The course is a good mix of theory and practice. Theory of Games Design and practice of C# coding in Unity - although the two are not as well linked as they might be - for example the theory covers 'good coding', telling a story', using prompts and cues for example. No where in the practical code teaching are these reinforced, exemplified or illustrated in any explicit way.

The coding is helped and hindered by its reliance on provided components - a sophisticated game can be developed for the final project assignment because sophisticated components are provided. However this massively increases the learning load when one comes to make the the innovative changes in the assignment as it takes quite a lot of effort to understand the components. dependancies and functionality in order to adapt or replace them.

My least favorite of the program. I wasn't as interested in working with the project and assets provided, so I struggled to get motivation. Also, even after I completed my project, I had to submit my assignment three times to finally pass, because of trolls who probably don't even take a look at your project and just graded everything with 0 and leaved no feedback (other than "ok"). I contacted support and they gave me no solution at all, other than "submit again". So I've been feeling that the weakest part of these courses are the lack of engagement in the forums, people only post random stuff in any automated led discussion, or spam to get their projects reviewed and that's it.

The theory part is fantastic. The practical part however is lacking and the two feel quite disjointed.

Pro's:

- Lot's of interesting topics are discussed in theory that I never thought would form part of my interest.

- The theory doesn't require a degree to understand but has enough depth to get you thinking and broaden your horizon

- Even if the practical part is lacking you'll still learn a lot about using Unity as you have to finish your project. You learn the most about making games by making them :)

Cons:

- TA for the practical part explains a lot of things too superficial. He often says "Now we're going to do so and so". But rarely explain why and what the idea behind this action is.

- It's great to have a good looking game based on loads of assets and scripts made already. But that way you'll end up clueless when starting to make a game yourself. I'd rather have a unexciting looking minimalistic game where I really understand the mechanics then a pretty looking black box.

- The discussion forum has a regular amount of people posting problems. I yet have to see someone from the teaching team respond.

In the end I would still recommend this course. The lacking practical part you can also get from lot's of other places for cheap/free. The theoretical part definitely not, that's why it's totally worth it!

Really good for anyone looking to learn and expand their Unity knowledge. Would love to see it upgraded to the latest unity versions. Some assets provided give you errors and have some problems but I believe this is on purpose to help you debug and figure out better how to improve any errors you may have creating games. Highly recommended!

i learned so much from this course excellent for bigginers!

great course

WEGRHFGFGD

Best !!!!

круто

Good.

good

Just like the previous two courses, there is much room for improvement in the way the practical parts are explained. It is difficult to understand because there isn’t any explanation beforehand about what we’re about to do and why. However, I actually learned a lot from this course. Thanks to it, I was able to complete a 3D mini-game from scratch. The quality of peer reviews is as terrible as in the previous two courses, with very few people taking it seriously. When I received a failing grade on my first submission, there was no indication that my game had ever been played. On the second submission, I passed, but again, it hadn't been played. If they are looking at anything, it’s probably just a glance at the screenshots. I think the assignment to “make three important changes” should be optional. No matter how much you change a boring game, it remains boring, making it essentially a tedious task. The demands are high, and it takes a lot of time and effort, so I would rather spend that time working on my own game.

I really like the theoretical parts of these courses