🎮 Quest Log – Level Design Progress #2: Refinement & Collaboration

 

🧭 Current Objective

Refine Level 1 of Judgement Day through client feedback, team coordination, and narrative improvement.


📬 Client Communication & Feedback

Over the past week, I shared our team’s current progress with our client, Professor Iva Youkilis, to gather feedback on both the structure and narrative direction of the game.

The response was very encouraging—she noted that the project is “shaping up really nicely” and highlighted the strength of our overall concept. However, she also provided an important suggestion that helped guide the next phase of development:

The narrative should emphasize the human stories behind each sin, rather than presenting souls as simple examples.

She specifically referenced Francesca (Circle of Lust) as an example of how Dante portrays sinners as complex individuals with emotions, motivations, and personal struggles—not just moral categories.


🤝 Team Coordination

After receiving this feedback, I shared a summary with the team to ensure everyone was aligned moving forward.

Key coordination steps included:

  • Communicating the importance of stronger narrative depth
  • Encouraging consistency in tone, structure, and dialogue
  • Continuing to collect and organize each member’s Twine files for integration into a unified experience

At this stage, our workflow is becoming more collaborative and streamlined, with clear direction on both design and narrative goals.


✍️ Level Revisions & Improvements

Based on the client’s feedback, I revised my Level 1 passages to enhance emotional depth and player engagement.

Key Updates:

  • Replaced generic or unnamed souls with recognizable or character-driven figures
  • Expanded dialogue to reflect internal conflict and human motivation
  • Strengthened Virgil’s role as a guiding voice, reinforcing moral reasoning
  • Improved reflection passages to encourage player self-evaluation

🎭 Example Improvement – Francesca (Lust)

Previously, the case focused primarily on identifying the correct circle.

Now, the interaction emphasizes emotional complexity:

  • Francesca expresses her story in her own voice
  • The player must evaluate emotion vs. moral responsibility
  • The reflection challenges the player’s reasoning:
    • Did you judge her based on her feelings… or her actions?

This shift transforms the experience from simple classification into meaningful ethical engagement, which better aligns with the learning objectives.


🧠 Instructional Design Alignment

These revisions strengthen the connection between game mechanics and learning outcomes:

  • Narrative → Understanding (learning the structure of Hell)
  • Choice-based decisions → Application (classifying souls)
  • Reflection → Deeper learning (evaluating moral reasoning)

Rather than just testing knowledge, the game now encourages players to interpret, analyze, and reflect—which supports higher-level learning.


🚀 Current Status

  • Level 1 structure: ✅ Complete
  • Narrative refinement: ✅ In progress (significant improvements made)
  • Team integration: 🔄 Ongoing
  • Client feedback loop: ✅ Active

Overall, the project is in a strong position. The focus has shifted from building core functionality to polishing narrative and learning experience, which is exactly where we should be at this stage.


🎯 Next Steps

  • Continue refining remaining cases for narrative consistency
  • Integrate all team levels into a unified Twine build
  • Prepare for final playtesting and iteration

💬 Reflection

This phase of development highlighted how valuable client feedback can be—not just for validation, but for pushing the design to a deeper level.

What started as a structured classification task is evolving into something more meaningful:
👉 a simulation that asks players to think critically about human behavior, not just categorize it.


XP Gained: Narrative Design + Client Communication + Iterative Development

Judgement Day Level Design Progress #1: Setting the Stage


 

🎮 Level Design Progress #1 – Dante’s Inferno Judgment System

The Quest Log: Gaming for Learning & Fun

🔍 Current Development Progress

For this progress checkpoint, I focused on building the foundation for my individual level within our group project. My level introduces players to the structure of Dante’s Hell and teaches them how to classify souls according to the sins described in Dante’s Inferno. The goal of the level is to prepare players for the core gameplay mechanic used throughout the game: judging which circle of Hell a soul belongs to based on their actions in life.

At this stage of development, the level structure and narrative flow are fully implemented in Twine. Players begin with an introduction guided by Virgil, who explains the purpose of their task and the overall structure of Hell. This introduction establishes the narrative context and helps players understand that Hell is divided into nine circles, each representing a different type of sin and punishment.

After the introduction, players encounter a structured explanation of the game mechanics. They learn that each soul will present their story, and the player must decide which circle of Hell the soul belongs to. Once a decision is made, the player will receive feedback explaining Dante’s reasoning behind the correct placement.

