Researched the problem in depth looking at existing solutions to similar problems, identifying and justifying suitable approaches based on this research [1].
There is no right or wrong number of existing solutions to look at, provided the products you consider give you enough evidence to justify your approaches later on. Note that band 2 and above state existing solutions—plural.
‘Suitable approaches’ depends on your chosen project. You could take it to mean UI design and usability features, computational methods, gameplay elements—anything the existing solutions do well (or poorly) that you can learn from.
Describing the existing solutions in depth is not credited on the mark scheme. Credit is given for identifying and justifying suitable approaches drawn from existing solutions. For example, if you decide to research Battletoads, you do not need to spend time explaining the entirety of the game—only the elements most relevant to your own project.
Annotated screenshots can be an efficient way to communicate the findings of your similar product research.
To keep your research concise, you could present it in a table showing strengths and weaknesses. Remember that the mark scheme requires you to identify and justify suitable approaches so just listing strengths and weaknesses would not allow you to reach the higher mark bands. The mark scheme rewards going beyond commentary to consider the impact of your research on your proposed solution.
Moderators' report
Moderators noted that students who “used evidence gained from researching existing products and/or stakeholders to form a distinct feature list and separate, measurable success criteria” generally did well [1].
Specification links
References
-
[1]Cambridge OCR 2024. A Level Computer Science Moderators’ Report H446/03/04 Summer 2024 Series. Cambridge OCR.
-
[2]Cambridge OCR 2024. A Level Specification Computer Science H446. Cambridge OCR.