I actually asked it for a friend, he played and it seems to have worked!
Recent community posts
Awesome! Really liked how theres a third rhythm created by my own movement, and its a ludic one instead of an audio one. Have you been looking at David Kanaga’s thoughts on games and music, there is a lot of inspiration to draw from him!
Acho complexo esse negócio de dar nota, então vou dar meu feedback aqui por escrito =)
Primeiramente achei a arte muito massa, especialmente o monstro tentaculento e a animação de morte dos personagens. Eu particularmente sou contra o brilho que o foguinho tem no fundo, mas acho que é gosto pessoal de pixel art. (que vale tb pra fonte com anti aliasing). Eu queria muito que o personagem só batesse a asa quando vc aperta pra cima.
O gameplay é já bem estabelecido, que é uma boa decisão de aprender a fazer um joguinho. Parabéns por não terem “vidas”, morreu morreu é isso aí. Acho que uma coisa massa de se pensar é deixar os colisores que machucam o jogador menores do que eles são visualmente e os dos alvos, maiores, isso dá uma margem maneira de erro pro jogador e acho que acaba sendo menos frustrante. (dê uma olhada depois nos seus jogos dificeis favoritos e vejam se isso não acontece =))
Recomendo tb se não conhecerem darem uma procurada no conceito de game feel, tem um video chamado “the art of screenshake” que acho que se vcs só pegarem o joguinho de vcs e seguirem o video como um tutorial, vão aprender muuuitas coisas e vai melhorar bastante o joguinho =)
Really though provoking. I almost feel like this could be a theme for a game jam. Making a another game out of one of the games shown here (or even all of them).
thinking about the text is very interesting. As a vim user, I always find myself into fun situations where I have to figure out a way to properly create a macro to make my tasks easier. There’s even a community of “vim golfing”. Pretty sure increpare has done a very frustrating game/plaything with this
Wow, this button is so juicy, that was an amazing minutes of play. I would never even have thought if making a single button this good haha. Reminds me of some early weird websites, hope games help them come back.
★ Again, what a great minutes of play. This is my favorite so far. Also though of some mobas but with a scale of complexity way higher (but just arbitrarily). Idk, I believe there’s something to be thought of not only visual feedback, but overwhelming knowledge required.
This is very interesting, and similar to the previous one for me actually. this could make for an game where it might to actually be visible most of the time, and you have to slowly figure out what your are doing.
This one gives me anxiety, but also a great idle game. Would be interesting if the random seed was based on some arbitrary logic (I first thought that I could make the character move faster). Kind of like creating a fake superstition machine.
This made me have a funny idea. Was thinking it could actually be a great idea to watch an AI slowly training and goind into some weird directions into a game. With the second part I though it could be a program that you had to look at to see training? A shoridinger’ pet. Also made me think of Petscop, which is a game that only has “lets play”s, and no real way of playing. So the game becomes to play its metagame (make theories and storycrafting).
★ Oh I love you, and I also hate you so much for this. almost made me make this run in puzzlescript. And made me think of this other genre: I describe very arbitrary and complicated rules, and the only possible way to “imagine” the game is by making it yourself.
★★ I’d love to have a bunch of levels for this. The fun thing about this is how I assume the game works, as you said, by its affordances. And there is a very very good idea for a game here, where you have to make the player break his own imagined rules. I got really caught up with this idea and might actyally make it!
Interesting, I believe I played a similar thing by Anna Anthropy, where there is a description of a world and you have to imagine a character. This goes even deeper, it’s kind of like what I myself enjoy doing as a designer, imagining weird things.
This one builds on the previous and it reminded me of Pipping Barr’s It is as if you were playing chess, it’s a very good game you should check it out.
The final part of the argument makes me think about saying that all art is interactive, every art is a game.
I would argue that there’s a third element here as well. The name of the game. It could also be said that the whole context is another element. It made me think a lot.
Thanks a lot for this game (number 13???), it was a wonderful and inspiring experience. I might make a game about #8 and mention you for the inspiration
I only actually knew about the "source code" file type, so thanks a lot for this info. I loved that the license information actually gives a brief description for each license and helps out choosing them, and I think that is basically my point, I only found out about this stuff after posting in the forums about it.
What I wish is that it was more incentivized in some way, even just sharing the source code as a file is a weird choice, when most likely the source code is already being hosted somewhere and could be easier to update. I see how it being already used by some people (and hopefully I'll start doing it myself now) but I think it should be more explicit to users, I can't even agree it's a streamlined process now, it's a bunch of different hidden processes.