🗺 Designing the Structure of Hell

To help players understand the hierarchy of Hell, I created a section that visually introduces the nine circles:

  1. Limbo

  2. Lust

  3. Gluttony

  4. Greed

  5. Wrath

  6. Heresy

  7. Violence

  8. Fraud

  9. Treachery

Each circle is associated with a short description that summarizes the type of sin punished there. This serves as a reference point for players before they begin making judgments.

I also implemented a toggleable “Map of Hell” reference panel that players can open at any time during gameplay. This feature allows players to quickly review the structure of Hell while evaluating different souls. From a learning perspective, this supports recall and reinforces the classification system central to Dante’s narrative.

🎨 Visual Atmosphere and Environmental Design

One of the design goals for this level was to create a strong visual atmosphere that reflects the themes of each circle of Hell. To achieve this, I developed unique background environments for every circle. These images are meant to reinforce the emotional tone and symbolic punishment associated with each sin.

Examples include:

  • A somber, mist-filled landscape for Limbo

  • A violent storm and chaotic environment for Lust

  • Filth and decay for Gluttony

  • Mountains of gold and treasure for Greed

  • A violent battlefield for Wrath

  • Burning tombs for Heresy

  • Rivers of blood and brutal landscapes for Violence

  • Twisted infernal cities for Fraud

  • A frozen wasteland for Treachery

These visual environments help support immersion while also reinforcing the educational component of the experience.

🔧 Current Implementation Status

The following components are currently completed:

  • Level introduction and narrative setup

  • Explanation of Hell’s structure

  • Game rules and player objective

  • Toggleable “Map of Hell” reference panel

  • Visual background environments for each circle

  • Twine flowchart structure connecting all passages

The core structure of the level is now functional and navigable within the Twine prototype.

🚧 Next Steps

The next phase of development will focus on implementing the interactive gameplay elements. This includes:

  • Writing individual soul judgment scenarios

  • Adding player decision options for each case

  • Creating feedback passages explaining Dante’s reasoning

  • Implementing a score or progress tracking system

  • Conducting initial playtesting with teammates.

These additions will transform the current narrative prototype into a fully interactive learning experience.

🧭 Reflection

At this stage, the level successfully establishes the narrative framework, visual tone, and instructional structure needed for the gameplay system. The next step will be expanding the level with judgment scenarios that challenge players to apply what they have learned about the circles of Hell.

Overall, this checkpoint confirms that the core foundation of the level is in place and ready for the next phase of development.

Level 3 Quest Log: Developing a User Persona for a Dante-Based Learning Experience

 



Part 1: Gathering Information

Reflecting on Myself

As both a learner and a designer, I value clarity and intentional structure in learning games and simulations. When I engage with educational games, I care less about flashy mechanics and more about whether the experience helps me understand systems, relationships, or concepts more deeply. If the mechanics feel disconnected from the learning objective, I disengage quickly.

For entertainment games, I value immersion, meaningful progression, and well-paced difficulty curves. Frustration is acceptable if it feels fair, but confusion caused by unclear objectives or poor interface design is not.

From a usability standpoint, I prioritize:

  • Clear navigation

  • Consistent visual hierarchy

  • Explicit feedback

  • Low cognitive overload

What is less important to me:

  • Overly complex menus

  • Excessive branching without guidance

  • Aesthetic polish at the expense of clarity

Reflecting on this reminded me that even when learning content is strong, usability issues can significantly disrupt engagement.


Reflecting on Others – Data Collection

Since I am focusing on a User Persona, I prioritized gathering information about how undergraduates interact with digital learning environments and complex interfaces.

I artificially limited myself to three sources, as required:

Source 1 – Research Study (Second-hand Data)

  • Study on undergraduate user experience preferences in digital learning environments (peer-reviewed journal article).

  • Focused on cognitive load, navigation clarity, and perceived usability.

Source 2 – Accessibility & UX Guidelines (Second-hand Data)

  • WCAG-based accessibility research and usability design recommendations for digital learning tools.

  • Emphasis on color contrast, text readability, and information chunking.

Source 3 – Public Player Motivation & UX Data (Second-hand Data)

  • Quantic Foundry player motivation data.

