Skip to main content

Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
(+1)

### DISCLAIMER ### Below are my 2 personal rules which I try to abide by when giving feedback. 1)  Always include what I appreciate about the game. 2) Only criticise when I have a suggestion on how to improve. Aleksandar is only a human, so he may violate them sometimes - please notify me and I'm going to correct myself immediately.

I believe in being very precise and in radical candor. Therefore my style of expression may be more direct, not using euphemisms or sugarcoating. Please remember that I put the effort into reviewing your game, my intention is to assist you, to contribute.

I would appreciate it if you could reciprocate by reviewing my submission and following similar rules. I don't expect it nor would I be disappointed if you don't. Feel free. 

########################

Thank you for this experience. It is ambitious that you target such a difficult topic. I get a sense that a lot of research has gone and a lot of effort was put into the design. The descriptions of the internal states are neutral and there are messages which give solace and hope. The result is an uplifting game - fantastic work!

The idea of the outcome modifying the starting state of the next run reinforces the idea of generations of people. Great design.

On the technical side of things, the representation of inner struggles with text only can only end up superficial. From my experience and when I've talked with people, when we make mistakes, when we do not self regulate our emotions, etc - it is often the result of failure: not because I made a bad choice but because I couldn't find or create the courage, the mental clarity etc that I needed to do better. When this effort is represented as a list of choices it is trivial to do the right thing. On the first playthrough I managed to get the Flourishing ending and it was easy. At best this may lead to breaking the immersion and at worst some people may interpret the game as being judgmental "Look how easy it is! How could you fail at this in real life?". 

Just to be clear - I'm not saying that the game should have been done in a different way. It's already designed and submitted - I'm not saying you should throw it away. It's great as it is. The message I'm trying to get across is that in the future if you would like to revisit this topic maybe you can try to represent it in a more technically complex way that is closer to the experience not just aesthetically but also - mechanically. A standard option to represent different experiences which are a smaller part of the overall game is to use mini games.

Good luck!

### LANGUAGE NOTES ### English is not Aleksandar's native language. Aleksandar has no formal experience as a teacher. I take notes while I play and I do notice small mistakes in language because for me they break the flow of reading. Therefore if you would like to have an outside opinion of your writing please read on. This practice is called proofreading / editing - even the best writers need it. #######################

"Your partner is sleeping next door." <== the phrase 'next door' actually refers to the front door of a separate building which is adjacent to this building. Maybe you meant to say that the two parents sleep in separate rooms, not separate houses?

(+1)

Hi Aleksandar,

thank you for the detailed feedback and for establishing your rules of radical candor. I highly appreciate structured, thoughtful critiques, and I will gladly take a look at your submission in return!

1) The Positives:

Thank you for the kind words regarding the research, the neutral tone, and the generational loop. It means a lot that the uplifting intention of the game resonated with you.

2) The Mechanics:

You touch upon a fascinating design challenge. You are completely right that in real life, failing to regulate isn't about choosing a bad option, but a failure of capacity—lacking the mental clarity or energy in that specific moment.

In this game, that "capacity" is represented by the Battery and Pulse variables. Because you played very efficiently and reached the Flourishing ending, you likely missed the core "fail-state" mechanic: If your Battery drains too low or your Pulse spikes too high, the empathetic options actually lock and become unclickable (greyed out). The game physically removes your ability to "do the right thing," simulating that exact loss of capacity you described. It only feels easy if you manage your resources perfectly!

That being said, I really appreciate your suggestion of using mini-games in future projects to make that internal struggle even more visceral and mechanically complex. It’s a great idea.

3) Language Note:

Thank you for the proofreading! Just as a quick language note in return: while "next door" definitely refers to adjacent houses, in everyday conversational English it is also widely used to mean "the adjacent room" within the same house (short for "the room next door"). But I appreciate the keen eye.

Thanks again for your time, your effort, and the great review.

(+1)

I'm glad to contribute in any way. You're welcome.

Ah, I didn't know it also means the next room - note taken.

At the time I left the review I played the game twice - first time was intuitive (reached the Flourishing ending) and the second time was intentionally all the bad choices. I am aware that the choices are locked out + the cool visual effects. 

Nonetheless, the representation of the capacity remains mechanically superficial. I look forward to find out how you evolve it for your newer projects.

Kind regards