Critiques on 2nd round, 2nd set project pitches

I'll just give my general thoughts on each group, some of which I may have already said in class.  This is mostly just from my memory, but serves as a set of impressions.

Automaton:

Good:
Game looks freakin sweet.  Animations and color scheme on it are vivid and engaging.  Presentation was better organized this time around.

Not so good:
I think they really, really need to take the intro to the game to a more basic level.  They kind of just jump in and say "there's all kinds of buttons and stuff here" and describe a small subset of them.  I think it leaves the audience confused about the game, even though we're computer scientists (the subject the game is supposed to teach).  I think it would be wise to leave out the more complicated puzzles and instead do a very thorough puzzle that explains each piece of the solution and it's function.  I guess it's late for this, but I also think it would be a lot less overwhelming to new players if many/most of the buttons are disabled or made invisible in the early puzzles.

Visual Scheduler:

Good:
Once again, their product is looking mighty fine.  This group is on track to win "project of the year", in my opinion.  Their tool is clearly useful, has an easy interface, and has a clear market.  Hell, the people in the class would probably use this thing if it were to stick around.  It definitely seems to beat the existing MyUNM facilities.  The idea raised about asking the audience for classes to add is very worthwhile.

Not so good:
Their presentation improved, but they could still use more rehearsal; sometimes it seemed like they weren't clear on where to go next.  Overall, I found the presentation to be pretty strong though.

G.E.R.A:

Good:
Ben gave a stronger speech this time.  He was pretty organized and to the point, without really looking back at his slides for reference (something I personally need to work on).  One thing I really liked is how Justin was following along with Ben's talk and updating the powerpoint presentation in the background without being asked.  I'd like to implement something similar for our next presentation.  Their demo went pretty well overall and the site looks good.

Not so good:
The fumble by Ben, of course, but it wasn't such a huge deal.  I do agree with Ackley that another member of the group (probably Justin) should have tried to provide an assist there.  I also agree with one of the class members that the demo should involve completion of some kind of mission, as it's the core unit of work for the application.