  • Used to understand expectations of digital-native users in interactive environments.


Where I Searched & Type of Information Found

All three sources were second-hand research.

I searched:

  • Academic databases (MU Library access)

  • Usability and accessibility documentation

  • Player research databases

The types of data found included:

  • Quantitative survey data (student preferences, usability ratings)

  • Reported frustration points

  • Design recommendations

  • Motivational percentages and player-type breakdowns

The audience examined:

  • Primarily undergraduate students (18–24)

  • Digital-native learners

  • Individuals accustomed to modern interface standards


Part 2: Analyzing Findings

Across the three sources, several patterns emerged:

1️⃣ Undergraduates expect intuitive navigation

Students show low tolerance for unclear instructions or hidden information. When cognitive effort is spent figuring out “what to do next,” engagement drops significantly.

2️⃣ Cognitive load must be managed carefully

Complex content (such as Dante’s Inferno) requires scaffolding. Chunked information, progressive disclosure, and visual signposting are important.

3️⃣ Accessibility is not optional

Color contrast, text legibility, and flexible pacing impact not only students with disabilities but overall usability.

4️⃣ Engagement does not override clarity

While modern users enjoy interactivity, excessive choice or visual clutter increases frustration.


Alignment with My Own Reflection

Interestingly, much of the research aligned with my own reflection as a user. I also value clarity over complexity and become disengaged when navigation interferes with learning.

However, the research highlighted something I had not fully considered: even minor usability barriers can significantly increase cognitive load, especially when the learning content is conceptually demanding.

For a Dante-based serious game, where interpretation and symbolism are already cognitively taxing, usability will play a critical role in maintaining engagement.


Part 3: Reflection on the Data Collection Process

Data collection was smoother than expected, primarily because usability research is well-documented and accessible. However, one challenge was distinguishing between “learner” and “user” data, as there is natural overlap between the two.

Another challenge was narrowing the focus. Usability research is vast, and artificially limiting the process to three sources required prioritizing relevance over breadth.

If I were to repeat this process, I would consider incorporating:

  • At least one first-hand interview with a current undergraduate student

  • Direct observation of how students navigate complex digital interfaces

Overall, this process reinforced that a well-designed serious game must not only teach effectively but also guide users clearly through the experience.

🧭 Level 2 Quest Log: Exploring the Existing Landscape

 

Quest Context / Intro

One of the first steps in any game design process is understanding what already exists within a given topic space. Before proposing new mechanics or experiences, it is critical to examine prior work—what has been successful, what gaps remain, and where opportunities for innovation may exist.

As part of this exploration phase, I reviewed and (when possible) played a selection of games and simulations aligned with potential client topic areas. This post documents what I found, what I did not find, and the insights gained from surveying the current design landscape.


🧩 Part 0: Topic Option(s) Explored

At this stage of the design process and the time of writing this blog post, our team has not yet finalized a single client topic. So, this blog post may be updated in the future once this has been ironed out. In order to support early market research and identify potential design opportunities, I explored several topic options that align with common learning needs and are well-suited to game-based or simulation-based approaches.

Topic Option 1: Systems Thinking & Cause-and-Effect

  • Focus on understanding how interconnected systems behave over time

  • Common in domains such as infrastructure, organizational processes, environmental systems, and technical workflows

  • Well-suited for simulation and strategy-based game mechanics

Topic Option 2: Safety, Risk, & Procedural Decision-Making

  • Emphasizes learning how to identify hazards, follow procedures, and make safe choices

  • Often addressed through simulations, branching scenarios, or role-play

  • Relevant to workplace training, technical education, and compliance contexts

Topic Option 3: Problem-Solving & Troubleshooting

  • Centers on diagnosing issues, testing solutions, and iterating based on feedback

  • Frequently appears in puzzle-based games and simulation games

  • Applies broadly to technical, mechanical, and systems-based learning environments

Topic Option 4 (Exploratory): Collaboration & Communication

  • Focuses on teamwork, role clarity, and shared decision-making

  • Commonly implemented through role-playing games, board/card games, or multiplayer digital experiences

  • Particularly relevant for organizational or professional learning contexts

These topic areas were selected to allow flexibility during early exploration while still providing enough structure to guide meaningful game and simulation research across multiple platforms.  Updates from the team will be considered as they come up.


🔍 Part 1: What Did I Find?

