This course was brilliant! its helped me understand where to start and how to start my projects, its going to take some time to get used to all the documentation But i understand how much it helps now not only with communication but Direction

It is the best game-related course I've had. Lucas Haley takes your hand and walks you through each part step by step. He has changed my perspective completely.

alot of new cool stuff to learn, just need to fast farward the stuff i already know then i got to the good stuff.

Wow!

The course was great, however the final test seems to have had a variety of issues, making it difficult to submit and review other peers. That aside, it helped expand my understanding of level design in ways I wasn't familiar with, along with the built-in templates and tools for rapid prototyping in Unreal.

I have thoroughly enjoyed the two previous courses in the Unreal Certificate Path and found them to be engaging and highly informative. However, I must express my disappointment with the Fundamentals of Level Design course. It felt like a significant departure from the quality and depth I had come to expect in this program. The course content was exceedingly shallow. The concepts covered could easily have been condensed onto a single infographic or poster. Instead, the material was stretched across numerous short and fragmented videos, many of which added little value. This format not only felt inefficient but also frustrating, as it lacked the depth and structure needed to truly engage learners. Module 4 was the only portion of the course that was worth publishing. It was genuinely helpful and offered practical insights that could be applied effectively. However, even this module was marred by logistical issues during submission. There was no clear way to upload PDFs or videos directly, which created unnecessary frustration. I submitted a link for my video but was unable to upload many of my supporting images. I had spent considerable time formatting a separate PDF only to realize that it could not be submitted. This was a disheartening experience and speaks to a lack of consideration for the learner’s time and effort in the course design. The quizzes in this course were not well-designed to assess meaningful comprehension. Instead of focusing on clearly defined concepts, they seemed to rely on the instructor's unique and inconsistent use of jargon. As an educator with experience in both teaching and peer-reviewed publication, I find it concerning when assessments depend on terminology that lacks universal definition or clear explanation. For instance, terms like "flow," as used in this course, were not adequately defined, making it difficult to connect them to the broader learning objectives. Such an approach does not support effective learning and instead introduces unnecessary obstacles to understanding. Additionally, the peer grading system needs to be reconsidered. While peer review can be valuable in certain contexts, its implementation here felt forced and ineffective. Without clear guidelines or a robust mechanism to ensure meaningful feedback, peer grading becomes more of a formality than a learning opportunity. Finally, the audio quality throughout the course was subpar. Poor audio can be a major distraction for learners and undermines the overall presentation of the material. It is crucial to ensure that technical aspects such as audio quality meet a high standard, particularly in professional-level courses like this one. Overall, I struggle to see what this course aimed to achieve. Aside from Module 4, the content lacked substance, clarity, and meaningful engagement. For future iterations, I would strongly recommend revisiting the course structure, eliminating redundant content, and focusing on providing clear, actionable insights that genuinely enrich the learning experience. Addressing technical shortcomings, such as improving audio quality and streamlining submission processes, would also help bring this course in line with the otherwise excellent standards of the certificate path. Finally, I urge the course creators to replace the peer grading system with a more effective feedback mechanism. There is great potential here, but significant changes are needed to meet expectations.

Too slow, Too long, Too little "unreal time" to work, only in the last module. No video material other than the instructor talking, and the worst is that the last task, the project upload, theres no "upload", all you can do is share your Google Drive links with the project, documents, video, etc. Also there is no "share" link on your own project to share with your peers and get reviewed. This course needs a MASSIVE fix.

Time to finish course and final project not equal