...
As prototyping was new to all members of our team, we made some 'rookie' mistakes during paper prototyping that resulted in a lost of valuable feedback. Instead of focusing on the interface's usability, our users were distracted with issues in our tasks wording and navigation blunders as a result of not being able to see the top of the prototype easily from their seat. This provided us only limited feedback as we began computer prototyping. With the technical difficulties we later encountered, getting more initial feedback would have allowed us to avoid some of the issues and spend more time developing more useful features.
Our inexperience also led to another blunder of being overly ambitious with our prototypes. While our prototypes showed the opportunity of what we could do with the idea at hand, the prototypes that we made, especially the paper prototype, were not realistic with our abilities and the time given. During our paper prototyping, we created many superflous features that were not necessarily needed for critical operation. This then lead to an expectation of having those features on the final product of our site. Instead of focusing on developing the critical aspects of the site while computer prototyping, we put more effort into trying to prototype all of the features. This resulted in weaker features all around and many of the features that we tried to prototype were not ready for GR5, which made it seem like wasted effort. If we could redo the project, we would have created more realistic prototypes with basic features and then enhanced the site from basic usability.
As we mentioned in our Implementation section, we had numerous issues resulting from our decision to use Scripts. Another regret of our group was that we did not choose another development platformWhen we realized that it was going to limit us and undermine our development progress, we should have used another host service that would give us the freedom we needed to develop more easily.