The Psychology of Color in Game Design & Development (Udemy.com)

Some specific examples for the variations would be nice (not necessarily from games).

very useful and insightful. simple introduction to colors. taking heaps of notes and timed revision would help. relevant examples would drive the concepts deep.

It was really interesting going through this course and getting a better understanding about colour in general. It will definitely be part of my daily workflow.

I enjoyed the class

Good course to learn color theory and Psychology.

Esta sendo importante para processo de criao dos meus designes...

Clarity of explanations

While this course has lots of important starting points, it's far from comprehensive. Many of the concepts are described vaguely and little information is expanded on that isn't on the slide.
The linked articles are very useful. It's a good starting point

I was excited to take this course. I have a degree in video game art and design and have been working on games and interactive simulations (including VR and AR) professionally for over a decade and color and lighting are a particular specialty of mine. Color theory was my favorite class in college so I was excited to take this course as a refresher and learn new ideas and concepts. I don't want to be mean or attack anyone, but this instructor doesn't have an accurate understanding of color and I truly doubt he has any training outside of internet research. The fundamentals of color schemes that he teaches are fine and I am willing to cut some slack in a lot of areas because color is subjective (colors mean things in different cultures and contexts; something that really should have been discussed in this class honestly) but this course is full of false assumptions and a lot of it is flat out wrong and inaccurate.
As one example, the instructor has an entire lesson that falsely states that warm colors are specific to reds, oranges, yellows, etc, and cool colors are blue green, etc. This is absolutely wrong as well as his statements regarding mixing warm and cool colors (he actually breaks his own rules in his examples even). All colors can be warm or cool. A green granny smith apple for example is a warm green because it has a bias toward a warm yellow whereas a mint green that biases toward blue. Red, blue, yellow...all of these colors can be warm or cool. Colors are not definitely warm or cool on their own merit. This is kind of a beginner's trap and a misnomer that is common among those self-educated on the internet as there are websites that perpetuate this myth, but it is very untrue. I'm not nitpicking over on thing here. All throughout the entire course I found myself raising my eyebrows at the wild assumptions he's making as definitive statements. Some are just bizarre, such as a "red shirt" would indicate a character bleeding. Maybe he misspoke, but if you wanted to indicate a character bleeding, the last thing you would want to do is put them in a red shirt if you wanted to make that clear. Also statements like blue indicating the color of religion...well that's a stretch . Which religion exactly? You'll find the colors that mean something here mean something very different in Japan for example (in some cultures they wear white to funerals). A good example is the Indiana Jones ride at Disneyland in California versus in Tokyo. In California the central room uses heavy red and oranges to indicate danger and doom by portraying a "hellfire" type of scenario, however this was changed to cool blues and greens in Tokyo because those are the colors that indicate danger in Japan. I feel like if he was trained he would not only know this, but also pronounce the words correctly. He obviously only read these words because he says MANY MANY MANY words wrong. Cyan is pronounce ("Sy-anne) not ("Kai-anne") and Azure is ("Az-yer") NOT ("Az-ure-ee") as he says it.
I don't want to be mean, but I don't thinking this instructor has done anything beyond Wikipedia and web research on the subject and regurgitated it very incorrectly. Not all of it is bad. His lessons on the color schemes are decent enough and he does touch on some ideas that are correct, but there are too many amateur assumptions for me to be comfortable letting slide from a PAID course where people are expecting the instructor to know the subject, and this instructor clearly doesn't know it well. Perhaps I am wrong and he HAS had formal training, but if that's the case I am even more disappointed. He only briefly mentions primary and secondary colors, or tinting versus shading, or additive versus subtractive light, and while he does mention them, any color theory class will emphasize these concepts heavily as they are very fundamental and important. Imagine if a surgeon was given a license to practice surgery but in school they only briefly touched on anatomy. Also imagine if that surgeon pronounced his medical terminology wrong and couldn't differentiate between "prognosis" and "diagnosis", and I doubt you'd be comfortable letting him perform surgery on you. I'm really dissapointed here. The fundamentals are pushed aside in favor of a lot of biased opinions on color - Blue means calm. Yellow means happy. Do they though? This is about color theory and psychology in games, so where are the lessons on things like creating mood boards for environments? Examples of how color can lead the player with breadcrumbs to certain areas (granted, he touches on this a tiny bit with a New Super Mario Bros screenshot, but this is too important of a concept to just "touch upon").
Some of his declarations are almost baffling. Cool colors indicate technology? Really? So the LCARS interface on Star Trek's heavy use of gold and red and warm purple means what then? Perhaps maybe he just drew a false conclusion and stated this as fact? This might also be rectified if he understood the colors like green can also be warm (such as in The Matrix movies) and frankly most of this lesson no longer holds up. I have to be honest, I almost stopped watching when he made the statement that cyber-punk had to only use a color palette of neon purple, pink, teal, blue and dark blue. This is probably the most ridiculous and untrue thing he said in the entire course. He could not be more wrong about that as there are some of the most obvious examples on pop culture that negate that statement right away. I don't feel anyone who had a formal education or training on the subject would make such a blatantly and egregiously false statement like that.
Bottom line, I don't feel this instructor is qualified to talk about color or color theory. He really needs to spend less time getting ideas from Wikipedia and random websites and study with book like Dynasty of Light by Alan Burner (of whom I studied under one of his protege's). I really hate that I sound mean or bitter here, but I don't think its right that people are paying for this course and the instructor is so obviously ill educated and unqualified to discuss the subject. People trust these instructors and take them at their word and don't always know when an instructor is selling bad info. In this case, I have studied under true professionals in this field and I feel I am in a position to say that students should really stay away from this course, as they will not receive the accurate training they are signing up for.

Nice course mate!

The instructor is mostly just reading the slides.
The complete course is just a presentation.
I would have liked if the instructor could have created a painting or a 3D/2D scene & thinking aloud to make us understand how to use color in the process of creating art.

Good