Financial Burden

360 2017-12-04 23:44

The game is very big. It needs more content to its size. Most of the gameplay is running around, it's very linear. I like the pixel art. Though it could use enemies, interactions etcetera, the coinss should really be picked up automatically. I've spent bunch of coins on a key just to open more empty rooms. Reward is leaving negative feedback on player, and I wouldn't play it anymore in its current state. The game didn't appear to have any serious bugs, but needs a lot of tuning. The world needn't to be as big.

magmafortress 2017-12-17 03:25

I seemed to spend the vast majority of my time wandering around through fairly similar rooms. I'd try to consolidate things - less rooms, more stuff in them, etc. Alternatively, maybe some kind of fast travel/auto-explore?

zinkler 2017-12-17 03:44

So, um, is there a goal to it? After a hundred rooms discovered and being able to approach the speed of light, I don't really know what to do. There's also that bug, where after a while you stop landing on the exact center of a tile, and land near the edge.

falseincarnate 2017-12-17 23:55

The game is definitely large, that's just a result of the rooms all being equal size (except shops) and generated as you open doors. The more doors your open, the more space is filled, thus the larger the world seems. This is entirely controlled by the player in that doors do not open without interaction and rooms don't generate until the instant a door is opened.

As for concerns about game play, there is currently no goal. There is no back story or win/lose condition since I didn't have time for those prior to submission, though I do want to add them in the future. Automatic coin collection was deliberately cut since the coins are a major trade-off, so it felt like it would punish the player for not avoiding them rather than punish them for hoarding them as I envisioned. Auto-exploration/fast travel were likewise not included because the game was about the player balancing their choices according to their situation. Do you continue along the same path in hopes of a new store nearby or turn back to one you know exists? Do you carry the coins and waste your time trudging slowly through many rooms, or press on knowing you can come back for them later? Adding ways to essentially bypass these choices means the player is less a player and more an audience. Though providing the user a one-way "fast recall" to the starting room via a one use item could be a reasonable future addition

The rooms are randomly generated, with various chances of containing things like coins, targets, shops, challenge doors, etc. A challenge door (door going up from main path) will lead to a path of variable length with higher chances to include rooms with more coins or challenges to overcome, but still has the chance for a room to be empty and/or a dead end. The rates of things being included likely needs tweaking in the future, but part of the issue again falls back to things that I had to cut for time.

A bug with movement throwing you off center was something I rarely experienced in testing and development (would sometimes inconsistently occur with coins in front of doors), if you could post an issue report on the github on how to reproduce that (if possible) I would very much appreciate it @zinkler

ambi 2017-12-18 09:49

It seems there's a lot of backtracking. Going back 20 rooms to just get a key seems a little too much. While the game fits the theme, it seems there's not point in just being slowed down. I don't understand how it is connected to a game mechanic outside wasting time. What is the decision being made? How can a player improve his skill playing the game? It seems just random and there's no reward or penalty for playing the game in a right or wrong way.

That said, you've got the basics of a Binding of Isaac/Zelda-type adventuring game down. The coin mechanic just isn't very rewarding. Maybe by removing most of the backtracking and putting a lower limit on the speed decrease would improve things. Also something like teleporting back to shops (for a cost) would be nice. Like for example Dark Souls bonfire mechanic.

falseincarnate 2017-12-20 19:10

Thanks for the feedback @ambi

Currently, there really isn't much "skill" to the game. It's a pretty simple collection and exploration game in its current state. The slowdown doesn't feel as dire since there is no threat to the player that the slowdown would amplify (enemies, a time limit, etc) currently. I wanted to add enemies which the player would need to avoid or kill in order to continue playing, which the slowdown would definitely add to the difficulty of doing, but had to cut them for time since I got hung up on some pretty major issues with the coin gun that ate more time than expected. They are still something I'd like to add post-voting.

A shop recall is starting to seem more reasonable (and requested) as long as there is a cost and limit on it... starting to think that you'd need to "pre-purchase" recalls from stores (or find them via loot in challenge rooms and such) which function much like the fast travel resource in Horizon: Zero Dawn (you need an item to fast travel, consuming them each time you do so until you get the infinite version of the item in the later game). This is likely going to be added in post-voting for sure.

Other post-voting goals: more room variety, more items, more challenge mechanics, and perhaps a "win" condition for the game as a whole so it isn't infinite exploration...