🎮 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

• “From Sand to Strategy: First Impressions of Egypt: Old Kingdom”

• “Egypt: Old Kingdom – Mentor Game Critique”

• “Surviving Hard Choices: Playing Spent and Gods Will Be Watching”

• “Gamestorming and Narrative Learning Game Design”

• “Comparing Narrative Elements in Games: Lessons for Learning Design”

• “Designing Final Cut: A Media Lab Story — Bringing Learning into Narrative”

Mid-Semester Growth

• “Reflecting on the Design Process – Final Cut: A Media Lab Story”

• “Exploring Goals, Rules, and Mechanics in Egypt: Old Kingdom and Ultra Pixel Survive”

• “Balancing Achievements in Educational Games”

• “Core Loop Comparison Reflection: Balancing Systems and Learning”

• “Reflecting on the Digital Design Process – Circuit Breaker”

Deep Dive Into Prototyping

• “Writing Rules That Teach Themselves”

• “Learning Construct 3: Revisiting the Basics”

• “⚡ Constructing Circuit Breaker: From Rules to Reactions”

• “Circuit Breaker — Refining Safety Through Iterative Game Design”

• “Why Circuit Breaker Is the Best Candidate for Gamification”

• “Gamifying ‘Circuit Breaker’: Turning Safety Into a Challenge”

Final Arc

• “Final Assignment: The Roots of Change Mission”

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.

Final Assignment: The Roots of Change Mission

 

Quest Log Entry — Prototyper’s Field Notes

Well, this is it — the final mission of the semester.
Arch McGee has vanished once again (classic McGee), Truman Tiger is counting on me, and the realm of Mizzou Learning Technologies is in dire need of game design intervention. With several course subjects begging for a meaningful-learning makeover, it fell to me, the Prototyper, to step in and restore balance.

Three challenges were laid out before me, but one called louder than the rest…

---

🌿 Why I Chose “Roots of Change”

Roots of Change immediately stood out because it combines everything I’ve been learning over the past 14 weeks:
✔ narrative framing
✔ systems thinking
✔ ethical reasoning
✔ investigative decision-making

It’s a web-based serious game where players act as environmental journalists uncovering corruption, failed policies, and deforestation in Malaysia. The game has incredible potential — but, as Truman warned, something wasn’t quite right beneath the canopy.

My task?
Identify three design errors and reforge them into mechanics worthy of meaningful learning.

---

🕵️‍♂️ Error #1 — The Missing Verification Mechanic

As I dove into Chapter 1 of Roots of Change, something became clear:
Players gather interviews, satellite images, and documents… but never verify any of it.

In a game about journalistic ethics, that’s like giving a knight a sword with no sharpening stone.

My Fix:

I added a Evidence Verification System that allows players to:

• Cross-check interviews

• Identify bias

• Mark sources as Verified, Disputed, or Unreliable

This transforms clue-gathering from passive collection into active reasoning — exactly what environmental journalism requires.

---

📊 Error #2 — A Reputation Meter Without Meaning

Public Trust. Government Pressure. Environmental Impact.
These are the game’s core metrics, yet nothing explains why they rise or fall.

It’s feedback without clarity — like exploring a dungeon without a torch.

My Fix:

I reforged the system into:

Impact Summary Cards

After every significant decision, the player now receives:

• What changed

• Why it changed

• Optional tooltips explaining the deeper system

• A short narrative reflection (“Officials react to your exposé…”)

Feedback becomes visible, traceable, and meaningful — reinforcing Gee’s idea that learning emerges from understanding consequences within systems.

---

🗺️ Error #3 — A Heatmap with No Guidance

The heatmap of Malaysian Borneo is gorgeous… and silent.
It shows deforestation patterns but never teaches players how to read them.

My Fix:

I introduced:

• Guided overlays revealing political, economic, or environmental drivers

• Timeline scrubbing with satellite before/after imagery

• Contextual pop-ups explaining why certain zones are high-risk

Suddenly, the heatmap transforms from a static visual into an investigative tool for systems thinking.

