That's kind of charming and fun! Does it have an end, or does it just keep going indefinitely?
Recent community posts
Sweet! Thank you! The vertical lines are off by about an eighth of an inch but it looks like the PDF is fine so I'm pretty sure my printer just isn't accurate in that direction, grr. It's still close enough to work.
Nicely done! I might suggest that you put a special character (or maybe a double-dash or something if the font doesn't have anything good) at the end of each multi-part dialogue so you know you've reached the end without having to loop back around to see if you get the first part again? But other than that it played very smoothly.
"if the first image is not loading for you" -- this seems to be a case-sensitivity error: if I use the browser's inspector tools to change it so it's asking for "Map.png" instead of "map.png" it works for me...
Hmm...yeah, we should put that in the description: it was a deliberate decision not to constrain the form that far. So often you'll get complete nonsense. If you make the second and fourth letters the same you'll get rhyming lines since they come from the same source poem.
Very fun! It would be cool to have a way to advance to the next level with the keyboard... Love the letter-based animations: I think the owl is my favorite, though it's a tough call between that, the apatasaurus, the elephant, and Saturn.
Thanks! I've sketched out story *ideas* off and on over the years, but usually they turn out to be just settings, not plots. I think this is the first piece of fiction I've actually *written* since I was a teenager, so the positive comments I've been getting are like, "Woah! Very cool. Wasn't expecting that..." :)
Yeah, arrow keys might be nice as alternate bindings when you have two people to play it so your hands aren't so close together. But I'd have to actually think about the code to allow multiple bindings for each control, so I'll get that later at some point. But I did change the left player to WASD, since that was trivial.
If things ever get less crazy and you get a chance to play against another person, do try it: some of the strategy ends up being interesting and kinda fun...like you tend to race to drop your piece, but it's often a disadvantage to get there first. And it's neat that you're actually interacting with the other player instead of just dumping junk on them like most two-player brick-stacking games.
Anyway. Thanks again for playing!
Ah, I always forget how ingrained WASD is for most people, growing up we were always like, "that's dumb, put it under the home keys, and then you have more things you can hit with your pinky" and reconfigured things. I could certainly change it. Should I move IJKL over too, or were those fine?
Yeah...I haven't really touched it in nearly two years, but after the Roguelike Celebration I'm thinking I should find time to make it into a bigger game. Map editor, more enemies, more interesting roguelikey interactions between things.
Re waiting: to some extent you have control over the game speed. If you want it to take less real-world time you can go "slowly" and hammer the space bar, or go "fast" and take fewer turns but more risk. In either case, it's useful (sometimes essential) to turn around ahead of time so you're already in position to stop. And the afterburner can help stop quickly too. You can only hold ten turns of afterburner fuel, but that's enough to save yourself a few times.
Re distance to the wall: yeah, I'm aware of that as a problem, but wasn't quite sure what to do about it. All the collision volumes are a circle that fills a full hex: the size of the shield circle. Except maybe the baby jellies? And this was the font size where the characters all fit, but of course they aren't round. Hmm...maybe an option that shows the circles for everything. All the walls are centered on their hexes, so you can use the background hexes as a guide, maybe?
Glad you had some fun with it!
I figured that one out: you have to get the yellow glowing enemies to zap the pillar, then it lights up and opens the door. But...then later I thought I was going to fight the skull king and the game teleported me to a gray area with a throne in the center and the walls didn't work; I could just walk off the edges in all directions, and no skull king showed up and the display was all glitchy when I did walk off the edge.
Did you actually try it? It's 100% designed around screencheating: your opponent's grid is rotated 90 degrees from yours, but the tiles are still drawn "upright', so it's much more disorienting than just rotating the view. There aren't very many landmarks, and you can zoom-in your display so your opponent doesn't have as much to go on. And of course your opponent is invisible on your screen: you can't see them even if they're right next to you. It seems like you'd be able to get good at it eventually, but I found it very tough to think about the map in two orientations at once.
On Itch, a game has to be created by one person, but if other contributors have Itch accounts and want it to show up on their individual pages, you can do that, though it's a little convoluted.
If the person who uploaded the game goes to the game's edit page, under "More" (from the tab list, after Analytics, Metadata, Interact) there's an Admins page where they can add other Itch.io users as admins.
Once you've done that, each admin can go to their profile (click on their avatar or username at the top right) and choose Edit Theme. At the bottom will be the list of games, and they can toggle Hidden off so it will show up on their profile page as a game that they created.
It would be tricky to fit the mechanical feel I had in mind into a historical setting, I think. It's fine, I don't need a game jam. It just seemed like it might be a good excuse to make this thing now.
'Cause I finished up with the GMTK jam yesterday, saw this jam's title and thought, "great! That's a perfect excuse to prototype the mental-calendar-math game I've had in the back of my head for several years." But it doesn't have anything to do with ancient history...
"Curly" was the second level we created and I think we were both still in that "heheh it's fun zooming around the curves" phase.
And the last one...yeah. It really needs two or three levels of tutorializing. There's just no good way to learn the techniques and yeah, it feels like random chance otherwise. And then going forward is so touchy that I still fail it at least half the time even knowing what to do. I thought about making the tail longer to slow it down a little, but we were near the end of the jam and I wasn't sure it would be a simple fix.
So yup. Typical game jam misjudging-the-difficulty stuff. Thanks for playing!
I keep starting to comment on this and then scrapping what I've written. I think I really wanted this to be a somewhat different game. The only two ideas that might actually fit your current game are:
I wished that the spacebar would auto-re-route the power the way W/A/D do for the engines.