Using the topic options outlined above, I explored a range of digital and browser-based games and simulations across multiple platforms, including online educational game repositories and commercial game storefronts. The following experiences stood out as either directly relevant or useful points of comparison.  While some of the games discussed here were also analyzed in a previous Level 1 reflection, they are revisited in this post from a different lens—as reference points for market research and topic exploration rather than gameplay analysis.

🎮 Game / Simulation 1: Crack the Circuit

📍 Where found:

Online (browser-based educational game)

🧠 What is the game about?

Crack the Circuit is a puzzle-based game designed to teach foundational electrical concepts such as series circuits, parallel circuits, and short circuits. Players are presented with circuit challenges and must use components like batteries, bulbs, and switches to complete functional circuits. The experience is intentionally simplified to foreground learning through experimentation rather than technical realism.

  • Core dynamic: Puzzle-solving and logical reasoning

  • Narrative: Minimal to none; the focus is on problem completion

  • Purpose: Educational

👥 Intended players:
This game appears to be designed for beginners or learners with little prior experience in electrical systems, likely targeting middle school through early high school learners or introductory technical training contexts.

📝 Relevance to topic areas:

This game aligns strongly with problem-solving and troubleshooting as well as systems thinking, as players must understand how components interact to produce desired outcomes.





🎮 Game / Simulation 2: Wired

📍 Where found:
Online (browser-based game)

🧠 What is the game about?
Wired is an atmospheric puzzle-platform game where players progress by constructing working electrical circuits within a physical environment. Unlike more abstract puzzle games, Wired emphasizes a realistic model of electricity, requiring players to understand how current flows and how circuits behave under different configurations.

  • Core dynamic: Exploration and experimentation

  • Narrative: Environmental and implied rather than explicit

  • Purpose: Hybrid — educational through interaction, framed as a game

👥 Intended players:
This experience appears best suited for older learners or players with some existing familiarity with electrical concepts, such as high school students, technical learners, or curious adult players.

📝 Relevance to topic areas:
Wired connects closely to systems thinking and procedural decision-making, as players must test hypotheses and learn from failure within a simulated environment.



🎮 Game / Simulation 3: Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes

📍 Where found:
Steam (commercial entertainment game)

🧠 What is the game about?
Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes is a cooperative multiplayer game in which one player defuses a bomb while others consult a manual to provide instructions. Success depends on clear communication, shared understanding of systems, and rapid decision-making under pressure.

  • Core dynamic: Collaboration and communication

  • Narrative: Situational rather than story-driven

  • Purpose: Entertainment, with strong transferable learning mechanics

👥 Intended players:
Designed for groups of players, this game targets a general audience but is especially relevant for teams practicing communication, coordination, and procedural reasoning.

📝 Relevance to topic areas:
Although not explicitly educational, this game offers valuable insight into collaboration, role clarity, and procedural execution, making it a useful reference for learning-focused design despite its entertainment framing.



🧠 Related Games

While not all games explored were directly aligned with the client topic areas, several entertainment-focused games still provided useful reference points. These experiences demonstrated effective mechanics for communication, decision-making, and system comprehension that could be adapted for educational or training contexts.


📘 Part 2: What Did I Learn About Games in These Topic Areas?

Exploring existing games and simulations across multiple platforms revealed several important patterns about how learning-focused experiences approach topics such as systems thinking, problem-solving, safety, and collaboration. While each game differed in presentation and purpose, common design trends emerged that help clarify both opportunities and limitations within this space.


Commonalities Across Games and Simulations

One of the most consistent patterns observed was an emphasis on learning through interaction rather than direct instruction. Games such as Crack the Circuit and Wired rely heavily on trial-and-error, experimentation, and visual feedback to help players understand cause-and-effect relationships within systems. This approach aligns strongly with systems thinking and problem-solving topic areas, where understanding emerges from observing how components interact rather than memorizing rules.

Another commonality was the use of clear constraints and goals. Even in experiences without strong narrative framing, players are guided by explicit objectives—complete the circuit, power the system, or progress through a level. These constraints help focus player attention and reduce cognitive overload, especially when dealing with abstract or technical concepts.