There are 2 parts to it: incentivizing developers to make their games "moddable" and incentivizing players to become modders. So I'll do one sentence each.
Developers: Having a clear choice of sharing the game source code and/or modding tools on the game submission page, and some feature to receive proper attribution (I like the simplicity of something like Creative Commons, take a look at that experience).
Players/Modders: Having a clear way of knowing whether the developer of a game is open to their game being modded and a streamlined way of making, publishing and attributing mods.
Note that when I say mods, again, it doesn't need to be the steam workshop experience, it can be as " simple" as forking the source code and making a modification.
Hmmmm, idk, I don't usually call the developers of whatever new library I am working on and need fixing for permission to do so, there are very streamlined internal ways of doing that. And that's a bit of the beauty of the git ecossystem, and what I wanted to see in some extent in games (especially small and broken ones), it's not about all games being "forkable" or moddable, but again, for the developer to have the option to think about it. Just having a checkbox to add the game repository would already show that itch cares about this, and might make developers that haven't even thought about the possibility of open sourcing their games of doing so, or even reminding a developer that has this in mind, but forgets to add the github link on the game's description. So once again I'll say, it's not about having a beautiful modding ecossystem with a systemwide API with in app purchases and profits to the modders, it's about making the conversation more open, just incentivizing game developers to think about modding in a more loose sense (wow, I can just add my repository here and there might come a day someone plays this and report a bug or even makes upgrades?)
Idk, I can't really see any real drawbacks on this incentive other than additional work for itch.io developers, and talking around it surely is making me believe even more in this.
I don't know, either you didn't understand my original point or you are being purposefully disruptful and counterproductive to it. I'll assume no malice, thus the former, and would ask you to kindly read all of which I have already written and think (as in no need to reply) how does that relate to any kind of extremity. For some reason you seem to holding very tightly to this argument that open source is not profitable, when profitability has never even been my point. I am really glad that you are engaged in this conversation with me, but I really think diving into the profitability and "extremety of open source" is missing the point and wasting away our precious thinking time. I would really thank you if you engaged with the actual proposals I've been making and telling how and why they could or could not work, instead of just insisting in "open source is not profitable" "open source has proven to be just a spring board", especially when I am even addressing those specific points in some way or another.
So if you answer this with just more meta discussion I'll just assume malice and give up on maintainig this dialogue with you. And please, if you want to talk about your thoughts on how bad open source is, please create a thread about it somewhere, and let's have fruitful arguments about it somewhere else, but again, it's not the point I am trying to make with this specific post.
I love the idea of having a "first run" leaderboard for the good improvisers and an overall daily best score. There could also be a overall randomly seeded best score, but you could see which seed the player used to achieve it, and play the same seed if you think you can beat it.
ps.: I do think though there is a big oportunity for cheating in the improvised game (eg.: you could play as a different user take notes of everything).
I am not suggesting profitable ways of modding games, even less suggesting itch.io to have specific mechanisms in place to help moddable games profit (eg.: steam marketplace). I think it is up to the game developers to make this choice and balance out if it's worth it or not.
The specific case where I though about this being a possible feature was when playing a small broken free game (which I could say amount for most of itch's library), that I felt compelled to "fix", and though itch could have interesting ways of incentivizing that behaviour, instead of me having to DM the game's author. It's a very tough conversation to have, and I think with certain incentives, itch can "educate" people to even start thinking of the possibility of opening up their free broken games they expect nothing with. Would be almost like promoting a game specific "licensing" idea and helping users out with it, by say, asking some additional questions about how you think your game can be modded/shared. (kind of like the CC questionaire you answer to know the best CC license to choose for your assets)
> I don't feel like explaining why would be productive to this conversation [about modding].
So I feel a bit sad that your answer was basically being the counterproductivity I feared, but I also feel commited to answer it, hoping to bring back your attention to the actual modding discussion. There's a lot of interesting discussion out there regarding open source as a profitable thing, especially within the discussion between free software and open source (this movement coming out explicitly as a way of free software serving some demands of capitalistic institutions, like when github posts that "open source has won").
Awesome answer, although I have some strong disagreement with the following
> I respect open source culture, but again, if someone wants to make money, this is not going to be their place.
I don't feel like explaining why would be productive to this conversation, but explaining why I think it's not productive might be.
What I'm proposing is not any kind of enforcement of "free software standards" (whatever this means) on itch.io games. I am also coming from this idea about itch.io's culture of having a more blurry distinction between creators and consumers. Also I am not even sure if this is feature worth implementing, and most likely itch.io developers have higher priorities things to develop right now (if only it was open source... but I digress).
