Great game concept. The instructions were a little vague at first but I got the hang of it. My only complaint is being able to stack them breaks the game balance. I also dont like that you cant unclick the rotate button if you accidently click it and it will waste a turn
I like the concept, but I was hoping for it to manifest as something more elegant in its depth, like a puzzle game version of the Game of Life. This ruleset feels more complex than good arcadey, perception-based puzzle scoring games tend to be, but it's not quite deep enough to work as a simulation game that gets you considering strategies at a high level of abstraction, either. I think as-is, this is a sort of game that I would play with levels and objectives rather than scoring.
Hey thanks for playing! My hope is that with proper graphics and some work making the gameplay more intuitive, it will feel closer to an arcadey puzzler then a complex simulation. Right now I think the lack of clarity
Levels are a great idea though, it would really open up the game to more play-ability once the base game get repetitive. I would need to think of good objectives though... Maybe something like "Select one shape to place that results in only Red shapes remaining" or something like that.
Have this feeling like I've played something like this a long, long time ago as a kid.
The mechanics are good, even if the "extra abilities" need time to get used to (and I was confused by the "Fly" ability). Obviously needs better sprites and some sounds, but it feels like a very solid foundation for a puzzler.
Lol I lost when a blue shape ate two yellow shapes in a row. Was doing an alright job of keeping the game going. I wish trees weren't a bad thing though because I instinctively wanted to create a lush forest. Also wondering if it might be nice to replace the shapes with animals instead, like seeing a lion eat a gazelle is easier to process than 'this color eats that color'
Thanks for playing! It's definitely the plan to replace the shapes with animals, I just need to find/draw so assets for them, which will probably be most of the "work" for this games.
I wonder if I could replace the trees with something else, maybe like ugly brambles or something to make it more clearly a negative thing...
Though it's raw right now but the game has potential! Like another commenter said, there's something about "intuition". The lose condition isn't intuitive and the winning condition isn't the most OCD-satisfying one, like how in Tetris the winning condition is to make a satisfying row which then takes you further from death by removing a line of blocks. Instead, the win condition here actually takes you closer to losing!
For example, seeing new objects like trees or ponds show up feels like a positive thing, creatures dying and turning into grass feels like a positive thing. Making something new from shapes that are trying to eat each other feels like it's positive. I didn't read the tutorial the first time around so I was surprised when filling up the whole board was actually the lose condition and not the win condition because filling up the whole board seemed like the OCD-satisfying choice.
Then, given there are 5 lose conditions (no moves, any of the 4 creatures are extinct) I just can't keep track of it, it feels like you can lose out of nowhere if you're trying to make creatures eat each other. The best play is to just not let them eat. Also... If creatures can go extinct, it feels weird to let the player place them willy-nilly. It doesn't feel like the creatures can intuitively go extinct if the player has an endless supply of them in their pocket. If you had to create more creatures from existing creatures, that feels like it'd make sense. The player would know that if all copies of a creature disappear there'd be no way to bring that creature back to life.
Once you have enough effects and polish, plus it's more intuitive, you won't even need a tutorial and players can figure it out and explore the game on their own.
Thanks for trying it out and the great feedback! The point about tetris is definitely a good one, I should make the "correct" way to play more fun and rewarding. Something as simple as point values popping up when an animals eats another one or something would probably help.
The reason the win conditions are what they are now is it's the "real" problems an ecosystem faces, IE: losing a key predator/prey animal can de-stabalize the entire food chain, same with over-population. Maybe that would be more clear with good assets and an actual animals for the shapes.
I really appreciate the feedback, you've given me some good inspiration for games to study and take lessons from!
i would have passed this over if i hadn't seen how much fun it was to watch ZCRPG streamer play it because its hard to tell at a glance that its fun
it is hard to get into, though. part of that is because it doesn't have the kind of video/audio polish that makes it satisfying to set up chains in arcade games, but also because it feels too many mechanics causing the game to be complex instead of a challenge that comes from refined interactions of simple mechanics like you'd find in Tetris or Puyo Puyo
in the end i was too brainlet to create the chains i thought i would be able to. making each "lifeform" a different shape means i have to remind myself which beats which every turn which is a lot of mental overhead
Hey thanks for playing and the tough feedback! I'm definitively going to improve the sound and graphics (or lack thereof) and hopefully that will make the gameplay less obtuse. I'm thinking once I work on clarity, the amount of mechanics won't feel as overwhelming.