Key Differences in Design Approaches

Despite these similarities, the games differed significantly in how they balanced realism, accessibility, and engagement. For example, Crack the Circuit simplifies electrical behavior to support accessibility and quick comprehension, making it suitable for novice learners. In contrast, Wired leans more heavily toward realism, encouraging deeper exploration but requiring greater persistence and tolerance for ambiguity.

Entertainment-focused games like Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes introduced a different design lens altogether. Rather than teaching explicit content, this game emphasizes collaboration, communication, and procedural execution. While not designed as an educational product, its mechanics reveal how social dynamics and role differentiation can be powerful drivers of engagement and learning—particularly in group-based or professional learning contexts.


Learning Domains and Genre Trends

Across the games reviewed, learning most frequently targeted:

  • Conceptual understanding (how systems work)

  • Procedural reasoning (what steps to take and when)

  • Decision-making under constraints

Puzzle and simulation-game hybrids were especially common, suggesting that this genre is well-suited for teaching complex systems without overwhelming players. Fully realistic simulations appeared less common, likely due to higher development costs and steeper learning curves.


Implications for Future Design Work

This exploration highlighted several opportunities for future design:

  • Many games focus on individual mastery, leaving room for experiences that emphasize collaboration and shared problem-solving.

  • There is a noticeable gap between highly abstract educational games and high-fidelity simulations, suggesting space for hybrid designs that balance realism with approachability.

  • Entertainment games continue to offer valuable inspiration for learning design, particularly in how they motivate players through tension, feedback, and social interaction.

Understanding these patterns will help inform future design decisions as our team refines a client topic and begins concept development. Rather than designing in isolation, this research reinforces the value of learning from existing successes—and learning where meaningful gaps remain.


Closing Line

"Mapping the landscape reveals not only what exists—but where new paths can be forged."


🎯 Closing Reflection

This exploration reinforced the importance of conducting early market research before committing to a specific design direction. Even when few direct examples exist, related games and simulations provide valuable insight into mechanics, player expectations, and design constraints. These observations will inform future design decisions as our team refines its topic focus and begins concept development.

🎮 Level 1 Quest Log: Circuits & Electricity (ISLT 9486)





Quest Context / Intro 

As part of Level 1 of Advanced Designing Games for Learning, I explored a curated group of games and simulations focused on circuits and electricity. This post serves as a reflective analysis of three selected experiences from this level and documents my observations, design notes, and classification decisions.

These notes will later inform my Level 1 Project, so the focus here is on understanding how each experience approaches learning through play, simulation, or a hybrid of both.


🔌 Game Group: Circuits & Electricity



📸 Screenshot: Group 3 – Circuits and Electricity



🕹️ Wired


What is the game/simulation about?

Wired is an atmospheric puzzle-platform game that tasks players with constructing functional electrical circuits to progress through levels. The game is built around a realistic physical model of electricity, requiring players to connect components such as power sources, wires, and switches to activate doors or mechanisms. Rather than abstracting electricity into symbolic mechanics, Wired emphasizes authentic behavior of electrical systems.

Structure (Dynamics, Mechanics, Goal)

  • Core Dynamic: Problem-solving through experimentation and iteration

  • Main Mechanics: Wiring components, completing circuits, activating environmental elements

  • Game Goal: Successfully construct working circuits to advance through the environment

Enjoyment & Motivation

I enjoyed the way Wired encouraged curiosity and experimentation. The puzzles felt approachable while still requiring logical reasoning, which aligns with motivational concepts such as competence and curiosity. At times, the lack of explicit guidance could feel slightly frustrating, but this also reinforced learning through trial and error.   I did find it very....odd running around in a hospital gown trying to fix circuits.  

Classification: Game, Simulation Game, or Simulation?

I would classify Wired as a simulation game. While it has clear game goals and progression, the mechanics are grounded in a realistic electrical model. The player is learning through interaction with a simulation, but within a structured, goal-oriented game framework.



Circuit Warz


What is the game/simulation about?

Circuit Warz is a serious game designed to teach advanced electronic and electrical circuit theory. The game presents players with challenges that require applying real-world circuit knowledge rather than discovering rules through play. Its design prioritizes accuracy and pedagogy over entertainment-focused mechanics.

