Foon → Ludum Dare Explorer → LD50 → Feedback comment stats → Bogden
Feedback comments for LD50
Bogden's games and stats for all events →
| Timestamp | Since previous | Game | Bogden's comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 4 02:19:49 | Over the Rainbow Bridge | ♥ 3 | Art style is delightful! | |
| Apr 4 03:19:12 | 59m 23s | Goblin Escape | ♥ 1 | Wow, I'm floored by the ambition here! I'd never have the courage to try to make something of this scale in 48 hours, kudos to you! |
| Apr 4 03:36:29 | 17m 17s | Earth's Last Stand | ♥ 1 | Really cool concept. The graphics are great! |
| Apr 4 04:18:51 | 42m 22s | Rocket Lawnchair | ♥ 2 | This game is weirdly addictive, just like QWOP, I spent way too much time on it, so far my record is 13.668! |
| Apr 4 07:04:22 | 2h 45m | a | ♥ 1 | Great game and great execution! I love incremental games, and this is a great spin on the genre. The physics of the sand was very satisfying. |
| Apr 4 07:19:44 | 15m 22s | Snooze | ♥ 1 | Really clever take on the geometry wars archetype mixed with the theme. Well done! |
| Apr 4 07:25:52 | 6m 08s | 5 More Minutes | ♥ 1 | Incredible entry, extremely fun, unexpected, and way too hilarious. Love those text messages. |
| Apr 4 22:02:22 | 14h 36m | Gemship Wars | ♥ 1 | Neat little game! Really enjoyed the partial destruction mechanics of the boat. Would love to see the partial destruction idea explored even further with bigger boats and ever more destructive weapons! |
| Apr 5 05:25:25 | 7h 23m | Blockage | ♥ 3 | y'all are some disturbed mofos, lol. love it. |
| Apr 5 09:59:37 | 4h 34m | Box Blocks | ♥ 1 | Really interesting concept, thanks for sharing! Really liked how you made it take longer to craft new blocks vs refreshing them, had to do an interesting balance of when to refresh and when to grab a shape. |
| Apr 6 05:21:11 | 19h 21m | Extremely Exteme Sports | ♥ 2 | Wow, real time online multiplayer racing in 48 hours? Incredible! Really love the fact that it's not immediately obvious that you want to maintain top speed by not steering too much until the avalanche first catches up to you! |
| Apr 6 05:33:59 | 12m 48s | Protocol Delta | ♥ 1 | Screen Shot 2022-04-05 at 10.33.39 PM.png |
| Apr 6 07:24:31 | 1h 50m | GRIDLAST | ♥ 2 | Really great game! Awesome graphics, gameplay, and sound! Would definitely love to see this game continued further and released on steam! These are nitpicky, but I played this away too much: * You can infinitely kite a zombie around a block, getting infinite cash Screenshot 2022-04-06 001503.png * You can just die if you start a level on the edge of the map without any warning * You can move as much as you want between levels, which is cool but maybe unintentional. The zombies don't animate in right away though, so you can end up with the "spawning" way into the middle of the board because they made a bunch of moves * If you use the destroy all card, you don't get the benefit from destroying cards in the shop, which I thought was the whole point of the item * It didn't seem like there was much point to picking up health after a certain point in the game, damage was way more important * If you use a card and destroy it while it is attacking, it breaks stuff |
| Apr 15 02:37:09 | 211h 12m | Claim your FREE BitBuddy™ TODAY! | ♥ 2 | Screenshot 2022-04-12 193842.png Screenshot 2022-04-13 233507.png Had a power outage which finally ended my buddy's run, but I like to think I gave it a fulfilling life. I hope I was a good friend :'( Definitely think you're onto something here, but not sure what the solution would be to making a game like this work for folks who just accidentally close it out for one reason or another before becoming invested in the story or its character(s). The whole "actually exiting the program kills your buddy" idea is great, but wonder if an in-game "click the quit button to kill your buddy" would work better in practice. Super curious about your thought process when making this though! |
| Apr 21 07:30:42 | 148h 53m | STUDY LADY (cookie mix) | ♥ 2 | Really cool concept, loved the style. Unfortunately the gameplay got fairly repetitive fairly quickly though. I think the core issue was that parts of the game became quickly irrelevant as I advanced, so it became little more than sitting through sequences and waiting for stuff to happen. If all of the pieces were somehow kept relevant at all points, I think it could be a lot more engaging. |
| Apr 22 20:11:19 | 36h 40m | Cursed Unicorn | ♥ 0 | Not much gameplay here unfortunately. You mention that you're inspired by Vampire Survivors, but this game is missing the multiple weapons/items that make Vampire Survivors interesting. Without variation, the gameplay just becomes floating around left and right while clicking "faster attack" every now and then. There's not really any strategy or meaningful decision making, which seriously dings the game on "fun" points. |
