itch.io

Thanks for the in-depth response. I'll certainly have to keep this in mind with future game jams and if I work on this game post-jam. I did want to go over some of what you said and respond to it directly.

The first thing that comes to mind is definitely Rhythm Doctor's moving windows stage.

I actually haven't played Rhythm Doctor yet, but I did watch a video of that stage, and it's on my list of games to play. In retrospect, I think the idea for this game was largely inspired by Outcore: Desktop Adventure, but that's more reminiscent of desktop buddies and is more of an action-platformer than a puzzle-platformer. (I do very much recommend Outcore, though. It's a great and, shockingly, free game).

Transparency didn't work for me (Meaning black squares behind every PNG)

I did have a note about this on the game page, since a playtester did run into this issue, but we got the cause wrong, and I removed it when it was shown not to be the cause. I have since added a new note to the game page based on the information you provided (thanks). I included some workarounds, but I don't expect you to replay the game for that or anything.

Ended up doing a jump while moving the window to avoid the second obstacle, cheesing it. I thought that was the intended way of solving it - the box being a red herring.

Congratulations: you figured out the speedrunning route. I had thought of that about that when I made the level, but decided it was more interesting to leave it in for experienced player than to try and prevent it. I thought it was unlikely that anybody would think it's the intended solution, but clearly I shouldn't have made assumptions. Most of the other levels also have less obvious solutions that are slightly faster, which is partly why we included an in-game timer to try and encourage the kinds of people who would seek that sort of thing out.

The game introduces multiple mechanics in a single level...

Ok, the context of what happened here is that it was both a side-effect of the development process, and an attempt at something that maybe didn't convey very well.

What's important to keep in mind is that the levels were created in the order that they occur in the game. The first level was designed by me before I even started coding anything. The test I made of the concept was just the box falling out of the window. As I said in another comment, the idea was this was meant as an iteration of a basic puzzle structure that's in a number of puzzle games. The example that comes to mind for me is Portal 2, where there are a number of levels that require you to do something to lower a platform, stand on the platform, then use portals to do something to get the platform to rise.

The second level was one that I made (had to double-check my chat log to remember who designed that one) very quickly after making the first level. I also described it as a tutorial level, and hadn't entirely decided what I was going to do with it. More importantly, I kinda ran out of ideas with that one, and asked Mypetblackie to come up with some level concepts.

She ended up sending a few different level concepts, but a lot of her ideas involved adding even more game mechanics (eg. one suggestion involved canons you could launch yourself out of). I was quickly growing concerned about running out of time with the game jam. Implementing more objects with unique behaviors would take increasingly more development time (keep in mind that the game mechanic where things off-screen stop existing causes everything to become more complicated to implement), and I was worried we were headed in a direction where each level introduced its own mechanic that would take significant time to implement. I challenged Mypetblackie to design levels with the mechanics we already had. The result of that were levels 3 and 4, which notably didn't make use of a lot of the mechanics of the first level.

When considering the levels, and how I might have re-ordered them, I still don't think the first level would work in the game as anything other than the first level. I still see that first level as a subversion of expectations: the first level looks like a fairly traditional puzzle level until you figure out the twist, and then the subsequent levels build on the twist (level 2 adds multiple windows, level 3 adds falling down into a new area, and level 4 adds non-resizable windows). It's clear from the feedback that the first level has issues with conveying the twist, but I think moving it later into the level would have been worse. That "unintended solution" you found is much more obvious once you have a better grasp of the game mechanics. I think that was a big limitation in bringing those mechanics back in later levels; it's not really feasible to make puzzles around togglable walls when you can just jump over / around / through them. Perhaps ditching that first level I made and making a new introductory level would have been a good idea, but I only realize that in hindsight.

It could use work from a design perspective, but that's alright for a jam, as I do not expect a polished AAA quality game within 3 days. :)

When I first came up with the idea, I was uncertain about pursuing it. I didn't have experience designing puzzle games, and I was very much worried about coming up with enough interesting levels in the time limit. I do think it mostly worked out in the end, and I'm happy with what we made, but I also understand that my inexperience with the genre certainly had an effect on the end result.

Thank you again for your feedback.

