Skip to main content

Browse GamesGame JamsUpload GameDeveloper LogsCommunity
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines
Vost4 days ago (1 edit) (+1)

Well, thank you very much for taking the time to write such a nice comment. :)

I’m very glad you enjoyed the game, found it inclusive and thought it was well made!

For the typos/syntax errors, you’re totally right… We have already identified several. As you can imagine we were in a hurry to meet the deadline and we prioritized writing all the text options over checking them in details. Nonetheless, we are planning to release a more polished version once the evalution period is over. So if, by any chance, you’ve written down any specific typo, please feel free to share them with us, that would be a great help. :)

About your feeling regarding the anti-capitalist take: I am really sorry but I am not sure to fully understand what you mean (probably because I’m not a native english speaker). So allow me to rephrase:

  • From what I understand, you mean that the player is driven towards being anti-corporate and pushed away from the status quo, mainly because the characters embodying corporatism are not as engaging. That was indeed intended, which is of course debatable. What I am not sure to get is your opinion on the topic: do you think the corporate route should be more attractive? If so, why?
  • I am also not sure what you mean when you mention the jam context: do you think that the people involved in this jam are naturally shifting towards anti-corporatism mainly because of the topic which is (obviously) oriented? Implying that people not already familiar with anti-capitalism would not be able to break free from the status quo easily? This would contradict with what I mentioned before, that’s why I am bit confused.

Anyway, thank you again for your comment and sorry for the long post!

Reply
Brite Palette4 days ago(+4)

Good morning! It's dawn where I am. 

I'm glad you guys already have the typo fix handled. I didn't write any down but I wanted to make sure you were aware for the future (normally I do, but there were some that I wasn't sure if it was a matter of the character or just a simple mistake). I totally understand rushing - I've made several corrections to my own project despite trying to keep everything as neat as I could. 

To clarify the points you ask about: 

1. I don't feel as if the game should have a more attractive pro-capitalism figure. Someone more "cuddly" and empathetic. I think, though, that capitalism DOES have attractive spokepeople that reel new people in every day. Even our friends and people we trust will tell us, "Don't you want to make more money? Isn't this better?" and some of us, for better or worse, listen. That doesn't mean your game is responsible or needs to have those voices - it's not the story you're telling. Your story is where a company is doing some unethical practices...what do you do? If anything I think the game would benefit from a better endorsement at the very beginning of all the "great things" the company does, or says it does, for society so that as the player moves along they can see that that isn't true. Like when Google's motto was "Don't be Evil" and we all cheered...only to find out they really don't care about that. Be evil, whatever. It feels like from the beginning I'm already of the opinion that the company can't be good (cause Lee obviously feels like a jerk. Sorry! That's how I felt. Did not like him.) 

2. And that last part brings me to your other question. I just mean that the people playing it from this jam aren't the best measures for the story, and that includes me. I came to the jam wary of capitalism. Therefore I automatically view the company as bad no matter what. And your narrative caters to that expectation. So the discoveries aren't as impactful. For the average person not coming from this Jam they're likely more effective. Unless they are pro-capitalism, in which case they won't like your game at all (and who cares about them). But that offers a scale, if you were able to make make the company seem "good" from the beginning, you'd have even people from this jam questioning "Is this really anti-capitalist?!" until they get into it and go, "Oh!!! The company's brand is full of misdirection and lies". I hope that make sense. So you unless you really WANT, as a team, the shock of the company to be bigger you have to take feedback from the Jam with a grain of salt or less weight. As it is right now? It's fine. It was kind of me saying, "I'm a really biased player, so you have to take that into consideration as if this was a playtest scenario". 

Let me know if it's still confusing. 

Reply
Belillart4 days ago (5 edits) (+2)

What an interesting conversation! My reply will have heavy spoilers, so beware to curious people who may read all of this.

"If anything I think the game would benefit from a better endorsement at the very beginning of all the "great things" the company does, or says it does, for society so that as the player moves along they can see that that isn't true."

 I get your point and you are right. The reason is that our goal/focus was not to surprise the player by discovering that the company was shady, the intro shows already how full of bullshit Lee is, but to find out how shady it is, what is their goal really, and if you can do something about it. But I do think we should keep in mind your point while we work on refining our dialogues. I am sure we can improve the satisfaction feeling of the discoveries even while respecting our initial take. Some dialogues and/or paths are already locked depending on who you talk with, how you behave with them, and how you work on mission. It is supposed to be easier to miss the hints about how shady the company is if you ignore Bernard at coffee breaks, or if you never go back to previous islands. Bernard will never send you the ping where he asks you to join the revolution if you never went to a previous island -- we wanted to add that if you hadn't a minimum of positive interactions with him he wouldn't trust you enough to join him either (but we didn't have time to implement it).

I think we all agree that people from this jam are more likely to disobey orders from the company, we will need to do more playtests with different people to know how players behave and what they think. When we were doing playtests of the first version of the game, we were actually surprised to see a lot of testers during the first whole playthrough (1) were focused on doing their missions on time (2) didn't use all their coffees and/or didn't interact with Bernard, or briefly (3) were tempted to please Lee and ignored Bernard disappearance (4) never went back to a previous island.
(Not necessarily all the points at the same time but still) 

We didn't have time to do any playtests with anyone before the jam so you all are actually the first to play this version! It will likely be improved in the upcoming weeks/months thanks to your feedback and others :)!

Reply
Brite Palette4 days ago(+2)

I'm glad to hear you talk about Lee being full of bullshit. lol 

Very quickly I came to the conclusion that that guy was a total tool. I tried to have one coffee break with him and found him so insufferable that I never approached him again. It also made me MUCH more like to push harder when Bernard went missing. To my point about the jam coloring the experience, I did go back to previous islands and ignore the threat of the Siren effect because I didn't believe the corporation. Lee being disappointed that one time didn't matter - I didn't care about his opinion anyway. I offer that as playtest feedback. Also, I didn't mention that Bernard's route was very satisfying as someone who supported what he was all about. I only wished that Wendy could have escaped too (not that she ever stated she wanted to). 

I do hope others play and offer feedback. It's golden for any project. 

Reply
AboutFAQBlogContact us
Copyright © 2026 itch corp · Directory · Terms · Privacy · Cookies