Hey!
First up: This is lovely and reminds me of the Watergate-boardgame.
Secondly: The twitter-link on your itch page leads to nowhere and should probably point to @VinlandToVolga ?
Take care!
Thanks for your feedback! Do you mean movement as the tall guy, the strong one or both?
We wanted to pronounce the differences between them to increase cooperation and communication (our intended audience being two players). Tall one should barely have to walk with the ball at all. But apparently we communicated that poorly?
Thanks for playing! Yeah, the fuse doesn't move, it's a simple animation and 5 second timer, whenever it is let go. Probably something we'll need to tweak later, but there just wasn't any time. The issue with the lose trigger is a bug mentioned on the full game page, which unfortunately slipped through. You'll have to restart the full game to fix it.
Interesting concept, great design. For some reason the buttons on game over / next level screen weren't doing anything; was that a bug or did you run out of time?
In any case the art style reminded me of paper sorcerer but with its own unique twist; really well done. Combat balancing is off but you're already aware and it's something that's really, really hard to do in 48h, anyway. I'm honestly surprised it works as well as it does, good job!
Even with your limited prototype I could feel that certain itch to get more loot and puzzle the right combinations of tiles to maximize the rewards. This really has the potential for a solid puzzle-rpg-hybrid :)
Really neat proof-of-concept. I was a bit disappointed after realizing there's only one level but I guess that's a good thing! The bone-pieces felt a bit of out place art-wise (not pixelated enough) and the movement was a bit too quick/hectic but those are nitpicks. Would love to see this expanded into a full game at some point.
Top notch aesthetic and design but I found it really hard as well. So most of my comments will be on difficulty design.
1. I think the "# of shots" mechanic is a bit too punishing when you can't see the full level from the start. I'm was often forced to retry as I couldn't gauge how many shots I need to preserve.
2. I had a sort of "neon-golf" vibe from the game and maybe that's a solution to 1.: Instead of limiting the number of shots, give a "par" for each level and punish through deduction of score? Or, if you want to preserve the limited shots, add a finite number of "bonus shots" that are used up whenever you go above the limit. However, these bonus shots are shared between level and going back to an older level and improving your play there will recover them.
3. I was confused too by the overcharging power but that seems to be more of an UI issue after reading the comments?
4. Maybe add an (optional) indicator for the arc of the throw? I think a few options to making the "throw" easier to estimate would go a long way in accessibility.
Again, it's clear a lot of work went into aesthetics and that def. paid off but I also think that the underlying mechanics are neat and full of potential. With a bit of tweaking of the difficulty you'll have a really interesting (and less frustrating :) ) game.
Edit: Two things I forgot and appreciate: Ingame tutorial and story were both very welcome and are so often omitted in game jams (takes one to know one, eh?) so that was very welcome sight!
Wow, so much to unpack here. Thanks so much for in-depth. The bomb is one of those "happy accidents" of brainstorming. We initially had a simble ball-chain in mind, but then we realized that there was nothing encouraging catching the ball (and thus less player interaction). Then someone asked "it could be a bomb?" and here we are.
Going through your single points
1. Yes, checkpoint system is def. we'll probably add in a future version (or shorter levels and less glitchy physics...)
2. Totally with you there. I think at the time we liked the comedic moment but yeah ... it's not great. Might just have the bomb start in the air so you auto-catch it. Great points about first language and kids. I think we'll add more pictures explaining what you can/should do. The text was sort of a last-minute solution.
3. Great idea!
4. We figured it's to pronounce the strong one's role, as otherwise tall does most of the fun stuff while the smaller one is just occasionally important. Maybe we should prevent tall to move with the bomb at all? That way the mechanic is more pronounced. But then there's the throw-catch method to circumvent the mechanic... Yeah, we'll have to think about it.
5. The yank's more of a recovery than anything else. We'll have to figure out what to do with it. We've improved the chains already and will probably work on it later. They caused a lot of headache during development.
6. Not much to add, will be fixed :)
Thanks so much again, that was really good criticism.
If seen a few abstract puzzle games so far but yours might be the first abstract score chaser! I really like the whole "early 90s rendering" vibe and could imagine it could gel really well with fitting soundscape. The P.L.O.W. being just as deadly as the asteroids is a great mechanic, that will very well with more risk/reward mechanics.
I agree with others that the beam could feel a bit more "beam-y". Maybe a some flickering or a wavelength effect? Adding controls for repulsion and attraction might also be good mechanics to experiment with. Anyway, you've got a great concept and solid design foundation to build on. Well done!
Sweet little puzzler. The controls felt a bit sluggish to me, though that might be because of the way the physics interact with the physics. The ability to manipulate the game world (sliding the panel, destroying boxes) should def. be communicated in some way.
Otherwise the physic interactions were a really nice touch that made the whole thing feel alive. And as someone who still struggles with 3D in Unity I'm super impressed at the level of quality you achieved in only 48h.
That's a really fun and unique art style, shame you couldn't get the sound to work in time. The varied fonts were a really nice touch and clever way of sprucing up the dialog. Also, I'm not sure if I missed mechanics or if the game's more intended to be a narrative experience? In any case, I'm very much looking forward to playing this after the jam.
Thank you! I had a fun conversation yesterday when two friends who played the game were surprised that jump-glitching wasn't the intended play-style. They said it was fun tho and maybe we'll figure out a way to keep the feel of it in without it being an unintended glitch :D
Also, I'm happy you got the reference. Surprisingly few people point it out. :)
Very fun and original concept. Bit hard to figure out initially but then it flows very nicely. If you work on this post-jam I'd def. add some sort of tutorial level or other less hectic way to introduce the mechanics ingame. Then add some more interesting mechanics (ducts to go vertical maybe?) and you got something n.e.a.t.
Very, very beautiful and well designed. The puzzles weren't too original mechanically but a very nice way to weave the story together. From a game-design perspective it's really impressive how you made the entire experience fit seamlessly together, well done! Are you considering ever releasing a full game in that style or do you prefer smaller, "jam-sized" titles?
Interesting concept. I think the mechanics need a bit of work to really "flow", right now it feels a bit more like a proof of concept than a game. But I think you got something there and with some tweaks, power ups, enemies etc. I can see this turning into a neat little shooter. The pixel art is really crisp and well made, very impressive job for 48h!
Very original, interesting concept and great art. However I'm not sure if I missed any mechanics or if there's just not much game there. It felt like I was just randomly mixing cards and always doing more damage than the opponent. Maybe it's just my lack of musical ability but I feel the core mechanics need to be better communicated. I'd love to play a future version of this, though. The art style is phenomenal.
Thanks so much for your feedback! Can you elaborate on how far or often you walked with the tall guy carrying bomb? The intended way is that he almost never carries the bomb. Rather he should catch it and then throw it back later. All puzzles can be solved with minimal bomb-carry-walking on tall guy's part. Maybe we have to find a better to communicate this.
I think that's more a design issue on our part. We didn't want any areas where the player should have to move with him carrying the bomb. But after watching others play it we've noticed that there are def. areas where people will do precisely that. And then I can totally understand why the speed is annoying :)
Thanks for your feedback!
Do you mean the tall guy is too slow when he's carrying the bomb or in general? And do you mean the speed feels too slow for the animation or would simply prefer him to be quicker?
As for the controls: I was being a bit too clever when coding the input controllers and made it recognize & switch to gamepads automatically, if they are detected. Which means that if you're playing on your own it's best to disconnect any gamepad before :)