This looks like a really interesting game, and I would have loved to play it. It's a shame you had the build issues. You might be able to upload a new build during the jam (Get Out Of This World uploaded an update like a day ago), but I also understand if you can't or just don't want to. I look forward to trying out the working build whenever it's available.

I was a big fan of your game last year, and I really enjoyed this game as well. There were a few parts of the story writing I feel like could have been improved a little, but nothing stand-out major. I also got a few good laughs, mostly from the visuals, which was great. I liked that not only did this follow a fairly literal interpretation of the theme, but it seemed to also follow the theme figuratively. The serious parts of the story were great as well. I loved the slow realization of what this planet was (though I had first assumed it was just a private game-hunting planet), and I think it was well paced. I noticed the "to be continued...", and I don't know if you're actually planning on continuing this post-jam, but I would be excited to see more of this story. I will say, though, that I felt like the flashback at the end was superfluous, and I think the story would have flowed better without it.

... quack

As I started playing this game, I was really liking it. The art style is really nice, reminding me quite a bit of the Pico-8, and the puzzle mechanic was really clever. I was rather disappointed, then, that I ended the game feeling really frustrated.

I think there were a few things that added up my frustration, but they all seemed to center around the character controller. I was wondering at the start of the game whether it was using a pre-made character controller. It's not that there's anything inherently wrong with that, just that it felt kinda out-of-place for this kind of game. The jump arc felt kinda strange, and having the jump height tied strongly to holding the jump button feels like the wrong choice for this kind of puzzle platformer. 

Having the physics for the two playable entities seems fine on paper, but was a real issue for me in practice. Having the spirit have much more momentum meant that I was constantly over-jumping when I was the spirit, then under-jumping when I wasn't because I was trying to compensate for a momentum that suddenly stopped existing.

This was exasperated for me by the rounded corners. I'm not 100% certain if it's the platforms or the character that has the rounded corners, but in either case, it was a huge determent to me. I found myself slipping off of platforms way more than I should have because of them. If you're going to round the corners like that, then the rounding should be significantly smaller, in my opinion.

I'm not sure if the direction the spirit goes when ejected is RNG or just based on something non-obvious, but I found it really obnoxious. There were quite a few times where an unlucky ejection angle caused me to instantly die. This was most prevalent in the last level, where it seems like ejecting from that starting platform seemed to instantly kill me like 30% of the time (and trying to jump off that platform not as a spirit killed me much more often).

Speaking of ejecting the spirit, I found it would randomly not work for me. At first, I thought it was some sort of cooldown that the game just wasn't telling me about, and I was getting annoyed at that. Eventually I figured out that there's some sort of bug in the character controller, because it happened whenever the character's walk animation broke. Jumping seemed to fix the issue whenever it happened, but until I eventually figured that out, this was a real annoyance (especially without an easy way to just restart the level).

Lastly, I found that (at least at first), I had a real hard time seeing the insta-death ... vines? flowers? ...  the purple stuff. I found they blended in more than I think they should. I'm not sure if this was because I'm colorblind (in which case it's an accessibility issue), or if it blends in like that for everyone. Either way, some more contrast would have been nice there, but once I learned where they all were, it wasn't an issue on replaying the game.

Overall, I really wanted to love this game. I think this could have been one of my favorite games of the jam. However, these technical issues I had made me not like it as much. I still think it's one of the better games this jam, but I feel like it could have easily been better.

A shoot to jump game? What is this, the GMTK Game Jam?

Joking aside, this was a neat, albeit rather short game. The ability to move while in the air is nice, though makes the game a lot easier. Perhaps forcing players to commit to an arc when jumping would make for a more engaging experience? I'm also not a fan of how the in-air controls work. There seems to be some momentum when starting the acceleration, but you can change directions instantaneously, which is a confusing combination. There also seems to be some bugginess when spamming the fire button, so maybe not letting the player start charging until the character stands up might have been a good idea.

This was a really fun game. It took me a few attempts to understand what I was doing well enough to beat it, but I did eventually manage a full run and beat the game. Overall, I really enjoyed this game, and one of the highlights of this jam. In terms of suggestions I'd make, I can think of a few, but they're all fairly minor.

