Skip to main content

On Sale: GamesAssetsToolsTabletopComics
Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs
TagsGame Engines

This game was very hard for me. For someone who knew absolutely nothing about match-3 in general I had absolutely no idea how I was supposed to get more than I match at a time. I figured it out by watching the vid you posted in another comment, if I was my own it might have taken me a while. The "strategy" I've figured out so far is that to move orbs I mostly spin my selected orb around a square or rectangle so that the orbs I wanna move shift around the perimeter around like on a conveyor belt until they move over. I also realized that by using diagonal swaps you can do things a lot faster than that, but (playing with a mouse) it wasn't easy to get diagonal swaps consistently, and it made things more difficult to visualize in advance, so I didn't do it much, except in "tangled" mode against the lizard.

Tangled mode was actually even harder for me, even if I had time to think and plan ahead, which makes me think I'm probably still missing some basic strategy.

Anyway using this information in normal timed mode I managed to beat 3 stages for 3 or 4 times but never managed to beat 4.

Most of the time, I wouldn't pay too much attention to which orbs I was popping because popping a decent number was already kind of a challenge so I had to go for the low hanging fruits anyway.

From my point of view, the (?) stages were counterproductive, because it'd make me go against a more difficult enemy sooner. But I guess this doesn't matter to someone skilled enough to beat all the stages.

In terms of visual communication, the fact that only the enemy HP has a bar and the rest is just numbers meant that it'd feel pretty underwhelming whenever I was doing anything other than raw damage, especially because I was mostly focused on actually learning to get matches and not paying too much attention on the stats part.

Overall the difficulty curve was absolutely brutal, I had to learn how basic match-3 works, how to move orbs around the map efficiently, all while being on the timer, and how the turn-based battle system worked at the same time. Infinite mode (and tangled mode) helped me a lot to figure out the basics, but the skills weren't exactly 100% transferable as timed mode kinda required me to come up with new strats to actually get things done in time. Also in general nobody expects to find the tutorial as a special seed. If you want this game to be accessible to normies you'll need to have a way clearer and slower tutorial mode that goes through all these things slowly and one by one, and to have it clearly labeled as a tutorial within the game.

Another thing, I won't pretend I know anything about this, but does *anyone* do this kind of high-speed match-3 gameplay where you're supposed to rearrange many pieces before they combine? From what I knew about match-3 in most cases it's way more casual and you do just a couple swaps then just let it fall.

I will say though, art and visual style, music, UI design, and everything else is amazing. As I said a million times before I had no clue about match-3 games and no real interest in figuring them out, if this game managed to keep me interested it's because of that too.

I'm sorry, this is a very long post and I think I've repeated a lot of stuff in more than one place, but I hope it's helpful somehow. Good luck with the game, I hope to see it again next time.

Duly noted, it has become abundantly clear that a visual tutorial is needed. I will admit that I was trying to avoid making a full fledged tutorial, but, seeing how the video I posted cleared things up, this is one of those cases where showing how matching works gives information that would be too difficult to convey in writing.

>Tangled mode was actually even harder for me

I personally find it harder as well (depending on how many moves you can do), hence why I made it a malus. The reasoning is that, when matching normally, what usually happens is that you plan a route to tidy up a side of the board, and can usually tackle the other side without having planned ahead, because the area is smaller and lets you ad-lib without getting lost. When your amount of moves is fixed however you really want to try and be efficient not only on this large scale, but also locally, because you're rewarded for fixing any combo that's near your held orb (and sometimes as a result you get "caged in" your own combos, forcing you to undo one of them to get out and wasting time). Plus as you said oftentimes the most efficient move to make is a diagonal one, and they're hard to pull off consistently.

>From my point of view, the (?) stages were counterproductive, because it'd make me go against a more difficult enemy sooner. 

Well spotted, the fights at the first few depths are pulled from an easier encounter table, so using an event node at the start has this drawback.

>In terms of visual communication, the fact that only the enemy HP has a bar and the rest is just numbers meant that it'd feel pretty underwhelming whenever I was doing anything other than raw damage, especially because I was mostly focused on actually learning to get matches and not paying too much attention on the stats part.

I'm not quite sure what are you referring to, are you talking about block and evasion coming off as less important than damage?

>does *anyone* do this kind of high-speed match-3 gameplay where you're supposed to rearrange many pieces before they combine?

The only other game I know of is Puzzle and Dragons, which I shamelessly took a page from; everything else seems to follow the traditional candy crush single swap. The fact that this latter style of gameplay dominates the genre is probably yet another reason why a hard to play/not casual match-3 game needs a tutorial.

Finally, thanks for the kind words on the UX, it's reassuring to hear that it doesn't feel as cheap/rushed as its creation was.