And that there were much fewer (probably bigger) rocks and no fast-moving ones. With the wrapping, it doesn't take much (at least for me) to overwhelm my ability to keep track of where they will be next. My brother's fancy Asteroids clone starts with only three "rocks" and new players still usually die a lot. And the power re-routing delay means that you can't react quickly to anything, so you have to plan ahead even more than usual in an Asteroids game.
Nice concept, though! Just a little too hard for me in its current form.
Looks like most of what I'd suggest has already been said...and answered, but I'll repeat anyway:
- Visual and audio feedback as to when enemies are about to move (some people don't see as well, some don't hear as well, or play with sound off).
- Separate keys (or buttons) for each action and for pause would make it (I think) a lot easier to learn. Most platformers require you to learn a bunch of buttons: not so many that require you to use a menu in the midst of gameplay. And you have several levels that require you to jump twice in a row, but if you want to do that immediately from a pause it seems like you have to cycle all the way around?
- I didn't notice anyone else saying this, but I'd like 'R' to restart the level directly, rather than kill you and then you have to press it again to restart.
- It's a little weird that you can kind of use the jump ability multiple times, but I don't see that there's anything you can do about it: it enables a lot of good level design.
- Checkpoints might be nice, especially in that last level. Different people have different tolerances for how long they're willing to go without a checkpoint and some games demand that you go a ridiculously long time between checkpoints (especially boss fights: Hollow Knight and Cuphead, I'm looking at you). But this one pushes the limits of what I'm comfortable with and you could make it more fun for more people by allowing them to take it one piece at a time. And you can always turn some off in a higher difficulty mode or something.
But yeah, those are polish things: for a 48hr game this is excellent. Jam games are almost always too hard and a little unpolished.
I'm afraid that for me this falls into the category of "it isn't actually more fun with only one button". I kept getting off a little bit and then having to restart the level. Maybe with a quicker respawn time? (though the death animation was a lot of fun). Or checkpoints? A nice start, though. And the level design was well done.
Hmm. It seemed like in the fourth wave there were the green barrel-throwing guys over in the bottem right where it was hard to shoot them, and then I ran out of bullets because they were all over there.
And even in fullscreen, the game was fully surrounded by black and it still wouldn't fire if I clicked outside the game area? So fullscreen didn't make the mouse control better for me.
But yeah, clever concept, and nice art.
--Josh (part of teamwintergreen for the jam)
Yeah, what olinkalex said. I'll be curious to see the new build. Also I think it would be more tense if your torch just slowly got dimmer, rather than the blinking-out more and more frequently thing. It would be more like a battery dying. Ooh. Maybe you could even shut it off yourself and then when you turned it back on you'd have a little more power.
Yeah, it was mostly the last level of your game that was beyond my ability to track everything in my head. I was just about to break out the pencil and paper or give up when I finally figured out the strategy. The others were challenging but simple enough for me not to get too frustrated. But I also usually do pretty well at puzzle games. Maybe you could have an "easy" mode where you have a key to switch planes without actually moving. Or maybe you can do that, but it counts as a move so your score is worse?
As for Filament, yeah. Philippe did most of the level design, and he kept making levels that were fun for us but very difficult for new players. We have a farm, so Saturday and Sunday are usually work days for me and I didn't have anywhere near as much time as he did. I tried to make a few easier levels but mostly spent my time adding some bits of UI and visual feedback (things like the switching-between-levels code), which seemed more important at the time. Thanks for playing!
Huh. Either this was seriously buggy for me, or it's mostly unfinished? The mines seemed to teleport me around but not reset the boss's health so...does that count as actually dying? The game didn't end when the boss hit 0 health: it just kept counting negative. The "beam" was a really slow-moving ball that just stuck to the boss and didn't seem to do anything.
It took me way too long to realize that the boss was up in the air. "People never look up", heh. But that's on me. Though maybe there's some way to do a directional flash of light or something that would point to him?
And 1000 health just seemed like too much when you were only doing one damage at a time. Even when I cheesed it and got him just over the corner of a building so I could stand there and just hold the fire button, it took what felt like several minutes.
And...now that sounds hopelessly negative. I actually loved the concept,and even in this state it was surprisingly fun to play for a little while. I could see where you were going with it. It just seemed like you ran out of time to finish it, or maybe it's just broken on my computer.
Very cool. Much more original of a take on "a 1D slice of a 2D space" than our game.
I actually got stuck on the third level for a while since I didn't understand that the four-way arrows was referring to the arrow keys. And combined with the voiceover cue...I spent a while thinking that maybe there was an invisible gap in the line where I could go in a different direction with WASD, and then thought maybe I could pan around with the mouse (since that sort of shape usually means drag-to-move). I did eventually get it, but if they had been arranged like they are on a keyboard it would have been clearer for me (and maybe enclosed in rounded-rects to look like keys)?
It might also be a nice touch to reveal the whole level once you beat it? I feel like it would have helped me to be able to check my understanding of the shape against reality. It might give too much away, of course. But maybe for some of the early/tutorial levels?
Generally excellent design though!
--Josh (part of teamwintergreen/Filament for this jam)
Our game, Filament, is at 9 ratings.
One path through the level: crazy curved ones. I think the controls are solid and fun, and you have different max speeds forward/back so you get a different challenge going out than coming back. I'm sure some levels are too hard but you can scroll through with PageUp/PageDown or the gamepad bumpers, and I think we included a good variety of experimenting with different mechanics.
It's definitely not as cool of a take on the 1D vs. 2D idea as Tunnel View though. :)
Edit: There's also https://itch.io/jam/gmtk-2019/unrated which shows the games with the fewest ratings: there are currently a whole bunch of games with only two or three.