Damn. A very interesting entry!
This might be the most visually appealing game of the jam yet, you're only combining primitive shapes together. Impressive. I'll have to note it down in my book. The particle system and the music are very simple yet, they are very effective at conveying the fact that you're underwater.
This game brings me Agar.io flashbacks. What would you add to this game if you had 3 days instead of 3h to work on it?
First of all, thank you for your comment :)
This is the first time I've made a game with just simple shapes like this. I actually drew everything directly in the game engine, which saved me a lot of time! And I'm quite proud of the fact that I was able to suggest the calm and agitation of the aquatic depths with such minimalist graphics.
As for Agar.io, it's perhaps an unconscious inspiration: I played it a lot about ten years ago (time flies!).
If I had three days instead of three hours, I'd try to solve the inevitable problem of this type of game (which is linked to its main quality): The aim of the game is to get the biggest snake possible, and as the snake increases, the game naturally becomes more difficult as there's less and less room to move around. It's a very interesting principle, and one that the original “snake” game exploited perfectly. But there naturally comes a point when the game stops because there's little or no room left. So, with three days ahead of me, I'll try to make the game a little more infinite, because this is the kind of game you can play on the train, in the doctor's waiting room or simply in bed on a chill day.
In short, I think we need to implement a system of upgrade choices (a bit like in hades, or in vampire survivor), which is minimalist but can renew the gameplay and increase the game's lifespan. A few examples of possible upgrades: increase the size of the terrain, attract nearby food to yourself, obtain a kind of shield to protect you once against an unfortunate shock, reduce the size of your body without lowering your score, and so on.
And perhaps in parallel with these improvements, other elements could increase the difficulty: more enemies, different enemies, momentarily forbidden game zones, etc.
The idea, of course, would be to keep things as minimalist as possible, but I think it's possible.
Maybe you'll get to see this version one day, as I'm thinking of making a small mobile application. I just need to find the time in the midst of my other projects.
Ho, you might go for a mobile port huh? Understandable. With the current controls, the game does in fact scream "touch screen". I've just tested it on my Samsung Galaxy S10 (Android) and it works since it's a WebGL build! The snake is indeed easier to control this way! Do you still want to have a dedicated mobile build?
About the limitations you've mentioned, yes it's fair. For these kind of games, "why should the player play again" is really a key point and the player usually stops playing once he feels like "he has seen everything the game has to offer". Adding more power-ups and more enemy hazards would be indeed a way to increase the lifespan of the game.
Honestly speaking though, are you sure about aiming for the mobile market? 10 years ago there weren't that many games on mobile so a lot of small but fun games could make it big like Doodle Jump, Angry Birds, Temple Run, Flappy bird (and so on). Nowadays though, making games and shipping on every platform has never been easier so, competition is at an all-time high. The Google Play Store is now flooded with games, both short and long and it has become quite hard to make a place for yourself. Are you sure that you want to dive into this market? Or are you not taking it too seriously?
Honestly, I don't know anything about the mobile gaming market. I just know that today's younger generations have strangely fewer computers than they used to, and that many do everything on their mobiles. I'm clearly a PC gamer and very rarely play on my mobile. But I have people around me who only play my games if they're playable on mobile. So I ask myself this question and try to take it into account.
I'm in the process of creating a game that will be playable on both PC and mobile, and I'll be selling it on Steam, Itch, playstore and so on. It will be the first game I market. So it will also be a way for me to understand how it all works and where I stand in the market.
On the other hand, I'm not looking for my games to become famous or create a buzz. I just want to be able to make a sustainable living from this business. And since I don't know the mobile app market either, I'll have to try and find out. So this game, which I don't think will require much effort to produce something nice, is the perfect opportunity to give it a try :)
Hum.... you said that you just want to make a living from making games, but it does involve your game having a certain level of fame. Lots of people are expecting everything to be free on mobile so if you want to make a living from free downloads and Ads revenue, you really need a huge player base to pay the bills. On the other hand, if you want to sell your game on mobile, people will be scared away really fast if you go above $5 for the price so, you also need a large player base to cover that.
Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not saying this to take a hit on your motivation but these are genuine concerns I have. If making games is a hobby for you, then not actively trying to market your game is fine. I'll even go as far as saying that it's the most enjoyable game dev experience you could have: making games with 0 pressure. If you want to pay the bills only from Game Dev though, you sometimes have to get your hands on some stuff you don't like, like preparing and conducting a Marketing campaign to make sure that people see your game. Stores are flooded with so many games right now. It has become very hard to stand out from the crowd.
If you ever release the game, I'll be curious to see the next version! I'll follow you here on itch to make sure I get notified. I wish you the best man! It was interesting having this conversation with you!
I think that to make a living as an indie dev, you have to find a happy medium. I'm not going to bet on commercial success with the first games I publish. So really, I'm going ahead with the idea of trying things out and maybe I'll come to the same conclusions as you, but I've got to give it a go. Plus, I've got the advantage of being able to take my time a bit before I manage to make a living from this business. In France, where I live, I receive the RSA, which is a minimum income. It's a very important right (which is particularly under threat from current politicians, so I don't know how long this situation will last), but in the meantime it allows me to live on a minimum income without worrying too much about bills.
Also, I think the mobile market is saturated, but there are also a lot of people who download small games and don't mind paying small amounts. If I had to put a price on the game I imagine making, I wouldn't imagine more than $1.
But that's also because I'm not going to spend a phenomenal amount of time creating this game. My current idea is not to spend a year or two on a game that has to work at all costs. On the contrary, I'd like to create several small games that don't require more than a few weeks or months of investment. Less risk if a game doesn't work, and more sanity!