One is that I feel like the controls could have been simplified. There are a lot of keyboard buttons needed for this game, and I feel like it could and should have been reduced somewhat. One would be to avoid having to manually refuel the ship. I'd either have just one fuel value (the one the player carries), or make it so that hopping into the ship automatically fuels the ship as much as possible. Even just this one change I feel would help make the game feel more approachable.

I feel like the game could have done with a main menu. There is the story screen, but having an additional main menu would have been nice to see. You could then put the difficulty settings on there instead of the pause screen, which I assume would be easier to handle, since you aren't applying those settings while in the middle of the game.

On the topic of settings, the pause menu feels excessive. Having individual sliders for every possible sound effect is more than I think is necessary. In my game, I just went with two sliders: one for music and one for SFX, which I think was good enough if you balance the audio well enough yourself. (I handled this in Godot using audio buses, which makes it fairly easy to implement). Similarly, the difficulty sliders are hard to grasp. The descriptions are fairly vague, and could have used more clarification. While I think sliders are a nice feature for those that want it, I think having something like two or three balanced presets would have been nice for people who don't want that level of granularity. Something like "Easy", "Normal", "Hard", and "Custom" could have worked.

This was a fun game. I found it kinda difficult, but I did eventually beat it. I personally would have preferred if movement and firing directions weren't tied to each other (more like a twin-stick shooter), but I also understand that's more a matter of personal taste. One thing I would have personally changed was the overworld map. From what I can tell, it's randomly generated instead of a designed map, which caused me problems. There were a few maps where I wasn't able to make it to any other system before running out of fuel from the starting system, and other times where there were system directly next to the starting system. Also, the time I won was when the closest system to the starting system was the final system, meaning I went straight from the tutorial to the final level. I would have preferred if the map was a fixed designed, and designed to specifically provide a smooth difficulty curve.

On the topic of accessibility, I found the colors for the fuel dots and XP dots to be too similar for me to easily distinguish between them. Using more distinct colors, or better yet, having the different dots be different shapes, would have made it easier for me to know what I was picking up. I kept running out of fuel in part because I didn't have a good sense of how much fuel I had actually picked up. On the topic of fuel, I feel like there should have been an indicator of what the actual fuel maximum was along side the fuel counter, as that would have helped clear up some of the confusion I had with the mechanic.

I liked this game. It's fairly simple, but that's what makes for a good game jam game in my experience. There are only two small suggestions I'd make:

1) There should ideally be a screen between completing the last level and returning the player back to the main menu. Just returning the player to the main menu can be somewhat confusing (I thought I might have bugged out the game when I first saw it), and having a simple screen that says something like "Congratulations on beating the game" can make a big difference.

2) Since the only controls are aim in a direction and move towards that direction, I would have mapped moving forward to more than just W. Space would be a good option, but more importantly, I'd suggest mapping left-click to move forward. This would have the benefit of, if you made an HTML build of the game, it would be playable on phones (as well as with computer touchscreens). Making the game playable on more kinds of devices and with different kinds of inputs is a convenient way of improving accessibility.

Otherwise, I really liked this game, and think it was extremely well made.

I really liked the atmosphere in this game. It's a shame you ran out of time because I would have loved to see more of this. The lines game was interesting, and it gave me more of a challenge than I was expecting. Now I kinda want to try and "solve" the game and figure out if there's an always winning strategy...

This was an interesting concept. I don't play a lot of rouge-lites, but this seems really complete for a game jam game. Obviously, there were some issues that were fixed in updates, so I won't go into the issues I had that were fixed.

The combat was rather unintuitive, and it took me a while to figure out what was going on. The battle tutorial TXT helped (once I finally read it), but I don't think that would have been enough to avoid my confusion. Of note, the battle tutorial TXT does not mention how to enhance the abilities, and it wasn't really intuitive in-game. The symbols over your abilities also weren't the clearest, and the idea that "+" means that the abilities can't be used wasn't very intuitive. Overall, I wasn't a fan of the UI for the battles, and think it could have done with some more refinement.