Your last sentence really hits the nail on the head. I need to reduce mental overhead for players in anyway I can.
Thanks a lot for the criticism and for playing in general! I hope it'll be better next DD.
I agree in that it feels very non-intuitive. But it definitely feels like a very deep puzzle/simulation game. I knew what yellow did since I read the tutorial but I had no idea what the ability name for yellow meant, I find out its the correct term but I had no idea what it meant until I googled it. Maybe its a me issue but I never heard the word "Graze" be used to refer to eating grass used before. Placing an animal on the same square as another when it dies of starvation places both grass and the animal, if you then have yellow eat that grass tile you can have two animals on the same tile. Not sure if this is a bug or not, feels like it could be either.
Having an indication of what will happen when you do CW/counter CW rotation would be very beneficial. I found it pretty fun to play, each move requiring a pretty good amount of thought. Excited to see how it looks next DD.
I really appreciate you trying it out, and the super in-depth feedback (and bug report)! I'll definitely work on the clarity of the gameplay, and hopefully that will make the game more accessible and smooth to play. I've already got some ideas to subtly indicate what the outcome of a move will be, and how to warn players when shapes are close to starving.
>"Not sure if this is a bug or not, feels like it could be either." Definitively a bug, once everything is done, the only things that should be able to share a tile are the Blue guys and the pond terrain (Right now he just eats the ponds)
Very interesting puzzler. Some changes to visuals would be nice, but more importantly maybe a tutorial? If you can set the game up to introduce mechanics/hiearchy over some stretch of play, I can see it hooking many players.
Thanks for playing and the kind words! I've always struggled with integrated tutorials, but I think it's time I challenge myself and actually make one.
Cool idea, would have liked to play more but I kept getting confused by the icon showing the direction a shape will move in. Can it just be an arrow that points INTO the direction it will go? Otherwise my circuits will never get it.
Also would be cool if it weren’t "shapes" but something tangible where the food chain is intuitive. I always had to look into the upper right to remind myself of it.
Thanks so much for playing, and the great VOD (I loved the west marches gameplay as well!)
>Also would be cool if it weren’t "shapes" but something tangible where the food chain is intuitive. I always had to look into the upper right to remind myself of it. This is 100% the plan, I want them to be distinct creatures with fun animations when they eat each other.
Thanks again for the VOD, it's so helpful to see someone play in real time.
Not very clear what do do from the start. But otherwise an interesting idea for a puzzle game. Could be really good with a bit of polish.
Suggestions:
Some more visual hinting might help, like displaying an outline of the shape you’re about to add on hover (rather than just enlarging the tile)
Rather than have an instructions page, let the player learn the rules through playing the game.
Tooltips could help with this. Have a little explainer when you hover over the other tile types like grass etc.
Win/fail state not very clear. After a playthough I think the goal is to survive for as many turns as possible, and failure is when one of the shape types is extinct.
Possibly a bug or just an oversight:
Once I clicked on a rotate button, I couldn’t exit that state. Tried right-clicking, Escape key, clicking the button again, etc. Playing web version.
Thanks a ton for playing, and the great feedback! >"like displaying an outline of the shape you’re about to add on hover" This is a great idea, and would help with a lot with clarity.
>"Win/fail state not very clear. After a playthough I think the goal is to survive for as many turns as possible, and failure is when one of the shape types is extinct." Yes exactly. I hoped the count of shapes would help make that more clear, but I should give some more warning (like text turns red when you are at 1 shape left). You can also lose by filling up the grid completely, but that doesn't happen often right now.
>"Once I clicked on a rotate button, I couldn’t exit that state." Apologies, this is 100% an oversight.
Thanks again for the great feedback, it's already given me some great ideas!
Thanks for trying it! I hope that gameplay will become more intuitive when I replace the sprites with actual animals, and the food cycle should be easier to understand.
I really appreciate the feedback though, thanks again for playing!
