DESMA 157
Game Design
Description: (Formerly numbered 157A.) Studio, six hours; outside study, nine hours. Preparation: completion of preparation for major courses. Enforced requisites: courses 22, 28, and 101 or 104. Introduction to game design, with focus on developing conceptual and practical skills that form basis for both digital and nondigital game development. Development of four playable game projects that explore various aspects of game design: rule design, game balance, multiplayer strategy, complexity, randomness, polemics, narrative, physical interaction, and aesthetic and pragmatic aspects of physical game design. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 0.0
Units: 0.0
1 of 2
AD
AD
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2024 - DESMA 157: Game Design with Sam Malabre is a B+ at its best. While the course concept is excellent, I find it hard to recommend the lecturer. A significant concern is that the university requires students to complete course evaluations before the class ends, often before we have completed all assignments, taken finals, and received final grades. This timeline prevents honest feedback, as many students worry that their evaluations might negatively affect their grades or upset the lecturer. Course evaluations should be administered after courses conclude and final grades are posted, allowing students to reflect rather than rush to complete them before finals. Taking Game Design with Malabre requires a substantial time commitment, often exceeding the workload outlined in the syllabus. The high expectations frequently led to after-hours meetings with group members and regular visits to office hours for clarification. One primary concern is that Malabre does not actively teach specific skills. Instead, students are expected to seek these skills independently. It is crucial to enter the course with a solid foundation in visual design, typography, color theory, fabrication, illustration, printing, and game theory. Without experience in these areas, it can be challenging to keep up. Additionally, the assignments and instructions were often excessively long, unclear, and complex, making it challenging to understand expectations. A tendency to over-intellectualize assignments added unnecessary confusion. I want to address two main concerns regarding grading and expectations. First, grades were often determined by effort and comparing students' work to each other rather than strictly adhering to the provided rubric. Since this is an introductory game design course, students enter with varying experience levels. Grading should focus on each student's effort to understand the concepts taught in class rather than how their work measures up to their peers. For example, the number of token pieces created set an unspoken benchmark that negatively impacted grades. Additionally, after seeking help for revisions and incorporating feedback to improve our work, we still received lower grades than anticipated—among the lowest we have seen in a DMA/UCLA course. This was frustrating and discouraging, especially when it felt like grading standards were being unfairly adjusted based on the work of others. Second, all assignments required deliverables, including a carefully designed board game, custom-illustrated cards with descriptions, a comprehensive rulebook, custom-illustrated character pieces, tokens, and additional game pieces. The expectation was to create game pieces using acrylic, which necessitated frequent visits to the Fab Lab and numerous emails. Given the Fab Lab's limited hours, this added significant stress as we tried to meet our deadlines. The unspoken expectation for the number of acrylic game pieces to fabricate set a limitless standard among students, ultimately hurting our grades. Moreover, students must pay for labor and materials when using the Fab Lab's laser-printing services, which may not be within everyone's budget. It is important to note that the instructor appears to be a pro-Palestinian activist. Some students observed that he treated individuals from specific socioeconomic and educational backgrounds differently, reflecting classist attitudes. This behavior contradicted his commitment to equality and seemed to affect grading practices. While the course offered valuable insights into game design, the unclear instructions, inconsistent grading, and unrealistic expectations made it challenging and occasionally frustrating. Clear communication and more realistic grading standards would create a more supportive learning environment for future students. Although the lecturer is skilled in teaching the technical aspects of game design, his grading and feedback seemed influenced by personal biases. It became evident that he favored students who were already deeply invested in game design and often preferred those with prior experience. This created a challenging environment for students with less background in the field, making it seem like only those with advanced knowledge and skills were set up for success. Rather than focusing on helping all students achieve a baseline level of mastery, the grading appeared to reflect a "mastery mindset," where only the most experienced students thrived. As a result, if you did not enter the course with extensive experience, you were at a disadvantage, making it challenging to succeed despite your best efforts.
Fall 2024 - DESMA 157: Game Design with Sam Malabre is a B+ at its best. While the course concept is excellent, I find it hard to recommend the lecturer. A significant concern is that the university requires students to complete course evaluations before the class ends, often before we have completed all assignments, taken finals, and received final grades. This timeline prevents honest feedback, as many students worry that their evaluations might negatively affect their grades or upset the lecturer. Course evaluations should be administered after courses conclude and final grades are posted, allowing students to reflect rather than rush to complete them before finals. Taking Game Design with Malabre requires a substantial time commitment, often exceeding the workload outlined in the syllabus. The high expectations frequently led to after-hours meetings with group members and regular visits to office hours for clarification. One primary concern is that Malabre does not actively teach specific skills. Instead, students are expected to seek these skills independently. It is crucial to enter the course with a solid foundation in visual design, typography, color theory, fabrication, illustration, printing, and game theory. Without experience in these areas, it can be challenging to keep up. Additionally, the assignments and instructions were often excessively long, unclear, and complex, making it challenging to understand expectations. A tendency to over-intellectualize assignments added unnecessary confusion. I want to address two main concerns regarding grading and expectations. First, grades were often determined by effort and comparing students' work to each other rather than strictly adhering to the provided rubric. Since this is an introductory game design course, students enter with varying experience levels. Grading should focus on each student's effort to understand the concepts taught in class rather than how their work measures up to their peers. For example, the number of token pieces created set an unspoken benchmark that negatively impacted grades. Additionally, after seeking help for revisions and incorporating feedback to improve our work, we still received lower grades than anticipated—among the lowest we have seen in a DMA/UCLA course. This was frustrating and discouraging, especially when it felt like grading standards were being unfairly adjusted based on the work of others. Second, all assignments required deliverables, including a carefully designed board game, custom-illustrated cards with descriptions, a comprehensive rulebook, custom-illustrated character pieces, tokens, and additional game pieces. The expectation was to create game pieces using acrylic, which necessitated frequent visits to the Fab Lab and numerous emails. Given the Fab Lab's limited hours, this added significant stress as we tried to meet our deadlines. The unspoken expectation for the number of acrylic game pieces to fabricate set a limitless standard among students, ultimately hurting our grades. Moreover, students must pay for labor and materials when using the Fab Lab's laser-printing services, which may not be within everyone's budget. It is important to note that the instructor appears to be a pro-Palestinian activist. Some students observed that he treated individuals from specific socioeconomic and educational backgrounds differently, reflecting classist attitudes. This behavior contradicted his commitment to equality and seemed to affect grading practices. While the course offered valuable insights into game design, the unclear instructions, inconsistent grading, and unrealistic expectations made it challenging and occasionally frustrating. Clear communication and more realistic grading standards would create a more supportive learning environment for future students. Although the lecturer is skilled in teaching the technical aspects of game design, his grading and feedback seemed influenced by personal biases. It became evident that he favored students who were already deeply invested in game design and often preferred those with prior experience. This created a challenging environment for students with less background in the field, making it seem like only those with advanced knowledge and skills were set up for success. Rather than focusing on helping all students achieve a baseline level of mastery, the grading appeared to reflect a "mastery mindset," where only the most experienced students thrived. As a result, if you did not enter the course with extensive experience, you were at a disadvantage, making it challenging to succeed despite your best efforts.
1 of 2
