Play project
One Gun's itch.io pageResults
| Criteria | Rank | Score* | Raw Score |
| Potential playability | #2 | 4.111 | 4.111 |
| Overall | #6 | 3.519 | 3.519 |
| Clarity | #8 | 3.444 | 3.444 |
| Theme Relevance | #8 | 3.000 | 3.000 |
Ranked from 9 ratings. Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam.
Leave a comment
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
Comments
This GDD immediately gives me the impression of a fun wave survival game mixed with a tower defense, which isn't exactly a new genre as it's not really reinventing or contributing anything peoplehaven't seen before.
There are a few sections where concise clarity would help improve readability and getting your intent across better, most notably sections where the word maybe is used a bunch.
The story and gameplay elements that are described seem fun and where most of the time and effort where placed but I kind of wonder how that really meshes with a few elements that tie in with each other. If this is supposed to be an area of defense to hold back the aliens against humanity why are they starting off so under prepared with a single turret? Just something that could use more thought or polish and could be gone into more detail for the setting and setup which is a rather easy fix, seeing how the story elements you do have are rather solid. Another thing that struck me is that the game is called One Gun but during upgrades you are attaching multiple guns to hard points so it's technically more than One Gun? Just something funny that confused me on that aspect.
On the whole I would play the heck out of this game, always into upgrading systems and growing big and strong in games and mowing down unending enemies.
There are a bunch of submissions and I wanted to give feedback to everyone, so I'm going to list some strengths and weaknesses that I perceive from the GDD's in this challenge (take with a grain of salt, I recognize the challenge this jam theme + time limitations, especially during a holiday weekend).
Strengths: This is a very playable game, it seems like a lot of fun.
Weaknesses: I personally would have preferred more visual representations in this GDD to explain some of the concepts more easily. The UI Interface & Graphics, gameplay explanations, and audio section could have had non-text elements and give a better understanding to the viewer. The core loop isn't a core loop, so it's impossible to tell what the core gameplay looks like from this section. I wish this had some story. There's an implication of story by virtue of having several characters, enemies, and lore about the Game World, but I don't think it's delivered in this document. I would also caution against this lofty promise you've made in the Genre section. Delivering these game elements in 30 minutes seems like a lot, and I think you would get more value out of stretching that amount of time. Based on the amount of content in this GDD (and what is implied by the content of the GDD), I imagine the base game should take at least 3 hours to complete, not including side missions. This game would (in my opinion) greatly benefit from having game pillars to guide you in further refining what is already here. You have plenty, I would maximize it and capitalize on what seems like a great idea.
I appreciate your review and addressing each point forwardly.
I'm glad you think the game is playable; that's the hope at the end of the day!
I didn't use visual representations for things because as you acknowledged I had a very limited time to complete this document. However, in the next phase of developing this document I'll refine each section by replacing most of the written description with visual equivalents.
I can see that in retrospect; I may have followed the tool tip on the IGA Template a little too literally by only just stating the actions the player would do as a part of the gameplay loop. I may have tacked on fragments of the gameplay loop into the other sections of the document.
The story, like some other elements of this document, were impromptu/improv. I made it up as I went and am not as proficient in developing narratives rapidly as I'd like to be. The story elements or implication of them were more to lay a foundation or expectation in the limited time I had and "as-I-go" nature of the development.
The genre references and correlations to other game titles were a way I thought I could use to describe the idea of the game in different ways without spending too much time writing every granule of detail specifically. It was a cost assessment I made and I fell short expecting imagination/interpretation to do the work. The concept will be distilled and refined into a more concise and definitive idea while also improving the visual reference/aid to help readers/team members paint a better mental picture of the project.
I appreciate your time writing this comment and providing good feedback to my GDD. I'll do my due diligence in identifying the game's core pillars more clearly and restructuring the document in the future!
I liked how your intro was an introduction to your team. Nice touch.
The entire thing was well written.
I'm a little confused about the two (human?) characters -- the Admiral and Engineer. Why are they here? Why should we care about them?
Thanks Maka!
The logical purpose of the Admiral and Engineer existing as characters in the game is to enrich the single player experience One Gun can offer. In the options menu, dialog could be toned down in frequency or muted all-together aside from story-critical dialog. Narratively, the Admiral and Engineer also give some tethers to the immersion of the world; like you feel like you're in a massive space ship with an army instead of wandering mostly alone and passively existing. There may also be opportunities for side-quests driven by them as you find and recover pieces of their original Stellar Fortress and [REDACTED].
