very scary intro, was too frightened to continue playing
Play game
Sennestin [Gamejam demo]'s itch.io pageResults
| Criteria | Rank | Score* | Raw Score |
| Playability | #1 | 5.000 | 5.000 |
| Cleverness | #1 | 5.000 | 5.000 |
| Artistic Style | #1 | 5.000 | 5.000 |
| Theme | #233 | 4.000 | 4.000 |
Ranked from 1 rating. Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam.
Judge feedback
Judge feedback is anonymous.
- Cleaver way to include the theme. Great puzzles having in mind that your mistakes have a cost. Just a few tips, game would really benefit form a tutorial or explanation on how mechanics works, as well as needs a bit of balancing the difficulty of a puzzles should increase a bit slower. Over all game is cool! Really great job!
Did you include your Game Design Document as a Google Drive link?
Yes
Seriously... did you include your Game Design Document?
Yes
Is your game set to Public so we can see it?
Yes
Tell us about your game!
Sennestin is a challenging sokoban style puzzle game that combines real time action gameplay. It was made in 10 days. The game is quite long and hard so i've left a video guide in the description on the game page. There is a lot to the game past the initial puzzles
Extra Notes
GDD link- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PbhldY6q_pijRx5jb5Wo-tsZ9cl74aqOjYM74i7SPCE
Comments
Spent the last day completing the entire game without using the guide (apart from one specific level where I needed a hint because the level design was poor imo), which took a few hours to complete as some levels were pretty difficult. Proof of completion:
Starting things off, overall a really well designed puzzle game with very interesting mechanics, good consistent art style, and music that allows you to think and I did not notice any bugs in my play-through. I like that the puzzles were actually intertwined into the story as if I was actually adventuring around this world, instead of just going from a level to another level with no real connection. The levels also had a duality to them, being able to be solved backwards which I really liked.
However, there were minor quality of life issues and some discrepancies in the game and level design which can make the game feel more frustrating.
Issues:
- I know the real time action is a major part of this game, but it does not mesh well for a "push the box" kind of game. The reason I feel this way is because pushing a box forces the character into a standstill even just for a moment. This can make you die to those emitters that an enforcing the opposite, that is quick movement. This is just a fundamental clash between two core mechanics in the game that have made puzzles feel frustrating. A puzzle game should feel frustrating but the player should feel it was because they made a mistake. Even though it is clearly the player's mistake for pushing a box infront of an emitter, it feels like the game is being unfair to you by forcing you to stay still for that fraction of a second while you're pushing something.
- The level design is good overall, but the progression in difficulty and introduction of new mechanics could be much better. I remember one of the levels suddenly introduced a bunch of emitters and I was rather overwhelmed at first. This can be easily solved by having levels which focus specifically on one mechanic. I always compare to Portal 2 because that game has amazing puzzle design. In Portal 2, each chapter introduces a new mechanic at the start usually but the first level in each chapter does not utilise the main mechanics of the previous chapters but focuses purely on the new one, aside from the very last chapters, of course the core mechanic of portals is always there. Similarly, your core mechanic is pushing boxes yes, but there were side mechanics which were not properly introduced. For example, just on the second level, you introduced the button to unlock the door and hieroglyphics which have *TWO* effects (walking over them activates them, and activated ones kill you) all at once! You should make the assumption the player knows literally nothing about your game (which they don't) and introduce things one at a time and slowly so they can master that mechanic because moving onto difficult levels.
- QoL - When you restart or die there's a screen wipe effect, which although looks nice, increases friction for the player. Every time I die or restart I have to wait just that much longer instead of just immediately being able to retry the level. Over time this can get really frustrating especially on those levels where the shadow is following you and you accidentally go backwards and die.
- QoL - This is very personal for me but after reading a note for the first time, the second time there should be a little reminder/warning message asking "Do you want to read this letter again?". There have been times where I accidentally click the interact button twice at the end of a note and it starts the entire dialogue again, I try to skip it quickly and the same thing happens again >:(
In summary, very good fun game with nice polish, just needs some work on game and level design and quality of life features.
Thanks for the lengthy feedback, I'll try to share some of my thoughts on the issues you brought up.
The clash: The delay when pushing boxes was an intentional decision and it was not only to give the player weight to their actions, but also as a tool to create puzzles. The emitters (or sentries as i will call them from now on) do not exist purely as an obstacle to be avoided or dodged. They are there to be interacted with and are a part of the puzzle themselves. Making them exist completely within their own bubble as to not disrupt you when you're trying to solve a puzzle would completely undermine their point. They are supposed to exert pressure on the player while solving regular puzzles, and it's something i wanted to achieve with the game from the start. The question these sentries pose should not always be "Am I fast enough to react to them accordingly?" but also "Will i have the opportunity to react accordingly?". They require more than pure reactionary gameplay but also planning through interacting with other puzzle elements (such as pushing boxes). Though not every single room will require that of the player, as some rooms are purely about dodging while some rooms are more about solving a puzzle, but I tried to get a mix of both while making the levels. There might not be enough of the game yet to solidify this concept and get used to this sort of relationship as a player, but I believe with more mechanics and different adjustments, the path to getting familiar with it could be a lot smoother.