Comments
Great game concept. The instructions were a little vague at first but I got the hang of it. My only complaint is being able to stack them breaks the game balance. I also dont like that you cant unclick the rotate button if you accidently click it and it will waste a turn
Thanks for playing! I plan to fix all of that on the next update (hopefully).
Hope I can catch the stream of you trying it!
looking forward to it!
I like the concept, but I was hoping for it to manifest as something more elegant in its depth, like a puzzle game version of the Game of Life. This ruleset feels more complex than good arcadey, perception-based puzzle scoring games tend to be, but it's not quite deep enough to work as a simulation game that gets you considering strategies at a high level of abstraction, either. I think as-is, this is a sort of game that I would play with levels and objectives rather than scoring.
Hey thanks for playing! My hope is that with proper graphics and some work making the gameplay more intuitive, it will feel closer to an arcadey puzzler then a complex simulation. Right now I think the lack of clarity
Levels are a great idea though, it would really open up the game to more play-ability once the base game get repetitive. I would need to think of good objectives though... Maybe something like "Select one shape to place that results in only Red shapes remaining" or something like that.
Have this feeling like I've played something like this a long, long time ago as a kid.
The mechanics are good, even if the "extra abilities" need time to get used to (and I was confused by the "Fly" ability). Obviously needs better sprites and some sounds, but it feels like a very solid foundation for a puzzler.
Hope you'll continue developing it!
Hey thanks for playing! I loved watching you play it on stream, it was so cool watching you figure it out.
Lol I lost when a blue shape ate two yellow shapes in a row. Was doing an alright job of keeping the game going. I wish trees weren't a bad thing though because I instinctively wanted to create a lush forest. Also wondering if it might be nice to replace the shapes with animals instead, like seeing a lion eat a gazelle is easier to process than 'this color eats that color'
Thanks for playing! It's definitely the plan to replace the shapes with animals, I just need to find/draw so assets for them, which will probably be most of the "work" for this games.
I wonder if I could replace the trees with something else, maybe like ugly brambles or something to make it more clearly a negative thing...
Though it's raw right now but the game has potential!
Like another commenter said, there's something about "intuition". The lose condition isn't intuitive and the winning condition isn't the most OCD-satisfying one, like how in Tetris the winning condition is to make a satisfying row which then takes you further from death by removing a line of blocks. Instead, the win condition here actually takes you closer to losing!
For example, seeing new objects like trees or ponds show up feels like a positive thing, creatures dying and turning into grass feels like a positive thing. Making something new from shapes that are trying to eat each other feels like it's positive. I didn't read the tutorial the first time around so I was surprised when filling up the whole board was actually the lose condition and not the win condition because filling up the whole board seemed like the OCD-satisfying choice.
Then, given there are 5 lose conditions (no moves, any of the 4 creatures are extinct) I just can't keep track of it, it feels like you can lose out of nowhere if you're trying to make creatures eat each other. The best play is to just not let them eat.
Also... If creatures can go extinct, it feels weird to let the player place them willy-nilly. It doesn't feel like the creatures can intuitively go extinct if the player has an endless supply of them in their pocket. If you had to create more creatures from existing creatures, that feels like it'd make sense. The player would know that if all copies of a creature disappear there'd be no way to bring that creature back to life.
Once you have enough effects and polish, plus it's more intuitive, you won't even need a tutorial and players can figure it out and explore the game on their own.
Thanks for trying it out and the great feedback! The point about tetris is definitely a good one, I should make the "correct" way to play more fun and rewarding. Something as simple as point values popping up when an animals eats another one or something would probably help.
The reason the win conditions are what they are now is it's the "real" problems an ecosystem faces, IE: losing a key predator/prey animal can de-stabalize the entire food chain, same with over-population. Maybe that would be more clear with good assets and an actual animals for the shapes.
I really appreciate the feedback, you've given me some good inspiration for games to study and take lessons from!
Having trouble to run this, was very interested based on the instructions screenshot, and I have a softspot for ecosims, I'll be back on a pc.
