i think my first playthrough communicated the game's ideas as effectively as it needed, i played the game multiple times after just to make sure there wasn't any obvious grade component (a consequence for losing, a perfect run), but i wouldn't have done multiple runs unless i needed to be sure about some mechanics
the openings pretty good, i think the tv set up adds a lot in terms of screen recognition for whats going on in the game, and Maddie as a host is certainly charismatic enough. I kind of wanted a little more follow along with the tv game energy until the character starts disassociating and imagining the tv talking to them, but im fine leaving these ideas as the exposition of i'm bored. Maddie is written as someone who will very much thrust the protagonist into all the glory of a gameshow (and has some good lines), but the player character (pc) is a little underbaked for some of the other elements present (if ads are being transmogrified by perspective into commercial incantations for ominous but increasing-in-awareness needs then the pc should be a little more seasoned when it comes to the actual horrors of the game, if the ads/gameshow are a literal part of the world then the pc should have a more nuanced relationship with how predictable they are, i think this leaves us with the idea that the gameshow has been summoned to contract with the pc and breaks all conventions but it can get a little muddled with how the commercial breaks encourage an inundated unplayable state, they might be temptations for the pc to impulse by but then the pc should be a little more delighted by and try becoming a husk quicker), perhaps we could catch the tail end of a normal show to loop a little better?), i kinda want something inbetween ive had a peg leg body for years and the more abject alarm you were going for, but hitting abject alarm aint that bad either.
gonna go through the three games, then try and half interpret the commercials in a similar paragraph (im not 100% what the relation should be, im fine saying they "sell needs of the pc" or "will trick the pc", but how are they comments on the pc's game? are they a complete loss of control and structure, im not sure they worked for me but they kind of floated off even though i tried to shoot them down a little, a hair):
game#1-i was looking out for a sleight of hand by the second trick (especially when something as telegraphed as ARENT YOU SMART came onscreen), but i missed that the seven of hearts got replaced by 2 eight of hearts (i reloaded it like 5 times just looking for it) probably because i assumed the game would give me a little control, just a taste maybe. The fool is schlocky, but i think its perfect as a storytelling device (the game wants the player to be able to interpret the story of the pc, not necessarily wriggle out of the telling of their fate).
game#2-i think i got pretty hung up on the word code in the tutorial section, i ended up playing it like wordle and im not sure if the cards drawn have patterns or are randomized but this methodology worked great to get me through it (i spent more time than necessary trying to disentangle how you were presenting the game, but it is by far the funnest of the 3 and kind of the meat of the gameshow), its interesting how the tarot cards being introduced later give it a front half and back half, im not sure im equipped to describe the change/crossover in/of gameplay succinctly (for what is essentially the same game). i thought maybe the fortune uncovered at the end would be fixed (and could be wrinkled out) but it appears not, i kind of like it randomized honestly but it is an opportunity to make the game tell a more rigid story without compromising a ton.
game#3-i was nurturing what i thought was an okay run going into the third game (trash 20% monte, was feeling myself on the second one ngl), and when it hit the match the cards all life drained out of me and i played it out. it became apparent that it was either not easy to fail it or impossible so i relaxed a bit, but i do think that letting out of steam, the plummeting of tension and excitement, is pretty important to the shape of the game!
ad#1-screaming walls, might give more context to the restlessness going into this viewing (is the reason your watching your walls are screaming all night?), i kind of want more of a sense of space, either a screaming room, or wiping a screaming wall vs other competitors, but i think it moves in a good direction and your editing style is a space to be concerned with to (wouldnt make sense for me to interfere too much)
ad#2-screaming photo frame, i think there is something real here, especially the reasoning 'dont worry it wont actually harm your friends soul, just a clone of their soul, this is functionally the climax, and while i feel its a little confused (this product seems more good natured than the setting would imply) im not sure im against it. i get the desire for an eldritch horror game to simultaneously be something of a comfort game (i seen a lot of the slendy dude), i guess ill say that i think its trying to accomplish a lot of things and i dont think theres room for me to be judgmental about what the game wants, sometimes the game wants to do what the game wants to do.
ad#3-the endings a little abrupt, and i think it would make more sense if the gameshow ended then we got the final ads before the next show. keep your world eater is a lot more resonant if its the last line, though it will lose some of its humor. you also could roll into the next time slot, and play with where to cut it there. i imagine we're running into development constraints with this ending so it okay!
i think talking through it the game thematically is pretty impressive (both in and out of the jams rules), but it definitely could use some tricks to make me sit down shut up and just play it :-0...