I also wasn't a huge fan of the maps. I understand using randomly generated maps, but generating them as a literal maze was very confusing and frustrating. The different areas didn't look distinct enough to easily recognize where you are, and the length of the paths means that taking one wrong path can be the difference between making it back and not. I think this game could have really used a more open map design.

Lastly, I liked the accessibility options in the settings, but I'm not sure how useful they really work. I didn't try the "motion sickness mode", so I can't really talk about that one, but being colorblind, I found myself confused about why it was really there. For one, there were options for Deutranopia and Tritanopia, but no option for Protanopia. I'm not sure why it listed two, but not the third. Perhaps this is just "Red-Green" and "Blue-Yellow" with terrible names? But more importantly, I couldn't figure out any impact this setting had on the game. I couldn't see any visual difference changing the setting, and it's not like the game depends on recognizing color, so I'm not sure why it was a concern to begin with. It just seems really confused overall to me.

Overall, I did really like the game, but felt like it was held back by these issues. Perhaps having someone playtest the game before the deadline would have helped with some of this.

This was a very interesting story, and I enjoyed playing it. Being dropped into the story in medias res was a little confusing at first, particularly due to the size of this extended family, but I did figure it out in time, so I wasn't too bothered by that. The stars minigame was interesting, albeit a little frustrating. I assume the messages at the start were hints (at least one seemed correlated to the constellation), but they disappeared kinda quickly, and there was no way to see them again, which meant I was working blind on a lot of them, having to just randomly click until I stumbled upon the one line segment I was missing. I also found it kinda buggy, where it would re-select the last star I selected instead of the one I was clicking on. I did get through it, but I feel like that's something that could have been refined a little more. Also, the dialog choices were a neat addition, but I didn't notice any appreciable impact on the dialog (I'm not even talking differences in the overall story, I'm just saying different text), which made them feel kinda weak.

Also, just some minor corrections if you want to update the game after the jam: "It brought us altogether, didn't it?" -> "It brought us all together, didn't it?" and "But in the end, she chose her self." -> "But in the end, she chose herself."

This isn't really my kind of game, so I didn't really get into it. However, it does seem like an interesting take on the concept. I certainly found all the complex interactions to be interesting, but too much for me to personally keep track of.

On the topic of accessibility, I found the use of color to be problematic. A number of the planet effects refer to the color of the planet, but I had a difficult time being sure what planets counted as certain colors. Being colorblind, even when the number of specified colors is low like this is, I do still find myself second-guessing things (eg. "is this planet blue, and therefore affected, or is it a purple planet or something?"). In general, I would have liked more indication of how adding each planet would affect the result (eg, and indicator when hovering over a planet that shows that planet A changes by +5, but planet B changes by -3).

Since this is the second comment about getting stuck on the first level, I figure I should give a bit of context, as well as a direct hint for anybody who's stuck.

The first level of this game uses a puzzle design that can be found in other puzzle games. However, using only the game mechanics that are immediately obvious, the puzzle is unsolvable. The purpose of this level is to help introduce the main new mechanic for this game. If you get to the last step of the puzzle you can do without the new mechanic, the game gives what I think is a fairly direct hint at what you need to do if you haven't already figured out that mechanic.

If you are still struggling with the level, here's a hint. EDIT: I moved the hint to the game's main page in the description, as I figured out how to make a pseudo spoiler tag there.

A neat little game. It definitely feels overly difficult, but it feels thematically accurate. I noticed that, excluding options that cost you money, all the options result in at best a net-even result (i.e. the gain of Coop for one nation is matched by an equal loss of another's), which certainly leads to a sense of "everything is slowly falling apart." My biggest issue with the game is the accessibility issues with the map. The text is rather small, making it hard to read many of the place names, especially at the default resolution. Additionally, marking the countries by color was a problem for me since I'm colorblind. Notably, the colors for Beorland and Estenmont look pretty much identical to me. I suggest trying to keep accessibility in mind for future projects. Also, a minor bug: pressing "Toggle Music" wouldn't bring the music back for me after I turned it off.

I think the idea here is interesting, but the game itself could use some refining. It could really use an in-game tutorial, as I got really confused as to how to actually play the game. It probably would have helped a lot to slow the player down quite a bit, so there was more time for new players to process what's going on. I think it could have also helped to make it a little more clear how everything worked together, maybe by showing the stats directly to the player.