I hope that sufficiently addresses that question. I appreciate your time reading my document and leaving your review!
Love the concept, and a game which focuses on customization of mechs and rearranging parts into creative new configurations sounded really cool to me!
The document did a good job of explaining the overview of the game and the main progression/upgrade pathways. I would have liked to see more detail on the specifics of combat mechanics and how rearranging parts can help with that. There were some intriguing descriptions of mobility-based parts like legs or hover-jets, but not combat-focused parts like gun types - which felt odd because high-octane gun combat seemed to be the main focus of the gameplay more than mobility or exploration. More specifics of how exactly you would combine parts to create different mechs - how the interface would work, what are the restrictions, etc - might have been more useful than the menus and save system description which is less unique to this particular game.
Likewise it would be nice to read more about how the different types of enemies function and look in-game - the story background for each race was super interesting to read, but I couldn’t imagine how they’d look or fight without more info.
The format and content was pretty clear and easy to read, although some diagrams might have helped when it comes to describing things like the HUD.
As for the genre, the Mecha-like genre described already seems to have a fair number of titles, and the document doesn’t specify which part of the design is genre-defining. The comparison of ‘more real-time and fast-paced building process than Crossout’ is intriguing, but the rest of the doc doesn’t mention real-time building and only seems to let you re-build your mech at certain key points. Likewise ‘an engineering take on Spore’ sounds instantly attractive to me, but is hard to substantiate without more description of the customization system itself, and what makes it deeper or more creative than other Mecha-like games.
That’s my feedback - definitely looking forward to see more of this if you plan to take it further!
Thanks Surya! I'm grateful to hear that you like the concept!
I suppose I got a bit too imperative with simple system descriptions there. I'm not exactly sure why of all the things I could've left open to interpretation I chose that... As for the choice of describing some of the mobility parts the reason I did that was because I didn't think about it in the initial concept; I had just imagined your CRDT would just be a stationary turret where it was dropped, but then I realized that might be difficult to make engaging if I expected story to be tied into it.
Aye, the story and enemy factions themselves were a bit "on-the-spot" too. Sort of made things up realtime as I kept describing the doc. I wanted to make visual references for them and the systems but realized my next best bet was cleaning up the typography with the limited time I had.
I did get a little "pitch-happy" there I'll be honest. Defining a new genre is more challenging than I thought it would be so I just restructured a game I had in mind to try and make it unique enough to be one. Association is how I do that best but I suppose without one definitively unique trait it sort of falls apart in that regard. I can accept that and move on when further developing the project.
I appreciate your time and insight with your response! I've got a call tomorrow to help me determine some next steps, but this one could be it for me.
I want to start by saying that I would absolutely play the hell out of this game. I’m always a big fan of any game where you trick out your equipment with cool guns and use them to strategically blast the crap out of enemies.
To me, your genre description didn’t make sense. When you talk about going from location to location on a map, upgrading between locations, and using your upgrades to fight off enemies, my first thought is "roguelike," especially that this sounds similar to FTL or Convoy. Now, to be clear, a game like FTL and Convoy is totally an autobuy for me. But it's not a new genre, and it feels coy that you didn't mention that term anywhere. Tower defense seems like another obvious genre that I’m surprised you didn’t mention. On the other hand, you do mention several genres that don’t seem closely related at all, like RTS and RPG.
I was also a little unclear on how the structure of the battles actually functions. Are the enemies trying to attack you, or are you trying to prevent them from getting past you to another objective? What’s the win condition? Destroy a certain number of enemies, survive a certain amount of time, collect a certain amount of resources?
Otherwise I thought the game description was solid; the aliens sounded interesting and I liked the NPCs. But I would qualify this as a fun new game in the vein of FTL, rather than a new genre.
I appreciate the review you wrote Gwen!
Looking back at my doc and comparing it to your feedback I can see how the genre description may have been misaligned with the actual gameplay. As I made things up I suppose I neglected to check for continuity in that regard.
I hadn't heard of either Convoy or FTL before your comment and found them on store pages like Steam. I suppose compared to those two my game would be a spin on them.
In the time I had between Mother's Day events and errands I wasn't able to fully flesh things out with the combat system in a way I would have found sufficient but I recognize those sections stand to have room for improvement beyond what the titles of mission types would suggest.
Your assessment is reasonable and I thank you again for your time in leaving your review! I'll keep it in mind as the GDD develops and becomes a full game!