---

🔧 The Redesigned Roots of Change

With all three fixes integrated, Roots of Change becomes a richer, more authentic investigative experience:

• Players evaluate evidence, not just collect it

• Feedback supports reflection and ethical decision-making

• Heatmaps reveal systemic patterns instead of pixelated mysteries

These revisions ground the game in meaningful learning principles and align its mechanics with its most important objective:
teaching players how to think like investigative journalists.

---

🧩 Reflection: Growth of a Prototyper

This final mission reminded me how far I’ve traveled this semester.

When I began, I saw game design as a mix of mechanics and fun.
Now, I see it as a landscape of:

• feedback loops

• embodied problem spaces

• cognitive scaffolds

• player identities

• ethical decision-making environments

Every redesign choice I made in Roots of Change was influenced by the readings and projects that shaped my understanding of meaningful learning.

Arch McGee would be proud.
(Wherever he is now… probably stuck in a side quest.)

---

🏆 Quest Complete

With this final redesign, I officially complete my Designing Games for Learning adventure. The Prototyper’s journey continues, but this mission — this semester — has reached its Front-Page ending.

On to the next quest.

Gamifying “Circuit Breaker”: A Lesson Plan That Turns Safety Into a Challenge

 

This post builds on the gamification framework I outlined earlier, which you can read here: The Quest Log: Gaming for Learning & Fun: Why Circuit Breaker Is the Best Candidate for Gamification: An Opinion Piece

The following lesson plan gamifies the procedural troubleshooting skills taught in Circuit Breaker. Instead of playing a full digital game, learners complete a structured, game-inspired lesson designed to improve engagement, confidence, and retention.

---

Lesson Title & Context

Circuit Breaker: Safe Troubleshooting for Media Lab Equipment
Instructional setting: Intro-level Digital Media or Technology Literacy course.
Format: 45–60 minute class session with optional homework extension.

---

Target Audience

• High school seniors, undergraduate freshmen, or new student workers in a media lab

• Mixed gaming backgrounds

• Reading level: 10th grade

• Common needs: increased confidence, step-by-step clarity, risk-free practice

---

Learning Objective (Mager Format)

Given a set of malfunctioning equipment scenarios (C),
students will identify and apply the correct electrical troubleshooting steps (B)
to restore power safely (A)
with 90% procedural accuracy on the final checklist (D).

This is a procedural, higher-order objective (apply, analyze).

---

Problem Definition

Many learners entering media labs lack confidence in diagnosing basic equipment issues. They often skip safety steps, over-generalize solutions, or avoid troubleshooting altogether. This lesson teaches safe and correct procedures while maintaining motivation and reducing fear of “breaking something.”

---

Gamified Elements Selected

Points / XP: Earned for completing steps correctly
Badges: “Safety Scout,” “Power Pro,” “Master Troubleshooter”
Progress Bar: Represents successful completion of each diagnostic step
Quests: Each malfunction scenario is framed as a mini-mission
Unlockables: Access to advanced scenarios after completing basics
Narrative framing: “The lab is offline. Restore power before the big presentation.”

These elements increase autonomy, competence, and purposeful engagement—core drivers in self-determination theory (Ede, 2021).

---

Instructional Flow

1. Intro (Engage)

• Instructor presents a short narrative prompt:
  “The media lab has lost power in several stations. Your mission: safely restore functionality before students arrive.”

• Students pick an avatar badge for role-play (Technician, Assistant, Analyst).

2. Main Activity (Quest Structure)

Students rotate through three equipment failure stations, each treated like a quest:

Quest Example: “The Flickering Monitor”

• Step 1: Inspect power strip

• Step 2: Check cable integrity

• Step 3: Verify breaker / outlet

• Step 4: Reset or replace safely

Gamification Components

• XP for each correct step

• Visual progress bar moves forward

• Small “loot drops” = tool cards (e.g., multimeter, zip ties)

• Badge awarded after completing all 3 stations

3. Closure

Instructor leads a reflection circle:

• What step was most surprising?

• What mistake helped you learn?

• How confident do you feel now?