This was a neat little game. It wasn't the first game with this concept I've seen this jam, but it certainly tackled it well. I feel like the snake's pathfinding had some issues, as it was easy to avoid it by hiding behind a rock. I try to avoid game concepts that require any sort of "bots" (eg, the snake in this game that pretends to be a player-controlled character) because of how hard they are to get right in a short game jam. The only direct feedback I have is that I don't feel like it should count as a loss if you (as the apple) touch the snake's tale, as snakes don't eat from their tales, and it feels awkward when I lose to it. Also, the snake during the countdown seems a little broken, with their tail section not being connected to their head, but that's only a minor graphical issue.

This is an interesting idea, but I feel like it needed a lot more refinement. There seems to be some technical issues, at least with the web version, with things like text seemingly falling off the edges. This game is also very inaccessible in a few different senses. For one, the game assumes that players are familiar with Minecraft crafting recipes, which is not something that should be taken as a given. Also, it expects people to understand recipes as a collection of ingredients (eg. two sticks and three cobblestone). I don't know about you, but I always recall Minecraft crafting recipes visually, as the objects being in a physical order to each other, which makes recalling recipes this way rather unintuitive. Considering the background is already a crafting table grid, I have to wonder why you didn't just go the visual route for this. The game requiring the player to type out the answer is also a bit of an accessibility issue, though I can understand if it's part of the core concept (i.e. it's intended to be a typing exercise kind of game). Lastly, the tutorial is an accessibility mess because the text progresses at a fixed speed. This is usually a bad idea, as there's no one speed that won't cause some players to miss text from reading it too slow, while also not boring other players who read it faster. Making it so the text progresses from a button press / mouse click is usually better for this.

I saw you made a comment on my game about us sharing a similar concept, so I decided to play and rate your game. This was very well done, and an interesting contrast to my game (which was in part limited by the art assets I had available). The way the car moves in 8 directions is certainly a limitation of using sprites for the car (I ended up using a 3D model rendered to a SubViewport to work around that issue myself), but it works fairly well here. Your controls were very tight, with turning being immediate (whereas for my game I intentionally wanted the car to be somewhat sluggish to control by design), though that made the car's momentum feel kinda strange. I might have considered making the car accelerate and decelerate faster (in place of the brake button), but honestly, it wasn't that big of a deal either way. I did have some minor issues understanding where the collision was for hiding in the bushes. I also feel like it maybe could have more of an escalating difficulty. It kinda feels like at a certain point the game isn't getting harder, which for a highscore game can be a bit of a problem. Overall, I really liked the game, and just wanted to point out my observations in case they help. The only other thing I'll note is that I liked the Fullscreen option, and it seems like the setting persists between launches, except it doesn't get applied when relaunched correctly, which requires me to turn fullscreen on and back off again to play it in windowed mode. It's just a minor bug, but I thought I'd mention it.

I found the controls for this confusing. I kept blocking when I attempted to attack, and never did fully figure out how to time the direction and space together to make it work. Overall, the controls felt sluggish and unresponsive to me. I also found the swapping to be rather counter-productive, and I feel like I would have liked the game without it.

This is an interesting game, but I had a lot of issues playing it. Using the scouts as you progress through the game becomes rather problematic, both because you can't control which landing site they come from (hence, can't really control the path they take) and because the fighters jets make it nearly impossible to use scouts to reveal military sites. This meant that I found myself using other ship types (notably landing sites) to uncover the map instead of using the scouts like intended. I also found the game to be a little too much waiting and repeatedly abducting the same cities rather than actually trying to strategize. I think making more of the actions faster (and even fasterer with reinforcements) would help a lot with the pacing and moment-to-moment gameplay.

I love this. The art style is amazing, Rei is adorably awkward, and the whole thing is cute as heck. If I had to choose one thing to nitpick, it would be there isn't an easy way to see all the content without having to mash E through all the dialog you've already seen (i.e. there's no equivalent to RenPy's auto). That being said, this game is just too cute for me to really be bothered by seeing more of it. Great job.

