Interesting platformer, seems rather thematic, unfortunately I cannot get past even the first level. The controls do not work in any way I expect them too and thus I find it difficult to control. For example, when I jump, I'm surprised that I have full control of the character in the air, and so I just end up failing those jumps every time and can barely jump onto a moving platform. I'm constantly dying.
NTGuardian
Creator of
Recent community posts
I think I played for about 10 minutes and got 2 bags in total. That first puzzle was too hard for me and so I gave up. I'd recommend throwing a lower ball (hah!) for the first puzzles.
It was very pretty and I've played marble games before so I was hoping that it would work out, but eventually I got too frustrated.
The artwork is nice, the sound is good and the controls pleasant, but eventually the game reaches an uninteresting equilibrium. After jumping over a few portals, I'm not really sure why I'm still playing. In particular, I can try to decelerate (which it seems that there's a minimum speed for the ball) and skip over everything I see without any real challenge, and I think I could probably do this indefinitely.
I can't say that I got to see much of the upgrades system as the game felt very lethal. I would get two upgrades--I think health and damage, since the game was so lethal--then I'd get past that level only to not really have any points for the next level. Additionally I HAD to buy health, because otherwise I'd just die on the next level. So there just was not much to buy.
Retreat/wait/continue seems interesting at an intellectual level but when playing it, I don't think I like it all that much. Part of the fun of a roguelike is exploring the level. This system means you can't explore, you just go forward or backward or stay in the same place. It also took some getting used to. So that's another area where it feels like the decision space is constrained.
Yay hex grid, Linux support, and pretty art.
Sadly, I don't get the point of the game. What am I trying to do? And sadly I don't feel like I'm facing a particularly interesting challenge. (Someone might say the same about my game though.) You do have something that could be expanded on, but there's not much here.
This is a good game. I don't think it's a Roguelike game and thus I don't think it fits the theme. But "winning" a game jam is not at all important, and making a good game is more important. There's things you could do with graphics to make it more visually appealing, and I think you know this. Also, "reach the goal" is not really a challenge because I can eventually accumulate money to complete the mission, and I have no uncertainty about this (though maybe you're looking for a more relaxed experience anyway). But add another restraint, such as a timer to complete a mission, and this is a great prototype you could expand on.
I love the theme. But while the mechanical idea is interesting, I can't say I like the execution. I do not know how you could win this game and my decision space is so limited that I don't have much incentive to retry. After I lost I was pretty sure there was nothing I could have done better and I had no really interesting decision space to explore. I do like the art, though.
Interesting idea! I was getting some Backrooms vibes (which makes me now want to make a Backrooms rogue-like). There's problems with the mouse controls, where basically I could not turn because my mouse hit the edge of the monitor. That made the game a little difficult to play. I almost won one game, but was overwhelmed by enemies. But I like this.
This game is clearly unfinished. It's unclear how to win or what you are trying to accomplish. The creators acknowledge this in their comments, that they ran out of time.
Making a card game in time for a game jam is achievable. I recommend making the game with paper first. Coding games is hard. Paper prototypes are easy. Try that next time to get a better sense of what you want this to accomplish.
So congratulations on finishing a game jam! That's a significant accomplishment.
I'm not sure if the game is working as intended. I think that I do what I am supposed to do, but then it does not appear in the boss fight. Also, I feel like I'm just grinding. I defeat enemies by clicking a ton. There's not really much strategy to it nor does it feel engaging or pleasing in any way. I just click as much as I can and try to stay out of range for enormous amounts of time.
I think you need to better explore the fun factor of the game. What makes it fun? So far, I did not have fun, I just clicked a ton.
Excellent job. This game works really well. The visuals and audio are quite pleasing and the overall loop is fun.
I think you could increase the difficult ramp and make it steeper. I eventually forced myself to stop so I could move on with my evening, but I was expecting the game to eventually reach a difficulty level that I would struggle to handle faster.
That's an easy fix if accepted. The game is in great shape.
Congratulations completing the game in a week, especially as a solo dev, and using Unreal. That's an accomplishment to be proud of.
I like the graphics for the game and wandering around the main character's house. With the puzzles, I think I may have cheated. They were very hard to solve initially, until I learned the pattern and was able to keep the character's phone off while completing the tasks; the composure bar (which you misspelled) does not go down if you never turn your phone on. It took many tries to figure out that batteries were a thing, which had me wondering for a while whether the game is solvable.
Your game title, "Lonely," along with some description of the game, seem to promise something that I do not believe the game delivers: a more moody experience where we explore loneliness and frustration. Maybe there's something philosophical in that when you're lonely you solve problems in the dark because you decide you just don't need light (I can see that), until you see light and for some reason that sets something off in you. I was kind of hoping to see the game lean more into what your title seemed to be suggesting. But I did like the game.
