection, mirroring the bonds formed by athletes on real-world teams.” -Does it? “This mutual respect fosters an inclusive atmosphere where all members feel valued and motivated to contribute their best.” I wonder about the difference between ideal outcomes and reality. -So players must remain disciplined in their part of the pitch after all: “With each player controlling a single avatar on the field, Pro Clubs necessitates a high level of strategic planning and adaptability. Teams must devise strategies that leverage each player’s abilities while also being flexible enough to adjust to the dynamics of the game.” -nice conclusion: “In this sense, FIFA is more than a game; it is a digital platform for cultural exchange and understanding, highlighting the potential of video games to shape societal values and beliefs.” -we’re missing quotations, citations, and a work cited. In the era of ChatGPT and other AI text-generators, these markers of research and human effort are vital and represent a core part of the challenge of A3. Now our class doesn’t ban use of ChatGPT, but it does require citation of it and a disclaimer about its use. I do suspect portions of this essay were written by AI. Of course, these things are difficult to prove (and beside the point in 2024), so I’d like to have a conversation with you, Aiden, about how we can improve this essay by relying less on AI-generated prose. Let’s chat in office hours, if you’re free then, or some other time, if you can’t make it between 9:50 and 11:20 on M/W. To be clear, this essay does not fail because it potentially uses ChatGPT. It fails because it misses key parameters of the prompt and doesn’t ground its conversation in scholarly sources.