Great, I'd love to hear your thoughts! Let me know if you have more issues, I'll try my best to fix them, or at least find a work around.
i would have passed this over if i hadn't seen how much fun it was to watch ZCRPG streamer play it because its hard to tell at a glance that its fun
it is hard to get into, though. part of that is because it doesn't have the kind of video/audio polish that makes it satisfying to set up chains in arcade games, but also because it feels too many mechanics causing the game to be complex instead of a challenge that comes from refined interactions of simple mechanics like you'd find in Tetris or Puyo Puyo
in the end i was too brainlet to create the chains i thought i would be able to. making each "lifeform" a different shape means i have to remind myself which beats which every turn which is a lot of mental overhead
Hey thanks for playing and the tough feedback! I'm definitively going to improve the sound and graphics (or lack thereof) and hopefully that will make the gameplay less obtuse. I'm thinking once I work on clarity, the amount of mechanics won't feel as overwhelming.
Your last sentence really hits the nail on the head. I need to reduce mental overhead for players in anyway I can.
Thanks a lot for the criticism and for playing in general! I hope it'll be better next DD.
I agree in that it feels very non-intuitive. But it definitely feels like a very deep puzzle/simulation game. I knew what yellow did since I read the tutorial but I had no idea what the ability name for yellow meant, I find out its the correct term but I had no idea what it meant until I googled it. Maybe its a me issue but I never heard the word "Graze" be used to refer to eating grass used before. Placing an animal on the same square as another when it dies of starvation places both grass and the animal, if you then have yellow eat that grass tile you can have two animals on the same tile. Not sure if this is a bug or not, feels like it could be either.
Having an indication of what will happen when you do CW/counter CW rotation would be very beneficial. I found it pretty fun to play, each move requiring a pretty good amount of thought. Excited to see how it looks next DD.
I really appreciate you trying it out, and the super in-depth feedback (and bug report)! I'll definitely work on the clarity of the gameplay, and hopefully that will make the game more accessible and smooth to play. I've already got some ideas to subtly indicate what the outcome of a move will be, and how to warn players when shapes are close to starving.
>"Not sure if this is a bug or not, feels like it could be either."
Definitively a bug, once everything is done, the only things that should be able to share a tile are the Blue guys and the pond terrain (Right now he just eats the ponds)
Thanks again for playing, it means a lot to me
Very interesting puzzler. Some changes to visuals would be nice, but more importantly maybe a tutorial? If you can set the game up to introduce mechanics/hiearchy over some stretch of play, I can see it hooking many players.
Thanks for playing and the kind words! I've always struggled with integrated tutorials, but I think it's time I challenge myself and actually make one.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2077858024?t=2h2m31s
Cool idea, would have liked to play more but I kept getting confused by the icon showing the direction a shape will move in. Can it just be an arrow that points INTO the direction it will go? Otherwise my circuits will never get it.
Also would be cool if it weren’t "shapes" but something tangible where the food chain is intuitive. I always had to look into the upper right to remind myself of it.
Thanks so much for playing, and the great VOD (I loved the west marches gameplay as well!)
>Also would be cool if it weren’t "shapes" but something tangible where the food chain is intuitive. I always had to look into the upper right to remind myself of it.
This is 100% the plan, I want them to be distinct creatures with fun animations when they eat each other.
Thanks again for the VOD, it's so helpful to see someone play in real time.
Not very clear what do do from the start. But otherwise an interesting idea for a puzzle game. Could be really good with a bit of polish.
Suggestions:
Possibly a bug or just an oversight:
Thanks a ton for playing, and the great feedback!
>"like displaying an outline of the shape you’re about to add on hover"
This is a great idea, and would help with a lot with clarity.
>"Win/fail state not very clear. After a playthough I think the goal is to survive for as many turns as possible, and failure is when one of the shape types is extinct."
Yes exactly. I hoped the count of shapes would help make that more clear, but I should give some more warning (like text turns red when you are at 1 shape left). You can also lose by filling up the grid completely, but that doesn't happen often right now.
>"Once I clicked on a rotate button, I couldn’t exit that state."
Apologies, this is 100% an oversight.
Thanks again for the great feedback, it's already given me some great ideas!
While I found the gameplay nonintuitive, the premise is interesting. I immediately wanted to play it once I saw it!
Thanks for trying it! I hope that gameplay will become more intuitive when I replace the sprites with actual animals, and the food cycle should be easier to understand.
I really appreciate the feedback though, thanks again for playing!