thanks!
mechabit
Creator of
Recent community posts
I like how their deaths are your opportunity lol
The combat is not very interesting, after the 2nd room I would have liked a better sword so I could 1 hit the basic enemies.
Throwing while moving and pressing E was a bit fiddly as well. Would have prefered left click to throw while holding a person.
Walking was a bit slow. In general if I get what the solution is and just doing it takes time then I'm getting bored.
The best thing hollow knight 2 added was the sprint ability lol
The boss fight was pretty cool. Putting him on the hook was pretty funny lol
Hey, cool game. Seems a bit unfair to upgrade the rover if you die. You just send up in a death spiral. Maybe include more methods to evade the rover like tossing rocks to distract it or kicking up some dust to obscure line of sight.
At the moment the best tactic is to pick smaller size and see through walls and just circle around the nearest rock.
EDIT got the laser gun and shot the rover and then the game crashed lol
Hey, got to this after the voting period but this is one helluva polished game, even the page style fits in!
I love the Grim Fandango vibes. I like how the boss incentivises you to make the most profit.
If you were to expand on this game I'd love more ways to upsell your clients and a papers please style back story to tug you in the opposite direction so there's more reason to lose funds.
Also the game says the year is 1998 but it's got more of a 50's vibe.
Really good job *thumbs up*
Hey so lots of people complaining about the comments and voting system but no one talking about alternatives.
The current star average system favours games with few votes. A game with 10 5-star rating beats a game with 100 ratings with 4.9 average. You can just get 10 friends or 10 alt accounts to win this way (above the median votes threshold). Similarly a great game can get hidden by a few 1 star ratings because of small sample randomness.
Here's a couple ideas for alternatives to the 5 star average system. Feel free to add your own in the comments.
1) Advocacy voting
- Instead of 5 stars system you click on the categories you think this game should win in
- Can vote for multiple games in multiple categories
- Could add more categories for things like best student game or best first game or made me laugh etc.
- Used to select the pope sometimes
2) Bayesian average
- Instead of the current mean-average star rating.
- Weights scores based on the number of votes
- Games with fewer ratings are adjusted toward the global average.
- Add a minimum threshold of votes to get ranked.
- Prevents games with few 5-star votes from topping the chart.
- Doesn't eliminate 1-star bombing
- Used by sites like IMDB for movie rankings.
3. Pairwise (Head-to-Head) Voting
- Voters see two random games (or from the games that they've played) and pick which one is better.
- Repeat many times; ranks are computed via Elo or Bradley-Terry systems.
- Removes rating inflation bias.
- Easier for players, just “which did you prefer?”
- Builds a robust ranking with enough comparisons.
- Used in Ludum Dare’s “smart randomizer” for a while in testing phases.
4. Ranked-Choice / Borda Count
- Each voter ranks their favorite games (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc.). Points are assigned (e.g., 1st = 5 pts, 2nd = 3 pts, 3rd = 1 pt), and totals determine winners.
- Can't down-vote to boost yourself
I like advocacy voting or pairwise head to head voting best. But option 1, 3 and 4 prevents the 1 star bombing trolls.