I'll try to talk about what I think when I think about this feature by trying to answer to the points brought up in your quotation. I am also super interested in the possibility of a response from @Anuke himself, given that he has the most successful moddable and free software game on itch.io (thank you for that reference, I had not realized that when I first played it a while ago)
1) This point is the one I understand the least. What I interpreted is a case where a future update of the game breaks the API or just breaks the mod in some form. What I think of this is since the game is open source, if you really care about your mod and want to keep it alive, you can basically create your own fork of the game that doesn't have the said changes. I'm pretty sure a mindful dev in a well modded game could also be thoughtful of this and create something like a "Classic" version of their game pre breaking changes.
2) Yes I agree with the case for really good modding, but I am not suggesting really good modding, just incentive for it in order to in the future have a better oportunity and a community surrounding modding to have more samples of really good modding. I'm thinking more of a "fork me on github" than in a full blown steam workshop-like feature.
3) I don't really understand why it stops to be fun when there are multiple external tools. There are multiple external tools for pretty much any activity I do on my computer nowadays, at least in the case of the mod they are most likely not competing with each other but collaborating, so I don't see how this is a problem (I want to "real meritocracy" but that's a paradox)
4) I think it should always be a clear line on which game is modding which, having a tree like structure would be very interesting, but getting to a point where this much modding is happening is basically utopia. It could even be expanded as being it's own itch.io page for a game and it's mods, and, since itch already has the idea of serving them, tools. Specific features that point out that a game is moddable can help out with this point.
5) This is similar to number 2, so I'll add to it. I think the complexity of the moddable API comes with the complexity of the game itself. The game that made me bring up this whole idea was a very simple game, simple enough that I thought I might be able to quickly understand it's source code and make changes to it. If you have the source code available, you can kind of consider it's API the whole thing? I still think for more complex games supporting mods means a better distinction between API and source code, but again, all I am suggesting is creating features so this could happen more often and we can learn more about how to proper handle those cases.
6) Making them easier to get into is the biggest motivation behind this, knowing that I can make my game publicly moddable while being in some way incentivized by itch.io to do it would increase my chances to try to explain the source code to people, and even write documentations for my own projects. It could create an ecossystem of not easily moddable games, but people interested enough in them to want to help out. All of this with a choice made by the original game to make it moddable.
Again this is all very dreamy and I am sure might not even be a high priority on things itch.io could be working on right now. I don't see danger in games that explicitly chose to be moddable of falling in conflict with the status quo. Mods claiming "supremacy" over the original game has been a constant trend in successful games that I don't think are considered bad things for video game history in general: counter strike, dota, pubg and autochess, to name the obvious examples.
So, recently I learned that there is this page with games for me to rate and I realized itch.io might keep the whole history of all games I ever played. Right now I am trying to organize my references and having that list might actually be very useful to me, but I can only access it by seeing the oldest, newest and more in need of a rating.
Is there a way to see the whole list of games I played?
EDIT: here's the link if anyone is interested: https://itch.io/library/things-to-rate
Recently I have been thinking a lot about free software, forks, modding and remixing, and recently I found a game on itch that was very interesting, and I had an idea I wanted to test on the game. Luckily I knew the creator, messaged him and he was ok with me making a modification. What I thought afterwards was that if I made a mod for his game and post it on itch, I would definitely have a link of his game on my page somehow to say that it was a mod.
After that I saw this thread: https://itch.io/t/608043/big-question-and-i-cant-think-of-a-title#post-1047858
And it all got me thinking, modding is a great way of getting people that don't have time/knowledge/resources to implement a whole game, and it is a very hard thing to properly support in your game (say something like a steam workshop). I really feel that incentivizing people to want to have their game modded and people to mod other games might be in line with what I understand is a value of itch.io.
I want to open a discussion on how and what can be added to itch in order to incentivize modding. The basic idea I had is being able to have a checkbox on your game publishing page saying that you are ok with your game being modded, with some basic instructions on how to do so (eg.: fork this git repo). This could make your game page have some kind of button like "mod this game", which would then open the said instructions and could even create an unpublished itch page of the game mod, which you could then update with your own version, and that would have a link to the original author.
This all seems very utopic, but I really think is an interesting conversation to have =)
had a lot of fun playing this, sadly in the end the best strategy for us was just rushing to see who got faster to the oponents base. We also had this weird situation where orange was moving super slowly and destroyed a static blue, which was very interesting, but we could not consistently reproduce. Very fun game =)