Sorry, it's a bad game. And: I need game-testers to see it. Maybe you? I can change the game now. I should use less fields, or? and a better algorithm than that simple match-3-logic?
Viewing post in Blue Library jam comments
Well, I don't think it's inherently bad, just could use some improvements. If I were to say what I'd change in your position, I'd do the following:
- Remove the input delay from selecting tiles (this is probably the most important one in my opinion).
- Quick transition animation between the two slots (nothing super complicated, tween-ing between the two points would probably be fine)
- Some sort of effect when completing a match-3 set - getting a cool effect hits the dopamine receptors (or something like that).
- If for the fields part you just mean how many of the gems there are, using less would definitely help, but I don't think it solves the issue people are having.
- I think the match-3 gameplay is fine - it's a classic for a reason. You could consider using some power-ups from some of the well-known ones, but it might ruin the counts for each color.
- I haven't done the math or anything to prove it's possible, but something you should consider is that a player could create an unwinnable game state by isolating a few gems with no way to match-3 them.
Unfortunately, I'm going to be a bit too busy to commit to being anything like an official playtester, but I would be willing to check out future updates as they come available.
Good luck!