I got to check it out. Do specific fonts mean the words are connected? How are the words chosen, is it by the position you click (does the same goes for the sounds)?
Thanks for your comment. I see what you mean with the points of feedback you gave. Making it more like a game could perhaps make it more fun and enjoyable. That said, that was sort of intentional, I was making more of an anti-game and the game or interactive project I wanted to make. Maybe in the future I could make my games or interactive projects more like a traditional game, and maybe this one could be changed up in the future as well (maybe even a future remaster(s) or different version(s)), but no definite promises.
I found the original quote, and maybe I took it a bit out of context. My argument might still work, but you can check it out, and you can tell me if I messed up on anything.
"My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because a man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet. Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—namely my idea of justice—was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we would have never found out that it has no meaning; just as, if there was no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we would never know it was dark. Dark would be a word without meaning."
If you think I took something out of context and should make an update, let me know including how to do it.
You're welcome. I'll touch on the CS Lewis bit. So, CS Lewis' argument might have essentially been saying that a universe without meaning would be like a universe without light. He might have been making the point that like how a creature wouldn't be able to know there is light or even have a conception of it so too would a universe without meaning be like. It's in Mere Christianity if you want to where he talks about it (by the way that might have been one of the best arguments in the book, and it might have been better if he spent more time developing that than what he actually did). So, what I did was maybe try to make it more logically correct or something. According to the argument having even a conception of objective meaning would be enough to prove it, but it is possible that maybe he was making a false equivalence, so I might have tried to prove it in a logical way or something, but objectivity might be hard to establish, so I might have made an error or something. That said, as I mentioned at the end, even if I didn't prove certain things true, if the argument is correct and my conception of objective meaning or maybe even some other conception is correct then this might mean the idea that there is no objective meaning is an unfalsifiable and probabilistic position which while maybe not necessarily disproving it does make the position weaker. If you want the page reference to Mere Christianity or something, you can let me know.
Another thing is I initially started by exploring around, and then I died going into like a black void, so maybe that spoiled (as in spoilers) the experience for me.
I think I was playing this game wrong (I'm a semi-pacifist, so the game might have not worked on me), but I might see what the game could be trying to accomplish. Essentially, it might be a critique on how in games we fight thinking we are the good guys and working towards goals that we think mean something when it turns out we might actually be the bad guys and the goals don't mean anything. If you do continue this, I guess I might suggest making that clearer (one instance is the text for the ants was in red which seems to imply that wasn't true though maybe that's color bias), and maybe even a reward for playing it in a pacifist way. Also, maybe try putting some explanation as to why a person is the bad guy instead of just saying they are like the lore behind it and stuff though maybe if I played the game correctly that would have been the explanation since I would be a laser-firing monster. I don't know if this is also meant to critique how we can villainize people that are not enemies at all. Maybe even address our low view of insects sometimes. I would say the visuals could be a bit nicer though there might be something kind of nice about the blurry visuals to some extent (with the more background elements maybe), and maybe this is the style you want to do. The music also works, and I enjoyed it sometimes though maybe the transitioning could be a bit cleaner, but maybe that's more an optimization issue.
Depends on the project. For this one I'm using Blockly to generate Javascript and put html stuff around it. I originally used Batari Basic for Atari games, and then most of the games I made were with Google Web Designer. I do remember you mentioned somewhere something about using Unity eventually, so is that still on the table or not anymore?
I'm somewhere in the middle on average. This game project if it could even be called that might help me go in a better direction, but time will show. What's your Magnum Opus on?
This game's main problem might be its wall jumps. Like the wall jumps off the same wall was kind of nice, but then you get the part where you need to wall jump between two walls, and I haven't succeeded. Maybe some animation on the wall jump or something could help. A simple sprite move might be better than the character just teleporting. Also, checkpoints might be a good addition even as an easier mode or practice mode.
If you can't get it to work on your computer, here's what you can do. Go to the link on your phone, put it sideways, click run game, and set the zoom to 50% or something like that. The game isn't optimized for mobile, so the screen won't be centralized, but in theory the game might run fine.
I don't know what proposital means, but the text or the background shouldn't be white. Maybe try reloading or maybe I could try helping you at some point. (I might know what it means now).
Thanks, you're right especially if they were really good animations with dynamic camera shots, scene changes, and stuff. I don't work on my jam games after I make them usually, and I may not have the skills or want to put the effort of doing them, but if they were really good, they could make this game into a masterpiece.
Hello, I played it and beat it. I think this game was a bit of false advertising though you can tell me if my expectations were wrong. I might have been expecting a mechanic that dealt more with restoring light and maybe something deeper about that. Instead, what the game actually did was restore your jump whenever you got close to a thing that turned to light. Maybe that should have been made clearer, but maybe other people might think differently. Anyway, besides that and the fact that there was room for expansion and length all of which can be attributed to the nature of the jam, this game does have things going for it. The movement definitely works which is always a good thing in a platformer. The jumping mechanic might have been kind of interesting, and there's more that could be done with that. The difficulty curve might have been more on the easier side, but that's better than being on the harder side at least maybe for someone like me. The game doesn't require text for you to understand its mechanics, but rather gameplay which is usually a good thing. There was one platform with light that didn't let you jump off it which didn't really make complete sense. Also, I might have tried not to factor this into my ranking, but music would have likely elevated this experience a lot though that would depend on the right music at least for me.
Hello, I played your game and beat it. So, this game was not as enjoyable as it could have been, so let me make some suggestions. The essential gameplay loop is finding the right square. Right off the bat, there's no skill involved rather it goes down to guessing. Perhaps what you could have done is make the right square a different color, and the skill would have increased. You could even make it harder by making the color slightly off. Also, there's no sense of progression or score system, so the main reason you would play this game is internal motivation. Now, internal motivation is not a bad thing, in many cases it's a good thing. However, in this case, the gameplay loop might have not been engaging enough. What could have helped is adding more complexity. There could be maze structure you have to move around rather than free roam. There could be red enemies you could avoid though I can see how this one could have been frustrating. There could have even been a lock and key mechanic where different colored squares open (and even close) sections of the maze that help you (or even hinder you). Adding external motivation as well could also help.
