itch.io

As the name indicates, this is a nicely presented and very playable Asteroids clone, no more and no less. The Linux and in-browser versions don't work at all on my, admittedly old, Debian machine. They use up all the memory (3 GB + swap) and the whole system grinds almost to a halt. The Windows version, however, runs smoothly on my also-not-new laptop. The in-browser version also works well there.

The graphics are appealing, easily understood and well integrated. The scanline filter was a good choice. Without it, things would probably have looked a little too gaudy. I agree with NightBlade that auto-fire was also a good idea. The fact that the screen doesn't scroll at all makes outer space feel quite cramped. If scrolling is technically feasible, then I think it's something worth trying.

I'd say this is the kind of game that could work well on smartphones. Let the player control the ship by moving their finger on a touchpad area at the bottom of the phone screen. It might also generate more revenue on phone platforms, but that's just a guess from someone who doesn't really know anything about that market. Playing for score is OK, but players might perceive better value for their money if there were a few more game modes (e.g. timed survival, search-and-destroy, etc.).

Addendum: No one has written anything about the sound effects and music, so I'll opine that it's quality work and appropriate to the gameplay.

Probably OpenAL, yes. The error message I get (in a red-X dialog, immediately when I run "The Away Team.exe") reads

The code execution cannot proceed because OpenAL32.dll was not found. Reinstalling the program may fix this problem.

The only DLLs in the install directory are

sfml-audio-2.dll
sfml-graphics-2.dll
sfml-system-2.dll
sfml-window-2.dll

I beat it because I'm smart and took notes. I agree that Signal is an impressive 48-hour achievement, made in significantly less time than I needed to get this review written. The puzzle design is interesting, making the player not only find the right keys but also figure out where each key is and how it is encoded. I think it was a wise decision to respond to correct solutions by triggering dialogue and locking the door controls. Without that feedback, there would've been a lot more for the player to keep track of, perhaps too much. It does leave the puzzles open to brute-forcing, but players who resort to that have only themselves to blame.

The music and background art are appealing and quickly set a Myst-esque mood, drawing you into a a world of eerie splendor. Some of the graphics are unpolished, but I won't hold that against a game like this. It's a story that leaves a lot to the imagination, and the oddness of the puzzle mechanics also makes me lean toward interpreting the whole thing as a dream sequence. I'm not convinced that anyone would actually build a church like that, before or after the apocalypse.

The Conclusion: This game is worth a try, if you're up for a bite-sized adventure game that will require some lateral thinking.

The strategic, army-building view does seem like a work in progress. I'm curious about what it's going to be like in the finished game. There obviously has to be some constraints preventing you from filling every territory with maxed-out units and buildings. It's hard to give useful feedback on that mechanic while it's in such an early stage.

I share your concern that the gameplay as seen in the demo might be a little too straightforward. There will apparently be more unit types in the full game, which is nice, especially if they fill other tactical niches (e.g. long-range artillery, fliers, armored spearheads). Presenting diverse, challenging scenarios is also important. If all you do is walk across the map to whack those guys over there, then there probably won't be much reason to carefully raise your army and make your deployments.

I think the chip-acoustic music is enjoyable and adds personality, but muting it should be an option, yes. Even the best music can become a grating distraction in a protracted battle, when you're trying to concentrate on your plan. There could also be a third option that restricts the music to cutscenes and battle highlights.

My first and second impressions of the Daybreak Empire demo:

The graphics are neat, technically and artistically. It's easy to understand what's going on, without lots of explanatory text. The HUD, terrain and character graphics integrate nicely. I particularly like the abstracted and distinctive character designs. They remind me of the way Ben Costa (the artist behind the comics Shi Long Pang and Rickety Stitch) draws people.

The controls are straightforward, click to select a unit, click to move, click to attack. Some tactical RPGs present you with a rather intricate menu system right from the start, with a multitude of classes, equipment, abilities and so on. I used to play Dwarf Fortress a lot, so I know that navigating that kind of system quite soon becomes second nature, but I'm still not sure that it's worth all the key presses and the heightened threshold for new players. In many cases, good game design can enable complex gameplay without relying on a complicated control scheme.