Structure (Dynamics, Mechanics, Goal)

  • Core Dynamic: Knowledge application and analytical reasoning

  • Main Mechanics: Interpreting circuit diagrams, solving theory-driven problems

  • Game Goal: Correctly solve circuit challenges to progress

Enjoyment & Motivation

While Circuit Warz is clearly educational, it felt more demanding and less playful than the other experiences. Motivation came primarily from mastery rather than enjoyment. The experience assumes a higher level of prior knowledge, which may be effective for targeted learning but could be intimidating for novices.  Reading some of the reviews for the game, a few people criticized the game for the first-person shooter vibe, claiming that this game probably should have been either a 2D game, or a top-down game instead (Circuit Warz on Steam)

Classification: Game, Simulation Game, or Simulation?

I would classify Circuit Warz as a simulation rather than a game. Although it includes progression and challenges, its primary function is to model and assess understanding of circuit theory rather than provide game-like engagement.



🔋 Crack the Circuit


What is the game/simulation about?

Crack the Circuit is a browser-based puzzle game that introduces players to basic electrical concepts such as series circuits, parallel circuits, and short circuits. Players use components like batteries, bulbs, and switches to solve progressively complex circuit challenges.

Structure (Dynamics, Mechanics, Goal)

  • Core Dynamic: Puzzle-solving through logical arrangement

  • Main Mechanics: Drag-and-drop circuit components, testing outcomes

  • Game Goal: Successfully complete each circuit puzzle

Enjoyment & Motivation

This was the most immediately accessible and enjoyable experience of the three. The clear goals and visual feedback supported satisfaction and competence, making it engaging without being overwhelming. The gradual difficulty curve reinforced learning while maintaining motivation.

Classification: Game, Simulation Game, or Simulation?

I would classify Crack the Circuit as a game. While it represents electrical concepts, it simplifies and abstracts them for the sake of puzzle-solving and engagement rather than strict realism.



🎯 Closing Reflection 

Collectively, these three experiences demonstrate different approaches to learning through interactive systems—from playful abstraction to rigorous simulation. Comparing them highlights how design intent, realism, and player agency influence whether an experience feels like a game, a simulation, or something in between.

Reflecting on these three experiences also prompted me to reconsider my own design work from the previous course, particularly my game Circuit Breaker. Like Crack the Circuit, my goal with Circuit Breaker was to balance accessibility with meaningful engagement by simplifying electrical concepts into clear, puzzle-driven challenges.

In contrast, experiences like Circuit Warz highlight what Circuit Breaker intentionally avoids: heavy reliance on prior technical knowledge and minimal abstraction. Instead, my earlier design choices align more closely with the simulation game space demonstrated by Wired, where learning emerges through interaction, experimentation, and player-driven problem solving rather than direct instruction.

Viewing these Level 1 games through the lens of my previous project reinforces the importance of intentional classification. Decisions about realism, abstraction, and player guidance directly shape whether an experience functions best as a game, a simulation, or a hybrid. These insights will directly inform my approach to future projects in this course, particularly as I move toward more advanced, client-centered game design work.  


🎮 New Quest Unlocked: Advanced Designing Games for Learning


Saved games carry over 

Welcome to a new chapter of The Quest Log: Gaming for Learning & Fun.

This section documents my journey through ISLT 9486: Advanced Designing Games for Learning during the Spring 2026 semester, taught by Dr. Danielle Oprean. While this quest builds upon my previous work in Designing Games for Learning, it represents a new challenge level—one that moves beyond theory into client-based design, iteration, and real-world application.

In this advanced questline, the focus shifts from learning the rules of the game to designing meaningful play experiences for others. Throughout the course, this log will serve as my journal for tracking progress, reflecting on design decisions, and earning badges tied to serious game design competencies.

Along the way, I will document:

This post serves as my Level 0 entry for ISLT 9486 and marks the start of a new quest—one focused on applying game design principles to authentic learning problems and real-world contexts.

This advanced quest builds upon my earlier journey in Designing Games for Learning, where I explored foundational concepts in serious game design, game-based learning theory, and reflective play analysis. That original questline laid the groundwork for the skills, perspectives, and design approaches now being expanded and applied in this advanced course.

View the original questline here: The Quest Log: Gaming for Learning & Fun (September through December)

Quest status: Accepted.
Player ready.

🎮 Final Reflection: Closing the Questline


 Quest Log Entry — Prototyper’s End-of-Semester Reflection

What a semester this has been.