This was an interesting, though somewhat frustrating game. It took me a while to get a hang of the controls, and even then I didn't always feel like I was in control. Having the block's momentum reset on the swap is interesting, but also feels kinda clunky in a way. I'm not sure I'd prefer the alternative, though. Also, since so much of the game is about timing (waiting for gravity to move the block far enough), having the levels auto-start seems like a bad idea. It would be nice if the game gave me a moment to look at the level before things started moving.

I had some problems with running this game. The browser version failed before the game even started (on both Firefox and Chrome). I downloaded the ROM and tried it with a few emulators I had installed. NanoBoyAdvance kept giving "Invalid graphics index: -1" errors everywhere, and BizHawk (which uses an mGBA core for GBA games) wouldn't let me access the settings and randomly froze. I finally downloaded the mGBA build you included on your itch page, which seemed to mostly work. Making a game jam game for the GBA is really ambitious, but seems like your game has a lot of technical issues because of that.

As for the game itself, I like the idea, but the execution has a lot of issues for me. For one, the snake's behavior seemed really unpredictable. It was hard to try to formulate any sort of plan because I didn't understand its behavior, which meant it felt more like I was getting lucky than winning because of my actions. Also, I'm assuming the snake moves before the player, because there were times I felt like I should have been able to narrowly sneak by, but the game disagreed. This feels way more unfair than giving the player's movement priority.

I really like the idea here, but I feel like it's held back by its controls. The camera controls feel off, in part because of the lack of vertical control. I don't understand why I need to take out and put away the fishing rod to move around when it could just always be out and lets you walk around whenever it's reeled in. I also struggled with the inventory system, and felt it could have been implemented smoother. I also found the game rather buggy. Trying to place the humans in the vivariums seems to be pretty clunky, and I manged to wipe my inventory doing. I also managed to cast downwards and soft-lock the game somehow. I love the concept of the game, but I wish it was a smoother experience to play.

This was a neat puzzle game. I'm not really fond of these sorts of sokoban games, but I enjoyed this well enough. I don't have any specific notes about the game, other than that the into images seems a little confusing (I assume the wizard was supposed to be the "bad guy," but the first image seems to imply that the hero and wizard were already working together to save the princess before this).

I like the idea for this. I think it would have been improved a lot if there was a slashing animation, as right now it's hard to tell what you're doing and what your reach is. Also, having the cooldowns in the corner makes it harder to keep track of them. Having them closer to the character would probably be better. The cooldowns could also probably be shorter, as the way they are right now feels rather long. Otherwise, I really liked it.

I like the idea, but it could really do with some polish. The lack of any real tutorial meant that the QTE's caught me really off-guard. I'm also not a fan of how tight the QTE window appears to be, as it's a lot of buttons at random, and it takes time to read the key, remember where on the keyboard that means, and press it, and the timing window for all that seems short. The first input also starts right when you press the button for the action, giving you no time to prepare for the QTE's. There also seems to be a distinct lack of feedback. It's not clear which inputs I'm missing, and what the effect of hitting or missing them are. The game also just seemed to quietly ignore the actions. I got a full miss at one point (a heal spell that drained health), but most just gave me zero feedback, making it hard to tell what if anything I was doing. The game could do with more direct feedback on that as well. Even with all of that, I still managed to complete the game first-try, so perhaps it's balanced a little too easy? The first fight seems like it doesn't depend on how well you do, while the later fights requires at least some success, but overall I feel like I played poorly enough that I should have lost at least one fight, so maybe the game is too easy. Lastly, there was no way out of the credits screen I could find, and I had to Alt-F4 out of the game. Some buttons there to be able to quit (and possibly restart) would be nice.

I misunderstood the purpose of the game and despite intentionally trying to kill the player, I still managed to "win" by keeping him alive. I think it's a neat idea, but it needs more balancing. I also felt like the game was lacking in strategic choices. Also, I'm not sure what triggered the game to auto-play cards, so the game could be clearer about what it's doing and why.