| Apr 24 02:01:42 | 29h 50m | Inevitable Seige | ♥ 1 | Definitely agree with pretty much everything in the last two comments! Especially the last bit from Daniel, what makes this interesting or unique? It just seems like a very basic tower defense with few towers, no upgrades, and a strange money collection mechanic that doesn't seem to have any reason (why am I hovering over stuff vs just getting money from killing stuff like in most TDs?) TDs have been made in so many ways, you really need something to set yourself apart if you're going to make one nowadays. You didn't have any new, interesting take on the genre, and it all felt kind of like a placeholder demo project for how to make a TD. What you have is a solid tech foundation for a much more complex and interesting game, but there's not much more than that. It's not particularly satisfying to find a good strategy for the game, nor is it satisfying to execute on a strategy you came up with. Much of the fun in TDs comes from playing with many different weapon and enemy types, and figuring out what works best. Know you wanted some honest feedback, hope this helps. |
| Apr 24 02:59:17 | 57m 35s | I Sink Not | ♥ 2 | Saw your ask for more honest feedback, so I'll be very direct, hopefully this helps! My overall takeaway was that the game had a pleasant, but not astounding presentation. However, it had an extremely shallow core game loop. The first thing that struck me was that the game did not seem to have an immediately intuitive and clear goal for the player to achieve. Think of the player journey: I start the game, I see a ship, three squares, and some stats in the top right. My instinct is to click on a square and build something random. A hull? Sure. Now what? I see a timer that's still counting up, and a build number that's gone up to 2. Okay, let's build something else now. A sail? Sure. And now I see what the game is (maybe?) about. Going far, right? So I play around with the parts some more, see my ship going, and eventually run out of spots I can build. ...Now what? Up until now things have been shaping up to be a fairly interesting game. Looks like I have a good number of options for what to build, seems like they all will have some unique effects on the ship. Great, excited to see how I as a player can now use this information to strategically make meaningful decisions to perform better, and to quickly see the results of those decisions. ...Except now that I'm done building, the game has become a very boring game of whack-a-mole. No more interesting decisions to be made, just mindless clicking until the ship sinks. In my very first play through though, I never even reached that point. Just sat around for a while, waiting for something new or interesting to happen. I got bored of clicking on panels, so I just let the ship sink after 10 minutes. Unfortunately for a jam game, this is already likely beyond the point that a player will stick around. Most people would close the game here, leave a rating, and be done. This is likely a large part of why your game did not score well. It grabbed my attention, briefly held my interest, then quickly pushed me into a tedious, uninteresting gameplay pattern. Screenshot 2022-04-23 191326.png That said, there's a lot of interesting systems here. I played a few more times to better get a sense of what the various parts were doing. There's definitely a lot of potential. I'm actually not sure what you were aiming for in terms of overall gameplay though. What were the core design pillars? What was your vision? What was the player fantasy? If it was intended to be a game about trying many different configurations to get as far as possible, then focus the game on that component. Make the primary goal extremely obvious. Cut out or drastically reduce the whack-a-mole, let the player extremely quickly see the results of their builds, then scrap it and get out to do a new one. Let the player build something, see how it performs, then build something new, all within 60 seconds. If it was intended to be about experimentation and creation of novel ships and seeing what new parts would do, then add many more parts to the game. Add progression elements, allow the player to reach milestones to unlock additional content and play around with new things. If it was intended to be about the execution in repairing and maintaining a ship as it (inevitably) falls apart, focus on that. Either make it either more strategic or more action-based. Either way, make decisions matter. Make execution interesting and not tedious. If it was intended to be multiple of these things at once, make sure you have your scope set out at the onset. If you can only realize one of these gameplay pillars in the time you have, focus on that thing and do it well. Otherwise, you end up with a variety of mediocre gameplay patterns, which will do far worse than one narrow, but brilliantly realized piece of gameplay. |
| Apr 26 21:51:07 | 66h 51m | 22h38 | ♥ 1 | Hah, I had to go back and play it again to see the other ending, turns out it was identical! So sneaky... Also similarly surprised by the rankings, think it should have scored higher! Graphics and audio definitely your strong points, gameplay was definitely the weak point. |
| Apr 26 22:00:20 | 9m 13s | You are Quitting | ♥ 1 | How this got anything but a 5 in theme is beyond me, haha. Excellent entry, and I am truly wondering if I really reached the end... |
