The Final Project

Practice - what you do

The Requirement

One or two verbs, maximum. Strong feedback. Clear Arc. A small slice with a real identity.

The final is proof that you understand videogames as a medium, not as a mood board.

What "Undeniable" Means

When you play the final, the action should feel right. Not "good enough." Not "it works." Right.

The jump lands exactly when it should. The dash has exactly the punch it needs. The feedback tells you exactly what happened. The Gesture is complete.

You'll know it when you feel it. So will we.

What the Final Is NOT

It's not a complete videogame.

No one expects levels, progression, menus, or polish. Those are production concerns. This is a design course. We're looking for design clarity, not shipping readiness.

It's not a tech demo.

Implementing five mechanics poorly is worse than implementing one mechanic well. Restraint is the skill. Saying "this is what my videogame IS" requires saying "this is what my videogame ISN'T."

It's not a concept.

"I wanted it to feel like..." is not the final. The final is what it actually feels like. Intent without execution is not design.

The Components

The Build

A playable prototype. Ideally 30 seconds to 2 minutes of focused experience. Long enough to feel the action. Short enough to be tight.

The Articulation

A brief written or verbal explanation of:

What is the core Gesture?
How do the 4 A's work together?
What Aesthetic Heritage are you drawing from?
What Permissions did you design?

The articulation proves you can name what you made - that you understand it, not just that you stumbled into it.

Examples of Scope

A platformer final might be:

One character
Walk, jump, maybe one more ability
A single room or short sequence
Clear feedback on every action
30 seconds of intentional experience

An action final might be:

One attack, one enemy type
A single arena
Hitstop, screen shake, sound design
Clear consequences for hitting and being hit

A puzzle final might be:

One mechanic
Three puzzles that teach and test it
Clear feedback when the solution clicks

Notice: all of these are small. Small is the point.

The Question We're Asking

When we play your final, we're asking one question:

Does this person understand what a videogame is?

Not "is this marketable?" Not "is this finished?" Not even "is this fun?"

Does this person understand that videogames are a medium of action? That the design lives in the Gesture? That the feel is the form?

If yes, you've succeeded. If no, we talk about why.

Craft - for educators

Why This Format

Students come in wanting to make "their dream game." That's beautiful, but it's not learnable in one course. The dream game is a multi-year, multi-person project.

The "one undeniable action" constraint forces focus. It's achievable in the time available. It requires all the skills we teach. And it produces something that can actually be felt.

The Scope Conversation

You will have scope conversations. Students will want to add more.

The answer is always: "Is the core action undeniable yet? If not, adding more won't help. If yes, you're done."

This is hard for students who equate "more" with "better." The final teaches that "complete" is better than "more."

Assessment Criteria

Does the action feel intentional?

Not "does it work" but "does it feel designed." There's a difference between functional and intentional. We're looking for intentional.

Can the student articulate their choices?

Using the framework vocabulary. If they can name it, they understand it. If they can't, they may have stumbled into something without learning from it.

Is the scope appropriate?

Did they resist the urge to add more? Did they focus? Restraint is a skill we're assessing.

Common Pitfalls

"It's almost done, I just need to add..."

If the core isn't there, adding won't save it. Redirect to the core.

"I know it doesn't feel right, but the idea is..."

The idea is not the final. The feel is the final. Help them close the gap or reduce scope.

"I want to show range by doing multiple things"

Range is demonstrated by doing one thing deeply, not many things shallowly. One undeniable action shows more skill than five mediocre ones.

Theory - deeper grounding

Why "Undeniable"

The word matters. Not "good." Not "fun." Not "polished." Undeniable.

Undeniable means: when you experience it, you can't deny what it is. The action has identity. It's not generic. It's not "a jump" - it's this jump.

This is the threshold for design. Below it, you have implementation. At it and above, you have something that could only be what it is.

The Proof of Understanding

The final is not about making something great. It's about proving understanding.

A student who makes a small, clear, intentional thing understands videogames. A student who makes a sprawling, unfocused, accidental thing does not - yet.

The final reveals where the student is. That's its pedagogical purpose.

Medium Specificity

The final is specifically a videogame final. Not a document about a videogame. Not a presentation about a videogame. A videogame.

This is because videogames are a medium of action. The proof of understanding must be in the medium itself. You can't prove you understand painting by writing about painting. You paint.

Unresolved Questions

How do we assess students with different technical starting points fairly? The constraint helps, but gaps remain.
Is "undeniable" too subjective? How do we calibrate across assessors?
What about students whose strength is systems, not feel? Is this final format biased toward action videogames?