If I flip back through the pages of my Quest Log, it feels like I’ve been on a long campaign—one full of puzzles, branching paths, boss battles disguised as design challenges, and more than a few unexpected level-ups. When this course began, I wasn’t entirely sure what it meant to design a game for learning. I knew games could teach. I knew they could motivate. But understanding how they are crafted to do so? That was a different kind of journey.

Throughout these 16 weeks, I not only designed, redesigned, and prototyped—I also documented my process, reflected on my choices, and learned to see games through the eyes of both a designer and an educator. Looking back now, I can see just how many skills, concepts, and frameworks I picked up along the way.


🧠 What I Learned This Semester

This course taught me that meaningful games don’t happen by accident—they’re constructed through intentional mechanics, feedback loops, identity roles, and embedded learning opportunities. Some of my biggest takeaways:

  • Mechanics matter more than I realized. The MDA framework helped me understand how small mechanical changes ripple through dynamics and shape the entire learning experience.

  • Scaffolding is essential. Plass et al. showed me that cognitive support, progressive difficulty, and clear feedback are not optional—they’re core to learning.

  • Player identity transforms learning. Designing experiences where the learner becomes an investigator, survivor, policymaker, or explorer changes how they interpret the material.

  • And perhaps most importantly:
    Games teach best when they let players do, not just read or watch.

This course flipped my perspective. Game design isn’t about creating something “fun” and then adding learning on top—it’s about building learning into the mechanics themselves.


🏆 Project I’m Most Proud Of

Circuit Breaker is still the project where everything came together for me.

From:

  • defining the core loop

  • building out rule-based interactions

  • testing prototypes

  • refining hazards and states

  • and finally translating the idea into a gamified lesson plan

…it became the project where I felt the greatest ownership and growth.

But my Roots of Change redesign is a close second. That assignment made me feel like a true instructional game designer—identifying weaknesses, proposing strategic solutions, and grounding them in theory.


🚀 The Project I’d Take Into Early Development

I would absolutely take Circuit Breaker (my Construct 3 project from earlier in the semester) into a deeper development cycle.

Why?

Because it’s the project where I saw the clearest potential for:

  • rapid iteration

  • visual feedback

  • teachable failure states

  • and an engaging core loop

Even with its early rough edges, it had a spark—something that felt like it could genuinely grow into a full serious game with enough refinement. If I were to keep designing beyond this course, that’s the prototype I’d pick back up first.


📘 Where I Still Want to Improve

Even though I learned a lot, I can see several areas where I still need growth:

  • Balancing complexity and clarity. I sometimes over-design or try to fix too many things at once.

  • Rapid prototyping. I’d like to get faster at building throwaway prototypes instead of conceptualizing everything on paper first.

  • Playtesting literacy. The ability to observe, interpret, and iterate based on player feedback is a skill I want to strengthen.

Game design is iterative, messy, and deeply human—I'm still learning to embrace that process fully.


💬 Three Pieces of Advice for My Future Self

If I could send three messages to a future version of me starting another game design journey, they would be:

1. Build small, test early, fail forward.

Don’t wait for perfection before letting someone interact with your design. Learning comes from the iteration, not the theory.

2. Anchor every mechanic to a learning goal.

If a feature doesn’t support the objective, it’s fluff. Be intentional.

3. Remember the player’s experience is the curriculum.

Immersion, agency, and identity shape learning more than any wall of text ever will.


🗺️ Journey Index — The Path I Traveled

Here are all the quests, reflections, comparisons, critiques, and builds that shaped my learning this semester:

Early Explorations

Mid-Semester Growth

Deep Dive Into Prototyping

Final Arc

Every entry is its own step in the evolution of my design skills—each one building toward this final reflection.


🎉 Quest Complete — For Now

Reaching the end of this semester feels like finishing the final quest in a long campaign. I’ve gained new skills, new perspectives, and a deeper appreciation for what games can do as tools for learning.

This class didn’t just teach me about games.
It taught me how to design learning through systems, stories, and play.

And that is a skill I’ll carry forward—into future projects, future classrooms, and future worlds I create.

Level Up: Semester Complete.
On to the next adventure.

🎮 Quest Log – Level Design Progress #2: Refinement & Collaboration

  🧭 Current Objective Refine Level 1 of Judgement Day through client feedback, team coordination, and narrative improvement. 📬 Client Com...