I had a hard time with this game. When I was brainstorming for this jam, one of my first thoughts was to make a reverse tower defense game like this, but i rejected that idea because I felt like it would be too hard to implement well. The problem is that when the only things the player can control are when and what to spawn, it can really feel like the game is out of your control, which is how I feel with this game. I got hard stuck on the second level because once the reinforcements are built, I just can't get anything through. I want to like this game, but I just can't play past the second level. Also, there seems to be a few technical issues. The buttons for spawning are still clickable, and still trigger the cooldown, even when the player doesn't have enough coins. Disabling the buttons when you can't afford them would be a very helpful UI change. Also, having a quit button in your web game doesn't really work, so you should disable that on web builds.

This was a really nice little game. Obviously you wouldn't make an image for every possible censorship combination, so there were a few times where I thought I made something but the game disagreed, but that's understandable. Other than a few technical issues (the music sometimes didn't start, and I'd have liked a restart button in-game), I thought this was great.

Fun Fact: I had actually implemented a pretty complicated system that allowed the pedestrians to stop if they are going to walk into your car, as well as stop if they get too close to the pedestrian in front of them, and pause spawning more pedestrians in that row if it's backed up. It all worked pretty well. Then I realized that it kinda trivialized the game, as you could just slowly creep forward and everybody will stop for you, so I ended up deleting that whole system.

😟

I really liked this. It's a clever idea, which kinda feels like a Mario Party minigame. I don't really have any notes. If I were doing this, I might setup the controls differently, but I don't think that's a real issue. Good job with this.

I like this. It's a fairly simple concept executed well. I just wish there was a little more to it, as the game gets pretty monotonous fairly quickly.

This is an interesting concept, but I feel like the execution was more frustrating than it needed to be. The biggest one is that the bike feels slippery. From what I can tell, the issue is this: If you accelerate, and then turn, you continue going in the direction you accelerated towards instead of the new direction you're facing like with a real bike. Obviously, this is a very tricky thing to get right, and I ended up spending quite a bit of time in my game just getting the car controls to feel good. In addition, the game is rather punishing, as if you lose track of the racer, you're bound to fly right past them, and then struggle trying to get back to where they are. I'm also not really clear why there's both a time and score, as they seem to both correlate to the same thing (how much you kept under the racer).

This was interesting. I'll admit I didn't really play along with the game, in part because my PC setup really doesn't make it practical to use standing up, but I at least tried to imagine what it would be like. Probably my biggest suggestion is, if you really want the gimmick to be the physicality of it, then you might want to make the game itself less obtuse / more readable. There were a lot of points where I was confused what was going on, so it could be clearer. For example, I ended up losing the tutorial fight after winning because I didn't know I needed to click "Win." The stick-man, while the dialog for it is funny, is really hard to read, especially once parts of the arms are lost. And the actual fights were all seemingly trial-and-error until I figured out how that specific character's fights work.

This is an interesting idea. There's a lot of little things I could nitpick, such as the snake's behavior if you throw the apple directly at it is really bizarre, but that's honestly really minor. The two big suggestions I have is a) add a final score screen that says "you got XXX points", as I won't necessarily see what my points counter was at when I die, and b) you need to have the difficulty ramp up more. I kinda overwhelmed the game with my strategy of "walk in a large circle", and ended up giving up instead of losing. Having something in there to act as a soft cap (eg, the enemy spawn rate becomes ridiculous) can help make this sort of game rather addicting to grind out high scores in.

I am using Godot, and it seems like in Godot 4 using world coordinates was the default. I actually changed it to use local coordinates because I felt like using world coordinates didn't look right with higher speed collisions. I can certainly see arguments for going in either direction, but I do appreciate your perspective.

This is very well executed. The concept is a great example of the "multi-purpose mechanic," and the game looks gorgeous. My only complaint is that it's unnecessarily punishing. I can understand why you made it so that the player's bullets can hurt the player, but I'm not sure that was the right choice. I assume you did that as a counter-balance to just mashing fire. The idea being that firing your weapon more gives you more visibility at the cost of increased danger. The problem is that it punishes first-time players for making a choice they had no information about. My first shot immediately ricocheted back and damaged me, and I didn't feel like that was fair as I had literally no information about what I was shooting at. I think using a simpler anti-spamming measure, such as a cooldown or ammo count, would have made the game less frustrating.