The progression: I agree, more rooms to introduce certain mechanics and play around with them more would be great, but unfortunately, game jams just end up being like that where you never get to do fully what you wanted (btw this game had no testing outside of me done up until the last 4 hours before the deadline lol). Every single mechanic did have at least one room where it gets taught to the player but I did plan to make more than just one. As for the example with the button and traps, I agree I could've done one more room right before it with just a simpler version with only traps, though i do not think it is a major problem, since while the level may look intimidating, it is rather easy in execution and the mechanics of each trap would be rather quickly understood by the player. I understand the sentiment that you should assume your player knows nothing about your game, but this game was made in mind with a very specific audience in mind, as well as the difficulty (especially in the later rooms) sets some minimum expectations that I kept in mind while designing those early levels. Also to talk, a little about THAT room that you had trouble with. I agree, I should've made a room right before it that played around with those mechanics in a bit more clear way. But i have to mention that every single mechanic that room expects of you, the game did teach in an earlier room. For example, there was a room where the only way to progress was to block out a stream of bullets from a green sentry just enough as to make a bubble of space further down the stream to walk down it and have enough time to cycle through your elements. That was one of the lessons that one room used, and the other one was simply weaving through openings in the bullet streams, which is a mechanic present throughout the entire game. The trickiest part of it was going through multiple streams of bullets and switching elements while doing so which i admit, I could've introduced in a room before, a little bit better.
The death screen: This one is a bit strange as this is the first time I've heard someone actually complain about the death screen. The death screen, in my opinion, is very quick and seamless and puts you right back at the start of the room. When you die, the thing that killed you also gets highlighted on the death screen, as to let you know what killed you, so next time you can be more aware of it. This is the first time someone thought it was too slow or annoying, as most people specifically commented on it being very satisfying and "fun to die", so I'm not sure as to what to make of this (btw if you spam z you can speed it up).
The text: I agree. These text options were unironically extremely hard to work with, and we didn't think putting more effort into them was worth it, as reading text didn't comprise that much of the game.
I forgot to mention, why is the switching between elements so slow? I found it pretty frustrating having to take so long to cycle between the elements. Another thing I noticed a lot is you can't switch element and move simultaneously, this might be intended and part of the test for the puzzle but it was frustrating most of the time.
Yes, when switching between elements the delay is on purpose, it is quite important for a lot of the puzzle design. Once again it's the case of it not always being "Can I react to something in time?" but "Will i have the opportunity to react something in time" and is part of the puzzle itself and not purely a reactionary mechanic. Also, you are able to switch elements and move at the same time, so I'm not sure what you are talking about.
Ya I got it mixed up with the delay in the switching. I think the switching delay just increases friction for the player and it's not obvious in the game that the delay is there on purpose. I've been thinking and I think the reason why I as the player don't get that feeling of "will I have the opportunity to react to something in time" is because I see projectiles, and only projectiles that I know can hurt me. Perhaps there needs to be an indicator like a cooldown timer on the turrets alongside a cooldown timer on the player for their element switching with the same design, so I can make the connection that the timing has to be done carefully for specific turrets. I for one didn't really differentiate the "slow attacking turrets you can walk through" from the "fast attack turrets that are effectively lasers", perhaps they should have a completely different design. In Portal, there's those emitters that shot balls which are slow and you know you can dodge them, and lasers which block a line of path which you obviously don't want to attempt to dodge.
Anyways Im just throwing ideas at this point, I just sensed that lack of clarity as I played more.
A cooldown on turrets would not make much sense as you can just look at the turrets when you first enter the room, you can see how fast each is shooting and how fast the bullets are, they are all very predictable, so a timer on that would be completely redundant and just be unnecessary clutter, how do you imagine all those UI elements would look when there would be multiple turrets next to one another. I don't really understand your point about being able to only see bullets that are about to hit you i'm assuming? All the turrets shoot in the exact same pattern that they start at and they can only go in a straight line. Similar to when you walk into a room you look at all the elements of a puzzle the same way you can look at all the lines of fire and their properties. It is up to the player to discover their own limits of what they can do with the tools they were given, with the level design giving opportunites for the player to do so. As for the delay in switching, when the player first gets the Philosopher's stone, they're immediately faced with a green turret that they have to get past using the stone. It was a green turret on purpose, as it being green forces the player to cycle through the elements at least twice and discover that there is a delay when switching. Same with the room afterwards there are green floor traps where the player has a chance to make that connection again. The same way there is weight and delay to pushing blocks, the Philosopher's stone shares that same property and is not unprecedented. I don't think it's a great idea to design mechanics around the player immediately doubting the way they are being used. All of the puzzles are designed around the delay and are completable as such, so i don't think there is much I can do about a player coming to a conclusion that something is an oversight before trying to think of ways that it might be intended. If there was no delay, I'd argue it would have much bigger consequences on clarity, as a player who sees that they can at any moment protect themselves from any element, might try to brute force puzzles that had more moving parts than using purely reactionary gameplay.
Thanks for the feedback. The delay between switching elements is intentional as it gives room to design puzzles around it. There was an idea for an upgrade to it that the player would get later on where the delay would be reduced and the player would be able to switch freely between all elements but we didn't end up doing it.
Thanks for your feedback. As for the early levels, it would be hard to make them easier without defeating their purpose. They teach the player important lessons that will be required to solve the much harder puzzles later. All the puzzles before the first item you obtain are still very doable by someone who isn't very good at this type of game. Though the later ones are definitely aimed at more "hardcore" sokoban players. As for the music i'm not sure what you mean, there is music, if you think it's very simple and not attention grabbing, that was the point as we wanted the focus to lie on the puzzles more. Though there is a second track in the later part of the game that is much better and i think you'd like.
Leave a comment
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.