---

Materials & Resources

• Printed quest cards

• Tool cards

• Badge templates

• Equipment or mock stations

• XP tracking sheet or Google Form system

---

Assessment / Evidence of Learning

• Final troubleshooting checklist (90% accuracy requirement)

• Observed procedural correctness during each quest

• Ability to explain “why” each step matters

• Optional mini-quiz or debrief reflection

---

Motivation & Engagement Strategy

Gamification elements serve specific needs:

Learner Need	Gamification Element	Purpose
Clarity	Progress bar	Reduces uncertainty
Confidence	XP + badges	Reinforces competence
Autonomy	Tool unlocks	Allows choice in approach
Engagement	Narrative quests	Gives purpose and stakes

---

Accessibility & Inclusivity Notes

• No time pressure mechanics

• Badges available for effort as well as accuracy

• Narratives are descriptive, not sensory-overwhelming

• Text alternatives for visuals

• Pair work allowed for students with mobility needs

---

Reflection / Debrief Plan

Students complete a short learning log:

• What steps did you master today?

• What will you apply in a real lab setting?

• Which quest felt most rewarding and why?

The instructor then closes with a discussion connecting the gamified lesson to future responsibilities in media production environments.

---

Gamification vs. Game-Based Learning Reflection

This design process felt very different from creating my game prototype. Circuit Breaker the game focuses on immersive problem-solving in a simulated environment. The gamified lesson, by contrast, does not attempt to replicate gameplay—it adds structure, motivation, and progress markers to an existing instructional task. Instead of designing mechanics, I designed reinforcement systems, which was a surprisingly meaningful shift. Gamification turned a procedural lesson into something more narrative, motivational, and measurable without becoming a full game.

Why Circuit Breaker Is the Best Candidate for Gamification: An Opinion Piece

 

Throughout this course, I developed several instructional game ideas, but Circuit Breaker—a learning game about troubleshooting electrical and equipment issues in a media lab—stands out as the strongest candidate for gamification. Unlike a full games-based learning experience, gamification adapts game elements to motivate learners within an existing lesson structure (Isaacs, 2015). When I compared my earlier ideas using the Gamification Design Toolkit, Circuit Breaker aligned most directly with the kind of engagement, structure, and scaffolding that gamification supports.

Nature of the Problem

The core problem addressed in Circuit Breaker is procedural: learners must follow the correct sequence of actions when diagnosing power issues in a lab environment. Many students struggle with troubleshooting not because the steps are difficult, but because the process feels tedious or intimidating. Gamification can reinforce procedural consistency using XP, progress bars, and quests, making routine steps feel meaningful rather than mechanical.

Learner Needs

This topic fits the needs of students new to media production environments, such as freshmen in Digital Media or Mass Communications programs. In the Digital Media & Innovation Lab where I work, new student workers often hesitate to troubleshoot equipment because they are afraid they will “break something.” Gamification allows me to reduce this anxiety by externalizing progress through feedback, badges, and leveling—all of which support competence and confidence (Ede, 2021).

Context Fit

This content benefits from individual progression more than competition, meaning XP, quests, and unlockables work better than leaderboards. The lesson also naturally breaks into mini-tasks, such as identifying hazards, selecting proper tools, and shutting off power safely. These map directly onto gamified structures like:

• Micro-quests

• Tiered challenges

• “Safe Technician” badges

• Energy bars / hazard meters

Accessibility and Inclusivity

Because the topic is procedural and safety-based, I can avoid problematic gamification elements such as time pressure or competitive ranking—which could disadvantage neurodivergent learners or students with anxiety. Instead, badges, tool unlocks, and narrative feedback maintain accessibility across learner profiles.

Transferability

The original game design transfers extremely well to gamification because the decisions, tools, and sequences from the game can be reframed as quests and checkpoints in a lesson. The learning goal stays intact, but the method becomes scaffolded and motivational rather than simulation-based.

Overall, Circuit Breaker best meets the requirements for a meaningful gamification redesign. Its procedural nature, clear learner needs, and strong fit for game elements make it the ideal foundation for a gamified lesson plan.

To see how these gamified lesson elements translated into actual gameplay logic and instructional mechanics inside Construct 3, you can read my follow-up post here: The Quest Log: Gaming for Learning & Fun: Gamifying “Circuit Breaker”: A Lesson Plan That Turns Safety Into a Challenge