First, congratulations on finishing a game jam game! That is a significant accomplishment in and of itself.
This is an interesting puzzle game. It's rather difficult, and I have yet to successfully solve it. You may want to consider offering variable difficulty. Additionally, I am disappointed when I just fail, and I don't get to see what the correct solution was. Seeing the solution is helpful in me understanding what errors I made, which could help me improve in the future.
A mathematician may have opinions on whether every game is solvable according to the mechanics you created and whether a unique solution can be determined. You may want to explore yourself proofs to justify that the puzzle is solvable, if you have not already done so.
This feels like a minesweeper-esque game, and I think the core ideas are very good. The visuals are good enough given the time you had, though you could definitely get prettier in the future. I myself am not that into puzzle games, but I think this game has very good ideas.
Thank you for the feedback! I'm glad you liked it and had fun with the puzzles. Those can be tough to do solo, since you know the solution, and I don't have anyone to test them on.
I'll keep in mind your comment on block placement. I thought that some uncertainty in the placement might add to the fun, but I'm thinking that in general players do not like uncertainty about the effects of their controls, unless that's done really well as a part of the game's mechanics. I do wonder if putting silhouettes on the blocks, or removing the isometric perspective, would detract from the puzzles.
Making a playable game in a week is an accomplishment. It's a hard thing to do. That's why these are not easy. That was actually my goal for this game jam myself (also solo), after previous ones where I was overambitious with my goals and BARELY got something out the door.
When giving reviews, I try to not just say "Good job." There's not much content in that review, and there's plenty of reviews like that. Critical comments foster growth. That's my philosophy.
Not bad. It's playable, the combat is interesting and balancing between doing the job and dealing with the other monster is good. It's a typical fighting game, and the upgrades give you something to go for.
I had some initial difficulty figuring out what I was supposed to be doing and it took a couple tries to figure out that I was supposed to knock down the building then defeat all enemy monsters.
The upgrades are pretty bland. They amount to stat upgrades. While stat boosts are nice, after a few plays of the game, I don't see how the stat boosts actually change how I play the game. You're still doing essentially the same thing: knock down a building, fight a monster. In that sense, other than serving as a carrot, the upgrades don't add anything to the experience. However, they do feel thematic.
This is a mostly conventional fighting game, which is fine.
There is basically no gameplay here. You walk around, jump, and do... nothing, really. There's no consequences for the decision you make at the end in any case. Waiting for the elevator is annoying; this seems like something where it should detect when you are around and lower in response, then go to the next floor up. Visuals are okay, and there may be something in the concept eventually, but as of now, I don't even consider it a game.
EDIT: Let's think about ways to make this an actual game. Right now, there's mechanics, but no real decision space, no demand for player to develop skill. So what could we do to make things interesting? Well, supposedly there are safety hazards in the factory but the boss wants you to overlook them. One might even think the boss is willing to kick back for you overlooking stuff, and you get some monetary reward, or the boss will punish you for each negative item on the report. But this is a trade-off with ensuring safety in the factory, so people could get hurt by the hazards you spot. What if you earned money for each "Yes" but developed a "bad" score whenever something bad happens for the things you overlook? And what goes wrong is randomly determined and unpredictable, so there's an element of risk in what you choose to overlook and what you choose to report. But you also have to manage angering your boss for reporting hazards, so there's an anger score that you have to deal with too. Furthermore, instead of you seeing at the end what your score was, what if you got intermediate feedback so that the player felt like they were making meaningful decisions in the moment?
EDIT: As bugs were fixed with the game, I can edit now.
First, congratulations on finishing the game! That alone is an accomplishment to be proud of.
If viewed as a prototype for a game, I think this has some interesting ideas. I like the idea of a deduction game where you have to wander around a facility to figure out what one needs to do in order to rob it, and listen for clues. Here, finding the clues seems straightforward, by just wandering around and seeing when the pop-up to interact opens, though you DO need to actually read what's said in order to solve the puzzle.
I think I would like this game more if it were not so obvious when you found a clue. I think bringing this game into 3D and having your character wandering around, with audio cues that provide clues on robbing the facility, and there be more "red herrings" when you inspect stuff. I think there may have been some this iteration too that I did not notice (I have not successfully finished the game yet).
You could even keep the hand-drawn art. I like it; it gives the game some character. If you kept the hand-drawn sprites in a 3D space, that could be very appealing.
As it stands right now, the game is okay, fine enough for a game jam game. It's an interesting enough deduction game where you explore, get clues, and use those clues in the end to rob the bank. I think the idea could go further if you wanted to explore it more.






