Hey, I’m Eric

. I run a small studio called Honor Games, and over the years I’ve become “that person” other devs come to when they’re stuck — scope, systems, messaging, production, all of it. I’m formalizing that into a consulting lane and taking on a handful of projects at a $50 flat rate for the month of June.

What I can help with:
• Sharpening your core hook so players instantly understand the appeal
• Honest, constructive feedback on your Steam page, trailer, or pitch
• Untangling scope, milestones, and production structure
• Spotting where your design or messaging isn’t landing the way you think it is
• Systems/worldbuilding alignment for strategy, sim, or narrative projects

What you get for $50:
• A focused 60–75 minute deep‑dive (call or async — your choice)
• Clear, actionable steps you can use right away
• Straightforward, no‑ego feedback from someone who’s been in the trenches

Why I’m doing this:
I genuinely enjoy helping other devs, and I’m building out my consulting workflow. You get high‑signal insight; I get practice and case studies. Win‑win.

I’m based in California (PST), so scheduling will be in that timezone.

If you’re interested, DM me your project link and what you’re wrestling with right now. If I’m not the right fit, I’ll tell you honestly — no pressure, no upsells.

Greetings,
As I promised this sub, I'd keep yall updated as to my academic progress as I go through he captechu program.

I got an A.

So, lets break down the 1st course in the series: Fundamentals of grad research., and the delivery method of the course.

As said before, this is an asynchronous delivery, thus it's on Canvas, and there are no standard scheduled zooms.

At 1st I was very annoyed that there was no zoom education, and all of the course was forum based. I like to "talk" to people, and I wanted more socialization. Overtime, I realized there were a few good reasons for this delivery method, AND GOT USED TO IT.

• efficiency
• cost savings
• avoid scheduling altogether
• Time zone less relevant
• all assignments and forums documented by text
• transparency as to all other student work

Despite this, there were a couple of notable drawbacks

• little or no real student collaboration or online community
• at times drastic variance in interpretation of the meaning or expectations of the assignments
• Dangerously hands off teaching style
• no videos, just text book and text modules on Canvas
• Very little student collaboration even on their official discord.

And this is just the delivery platform trend.

okay, now on to the actual course content. d

Text book was solid, the author seemed reputable, knowledgeable and up on tnhe atimes.

The assignments were mostly easyish for me, but remember, I grew up wit a bay area education, and UC Irvine for undergrad, so my research and critical thinking skills are superb, , not to mention I am Founder & CEO of Honor Games®, so I my problem solving skills must be top tier.
I'm not trying to put any of my classmates down or their backgrounds, but most of us are in school, to make a pivot. I however and pursuing this, to validate and formally recognize my path in life.

Anyways, enough about me, back to the course.

So,

The 1st fewe chapters of the book and assignments were about understanding qualitative and quantitative data. Furthermore we had a section on what a hypothisis a research question really was.

We had to define what research WAS NOT and why.

We had to figure out how to make sure research isn't biased

There was also a chapter on ethics.

All in all a solid introduction to research protocols

As I completed my final assignment, It was a research critique, asking to bring it all together.

And here is where my concern of asynchronous text only came into play.

The assignment asked to critique a published research article from a specific database.

my professor comment was "you didn't summarize the article"

and I suspect she intended to dock me points for that, yet no where in the final assignment description, did it say to do that.
I ended up still getting 100%, and I think she reviewed the prompt, and realized, it was just an assumption she had made, and how most people do the assignment, as we write to see our thoughts.
At the end of the day I actually forced her to read the article I chose, and I think that is what I made her realize.
Sure, profs are busy, and they want to get their job done as quick and painless as possible, I'm relatively certain she didn't read the full article of everyone, as that is just too dam time consuming. But I chose an article about 6 pages. And I think she had an epiphany.

I made her work, I made her "think" and in that, I think she liked me for doing that.

The last thing I did, which I don't think anyone else did, Is I chose a specific topic to focus on during the entire course.

Mental health an AI use.

This common thread served as a narrative progression throughout almost all of my submissions.

I'd say the only thing I was really surprised at, was there is a difference between a bibliography and reference section.

happy to AMA