Intent:

I’m going to make a games cover based around Indiana Jones Film and Game franchise because it’s a heavily reactionary and stereotypical concept which is very popular so when I transform it into a more radical and counter-stereotypical concept which would challenge consumers perspectives and assumptions much easier since the ‘Indiana Jones’ franchise since it’s very popular. I predict my radical product will be perceived as similar to the ‘Lara Croft’ game franchise

Media Language:

After analysing and describing CSP 1&2 I can assume that I can produce a reactionary and radical product which will look professional with the use of similar indexical, symbolic and iconic signs. After looking at CSP 1&2 I now understand what signs game covers typically use and how, knowing this is going to help me make my games cover since I know what signs to use.

Representation:

I’m going to be designing both: a radical cover, one which introduces and explores counter-stereotypical ideas which challenges the consumers reactionary response to a game which has the same concept of the one which I plan on making and a reactionary design, a design/concept of a game which is stereotypical and what the consumer may expect from a game with the concept of the one I plan on producing.

I feel a large, mainstream company would distribute/produce the reactionary version of the game since they’ll know/expect that a mass market will enjoy the game. Whereas I feel a smaller, maybe niche marketed games company would distribute and/or produce the radical version of the game.