I have my students play almost exactly this game at the start of a course in College Geometry, through GeoGebra. Of course, it lacks the video game style interface you're describing (and which, I agree, would be awesome), so I would be excited to see something like this polished up nicely.
I'll tell you briefly what I do in class and a little about how you could spice it up. Be sure to sign me up as a $\beta$ tester!
First, GeoGebra is heavily customizable in terms of what tools are available. So on the first day of class I have them open a blank GeoGebra worksheet where the only tools are available are the minimal compass and straight-edge constructions: Create a point, connect two points through a line, and draw a circle given its center and a second point. The next very handy point of GeoGebra is that you can make tools (or, "unlock abilities") which allow you to write macros to accomplish repetitive tasks. For example, students quickly tire of manually bisecting each line segment and are motivated to construct a tool that can do it more quickly. Incidentally, the challenge that students are trying to accomplish is to develop a set of tools that minimizes the number of mouse clicks they need to use to accomplish a series of geometric constructions. Hartshorne's Geometry is a good source for such problems, including some rather challenging ones (boss battles?)
This typically goes over really well, but I agree that for the casual audience we'd like to jazz it up some more. Okay, so how do you jazz it up? Well, the third great feature of GeoGebra you can exploit is its ability to embed itself in HTML, and in particular interface with javascript code. The things I do by hand for the class (pre-ordaining a set of tools) can be implemented as HTML/javascript buttons outside of the main geogebra panel. So as your picture suggests, you could, for example, give a player a scrollable inventory of clickable tools (Daggerfall in particular is entering my visual consciousness at the moment) for use in their constructions. This also embeds the entire game in a more robust and convenient programming framework, as keeping track of a bunch of counters and complicated global structure is somewhat non-intuitive using GeoGebraScript.
I'd love to answer this question because I come from a very similar situation. I didn't like school and never really put the effort into it. I even failed maths in my final exams. I got interested in it 2 years after school, learned at my own pace, started a math bachelor and am just writing my bachelor thesis in mathematics. So you can certainly go from 0 to 100 if you're passionate about it.
But first things first: Welcome to MSE! This is actually a great place to start, because reading posts you're interested in can give you a good idea as of how things work. And you can ask questions yourself when you're stuck! If you do ask them well (see FAQ's to know what's expected) you will almost always receive an answer.
One of the comments suggested that you should get a math prof at your institution to take you under their wings. If you want to pursue mathematics seriously, and have some previous knowledge from you CS course, that's a great idea. But as CS programs can, in my experience, range from very mathy to not at all, you might not be there yet. This is a great tip anyways because maybe you find someone that's just willing to help and answer question. Doesn't have to be a prof, some doctoral students, postdocs or even undergrads will be fine. Getting to know people that do math as well is important anyways, more on this later below.
Ask yourself how confident you are with basic mathematics. Did you have trouble in your math courses at uni, or was it easy? If you find that university mathematics is hard for you, khanacademy.org (it's a non-profit and for free) is a great place to start. I brushed up all of my basic math skills there. You can find out what's missing by taking tests and then follow their programs to fill the gaps. Khanacademy was really motivating for me because I felt like I could go at my pace and it's slightly gamified (you get points and badges for solving exercises/ watching videos/ reading texts), which I personally find very motivating. The kind of maths you learn there is not strictly necessary for pure maths, but I find it helps if you're very confident in working with formulas and knowing the basic concepts on highschool level. But keep in mind: It's not strictly necessary, so if you don't want to, you don't have to learn this high-school math and what Americans call calculus.
Now, if you are interested in (and ready for) more university-like pure mathematics there are two things you can do:
Firstly, look at different textbooks. I recommend two pure math textbooks: one on (linear) algebra and one on real analysis. If that's your cup of tea, maybe there are nice books on discrete mathematics for beginners. You should certainly try different books before you settle for one - maybe you have access to some through your university library. Do as many exercises as you can! It is important that you use math books that are made for mathematicians because the hardest (and most rewarding by far) thing is learning how to proof stuff. You can only learn this by a) looking at a lot of proofs and b) doing a lot of proofs. Textbooks for mathematicians provide ample opportunities for both. Make sure you understand most of the proofs that you read. Get used that it might take you hours to read a single page! It's no failure if you have to put a problem, or a passage, aside for now and come back to it days, weeks or months later.
There are book lists online, so I'm not recommending anything here. If you are interested in number theory specifically, though, you might want to ask another question which introductory textbooks are extra nice for that. For Algebra, Bosch's book is great for people with an interest in number theory, but maybe a little bit too advanced (depending on your background).
Secondly, your university probably offers a math program and you should certainly check their lectures out. This is important not only for the lectures (where you can ask questions), but also for the collaberation with others. Studying math together is really nice and actually (for most people) crucial to medium and long term success. Talking about the problems and concepts is invaluable.
One last option: There are a lot of great books that are written for a wider audience and treat mathematical topics. So, if you don't want to learn all the basics first (linear algebra, algebra, real analysis), then you might just enjoy reading a few of these.
Best Answer
As you know, 0.4 and 2/5 are the same, so the plots should (apart from the vertical shift by 1) be identical. The cause of the discrepancy is due to the way the calculator was programmed, so without looking under the hood I can't say for sure, but I have a guess:
When you type $x^{2/5}$, GeoGebra probably recognizes the 2 as an integer in the fraction, whereas when you put in $x^{0.4}$ it's probably treated as a floating-point number (a different way for a computer to store numerical values using something like scientific notation), so in the latter case, GeoGebra doesn't "realize" that the $x^{0.4}$ will always be positive.
Does that help? P.S. You were on the right track with the idea about evenness; a full answer as to what happens as the exponent varies continuously would require complex numbers.
EDIT: Unfortunately, I don't remember ever seeing any (3Blue1Brown is outstanding at such explanations, though), but I can give a try.
We think of real numbers as being on a line - right is positive and left is negative. Complex numbers are what we get if we think of numbers on a plane - right is still positive and left is still negative, but now we also have numbers extending up and down. This is the complex plane; it's just the x-y plane but we've identified the y-axis with the "imaginary part" of the number, so we can still think about it geometrically. Now, what happens to a number when we exponentiate it?
Two things happen - the distance of the number from the origin changes, and the number rotates. We're specifically interested in the rotation part. The argument of a complex number $z$ is the angle between the line from $0$ to $z$ and the posite part of the x-axis; let's call this argument $\theta$. When $z$ is raised to the power $r$, the angle of $z^r$ is $r\theta$ - the angle is rotated by the number in the exponent.
Now, what happens when we consider specifically numbers on the real line? Positive numbers are on the positive real line so the angle is $0$, and of course $r\times 0=0$ so they stay as positive numbers. Negative numbers, however, are on the opposite side - their angle or argument is 180°. If you multiply 180° by an even number, for example, you get a multiple of 360°, so you're back on the positive side or the real line. That's what we're used to - negative numbers to even powers give us positive numbers.
A fractional exponent means you're not rotating by a whole number multiple of 180°, which means you could end up somewhere that's no longer on the real line - that's how you can get into complex numbers with exponents. In fact, the imaginary unit $i$ is what we get by taking $\sqrt(-1)$, or halving the angle with the positive real axis, so we go from 180° to 90° - directly above 0, not to the left or right at all; in other words, the number $i$ which is 90° off the real axis has no real part.
There are more details involving roots being multivalued - for instance, both $1$ and $-1$ square to one, so you could say that both are the square root of 1 - but I won't get into those details here.
Also, the definition of an irrational exponent is essentially just as a limiting case of rational exponents - this question answers it.