Before taking 247G, I mostly thought about games from the perspective of a player. When I played games like CS2, Cyberpunk 2077, or Red Dead Redemption 2, I focused on whether the game was fun, interesting, or immersive. I rarely stopped to think about why a game made me feel a certain way or how its systems created that experience. I also thought game design was mainly about coming up with a cool story, characters, and mechanics. This class changed the way I look at games.
One of the biggest things I learned was that game design is an iterative process. A game idea that sounds good on paper does not necessarily work when someone actually plays it. Throughout the class, I experienced this directly through our different design projects, especially our RPG project about a town being slowly consumed by vines. At first, we had a general idea of the setting and story, but turning that idea into actual gameplay required much more thought. We had to consider character abilities, combat systems, enemy behavior, movement, resources, and how all of these mechanics supported the emotions we wanted players to experience.
The concepts from class that stuck with me most were mechanics, dynamics, and player experience. I started to understand that mechanics are not just individual rules or abilities. When combined, they create patterns of player behavior and eventually produce certain emotions. For example, in our game, the spreading vines were not only part of the story. They also created pressure by making the player feel that they could not stay in one place forever. This helped me understand how narrative and mechanics can work together instead of being separate parts of a game.
I also learned the importance of iteration and playtesting. Sometimes I became attached to an idea because it looked good in my head, but playtesting showed that it was confusing, too complicated, or simply not fun. Instead of treating this as failure, I learned to use it as information. We changed character statistics, redesigned skills, adjusted boss mechanics, and simplified ideas based on what we discovered. This was probably one of the biggest changes in how I approach design.
Another important part of my growth was learning to think more critically about games I play. Assignments such as critical plays and game analyses made me look at games beyond whether I liked them. I began asking what a game was trying to make me feel, what choices it gave me, and how its mechanics influenced my behavior as a player.
The biggest challenge for me was moving from thinking like a player to thinking like a designer. As a player, I can simply say that something is fun or boring. As a designer, I need to ask why it is fun or boring and what I can change to improve it.
Going forward, I want to keep using this mindset whenever I design or play games. I will spend more time testing ideas, listening to players, and thinking about how mechanics create experiences. Most importantly, 247G taught me that good game design is not about having one perfect idea. It is about being willing to try, fail, change, and try again.