To actually hit something and deal damage, you need to push a button when a moving slider is close to the center of its track. I'm not sure about this concept. The first time I tried this game, I couldn't hit anything and got so annoyed I uninstalled it. When I tried it again yesterday, I could hit successfully every time. I can understand that RPG creators want to add an unpredictable factor to their battle system, and this approach is definitely an improvement over the random rolls-to-hit in Battle for Wesnoth, which have driven me to ragequit and uninstall not once but twice. That said, I still worry that doing the same old timed button push will eventually become tedious when you play the full game. If they asked me, I'd suggest that they leave it in for now, but consider ways to add variety to this aspect of the game.

Alright, here's some free stuff that might work:

1. Daybreak Empire - Strategy RPG. In development, demo released February 3, a handful of comments and a couple of videos. Ran without problems on my laptop.
2. Signal - Point and click adventure/puzzle game. Made in 48 hours for Global Game Jam 2018. One comment about being stuck on a puzzle. Worked like a charm on the laptop.
3. SUGAR! OVERKILL! - Run and gun action game. In development, demo released two days ago, has received three comments, one video. The game ran nicely on my not very new Windows laptop, only problem was that it wouldn't recognize my joypad.
4. Fell Seal - Another strategy RPG. In development, demo released August 27 last year. Five community threads. The graphics were flickering a lot on my laptop, and this game also failed to recognize the joypad.

We can pick the topmost entry on this list that isn't vetoed by anyone, or do a straw poll among the participants. Either approach works for me.

Free games only is alright. It's probably easier to get the ball rolling that way. I would actually have chosen a free game myself, if I had a good candidate available. It turned out that most of the titles in my collection were very short, already popular and/or not free.

I sympathize with your wish to not have to play games you just can't get into. If this takes off and a decent-sized pool of participants develops, then people skipping games that don't appeal to them shouldn't be a huge problem. If it ends up being just the two of us talking to each other, then frankly I'm not going to continue doing this, anyway. Taking part in community discussions is fine, but I'm not interested in being one half of a reviewer duo.

Commenting on the game pages or otherwise notifying the developers is a good idea, once we have something to show them.

So, should we stick with Away Team like you said or do you want me to go find a free, non-IF game? I could probably do that, if you give me a day. Nominating something yourself is also fine.

EDIT: I just ran into some missing DLL trouble trying to run Away Team on a Windows machine, so that's another reason why it might not be the best choice.

I've looked at a few, at least. Away Team by Underflow Studios is an interactive fiction adventure in space with some graphical elements. I started playing it a while ago, but stopped due to lack of time and a few annoyances, like text that occasionally wouldn't scroll. The story and concept of the game still intrigues me, so if you're up for it then we can start there. The minimum price is $2, is that OK?

• I agree that insightful and actionable feedback is more important than ratings. A five-star voting system with no subcategories provides very little information.
• I'm concerned about this becoming yet another vehicle for self-promotion. That's why I'm not keen on letting people nominate their own games. That at least one person who isn't the developer cares about the game is a reasonable bar to set, IMO. If someone sees someone else asking for feedback and thinks their game is worth nominating, then that's fine, of course.
• If each participant picks a game on their own, won't this become a lot like the "Recommend a game" board? For me, this is as much about getting some discussions going as providing feedback to developers. With all the talent that's gathered here, I find it a little sad that 90% of the activity on the boards is advertising and requests for support. Have the conversations moved to Discord and Twitter and all that newfangled stuff? I'm a forum guy, myself.

I like this idea. How about starting small, selecting a single (unrated, or dubiously rated) game for the participants to play, discuss, rate and review each week (or every two weeks)? Anyone could nominate a game (not one of their own), but only one user gets to pick the game to review. I suppose we could then notify the maker(s) of the selected game before we begin, in case they don't want that kind of attention. As the topic starter, NightBlade could choose the first game. Then every week the current game picker could pass on the game-picking baton to one of the users who participated the previous week, in a round-robin fashion.