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

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.

The best course. The mentor explains everything with enthusiasm and examples. Everything was easy to follow and found many interesting new things. Thank you.

I loved this course, definitely it should have more details of level designing. But overall it is quite impressive for the beginners

The final submission needs to be fixed. The text prompts are misleading and confuses how people should turn in their work.

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

It was so fun adn I leaned many things and gained new skills.

I learned a lot, it was great

Very helpful

Wow!

This was a really great course! I really liked the instructor and the final assignment. Solid introduction to the modelling tools and level design documentation. I'll definitely be making use of my learnings here. However, the grading on the final assignment is pretty flawed. First off, there's no proper way to submit your work - I had to use Google Drive to host my documents. The assignments I marked didn't do anything like that, and therefore I had nothing to mark. Based on the discussion channel, it sounds like they're aware of this and hoping to fix it. The grading itself is also extremely harsh - most questions are on a scale from 1-4, and getting a 3 in many/all categories will result in a failure. More often than not, people feel weird about giving something a perfect score - so this is pretty likely. One category in particular loses you 10 points like this, which is essentially an instant failure. I resubmitted my work and got 100% the next try. Which doesn't feel much better - my project wasn't perfect, so who knows if my scorer even reviewed my work. The granularity of the grading is working against us, especially in a subjective, peer-graded assignment.

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.

The sound of the videos, some times is horrible but good course

While Lucas Hayley was a great Instructor overall, there were major flaws that if changed, would raise the quality of the course by a ton. To begin with, there were various Audio issues of the Voice of the Instructor from time to time. To end with: There are 4 Modules, the first 3 Modules were extremely heavy in theory with close to no practice (other than creating Level Diagrams/Map and a Level Design Document). While these are fundamentally useful and very much needed, they were too long (3 Modules) and couldve easily been taught within 1 compact Module, skipping the rather unneccessary stuff in return for more high quality learning material. The last Module (4), is where you´ll actually get to practice and create a Greyboxed level of your previous Level Map/Diagram. This module was great and very much needed, it taught a lot of new stuff which is awesome. Though - i wish there wouldve been 1 more Module to go deeper in the topic of greyboxing in Unreal Engine, maybe to explain more tools or the actual next stage after Greyboxing. So overall, unfortunately a lot of wasted potential here, considering its a Fundamentals Course.

Die Infos im Kurs sind teilweise sehr Offen und schwammig, man weiß nicht so wirklich wie man bestimmte Sachen anwendet. Die Fragen sind teilweise unmöglich, was ist so schwer daran multiply choice fragen zu verwenden?, für jemanden deren Hauptsprache nicht English ist sind diese fragen sehr nervig und schwer zu beantworten, aber im groben und ganzen würde ich den Kurs als okay bewerten. Das Kursprojekt ist auch recht schwer fertig zu bekommen weil man von anderen Bewertet wird die genauso clueless sind wie man selbst.

Mi experiencia con este curso ha sido, en general, decepcionante, especialmente en lo relativo a la entrega final del proyecto, que considero mal planteada y poco clara. La sección de entrega del curso resulta extremadamente confusa. No existe un sistema adecuado para subir archivos directamente dentro de la plataforma (en este caso, Coursera), lo que obliga a limitarse a responder únicamente las tres preguntas de forma textual. No se proporciona ningún espacio seguro, interno al curso, para incluir enlaces o documentación, lo cual genera dudas en cuanto a privacidad, trazabilidad y revisión real del trabajo. Además, muchas personas —entre las que me incluyo— no van a acceder ni a compartir enlaces externos que no pertenezcan a la propia plataforma de Coursera, por razones de seguridad y privacidad. Esto hace que la entrega se base más en lo que se explica que en lo que se demuestra, lo cual contradice la lógica de un curso práctico centrado en diseño y prototipado. Por otro lado, el contenido del curso tiene buenos fundamentos teóricos, y el material cubre muchas áreas clave del diseño de niveles. Sin embargo, hay inconsistencias en la calidad de los vídeos, como diferencias notables de volumen y sonido entre lecciones, incluso al usar la calidad máxima permitida por la plataforma. Esto dificulta seguir algunas secciones, sobre todo si se está estudiando en un entorno no ideal. En mi opinión, la metodología de entrega debería revisarse por completo. Habría que contemplar alternativas para quienes no tienen un equipo que permita grabar y ejecutar proyectos a la vez, algo que es especialmente exigente cuando se trabaja con motores como Unreal Editor. No todos los estudiantes cuentan con máquinas potentes, y eso no debería ser un factor excluyente para demostrar su progreso y comprensión. En resumen: el contenido del curso es útil, pero su diseño técnico y pedagógico está lejos de estar optimizado para todos los estudiantes. No puedo recomendarlo en su estado actual, y sugiero una revisión profunda de la estructura de evaluación y entrega.

After completing the full eight-course Epic Games Game Design program, my overall impression is largely negative. Much of the material is outdated, so only about half of the instruction is directly usable, with the rest requiring heavy reliance on YouTube tutorials and independent research. The pacing across courses is inconsistent and often chaotic, and the suggested timelines for final projects are unrealistic. Quizzes are either overly simple or rely on extremely precise spelling and terminology, which pushes students to consult discussion boards where answers are commonly shared. Grading is handled entirely by AI and peer review, with no meaningful instructor involvement beyond copied discussion prompts. The latter half of the program is particularly frustrating. Core implementation and system design are delayed until the final course, and even then they are taught using older versions of Unreal Engine, causing frequent mismatches and confusion. Animation examples are often buggy, with little to no guidance on refinement, and several videos are poorly edited, sometimes cutting out critical steps entirely. The peer review process also loses credibility as more submissions rely on AI-generated images or videos, which diminishes the value of genuine effort. While I did gain some basic understanding of user experience concepts and general familiarity with Unreal Engine, most real learning came from external sources. I cannot recommend this course and strongly suggest investing in a more current program with active instruction and support.