Despite having the most irritating title of any game on this list thus far, Haxsys 2.0 (grrr) has many qualities about it that make me smile. First and foremost, one of the ships you can choose from looks like an old-style Arwing, which made me squeal like a fangirl.
Other than that, though, the concept is a new spin on an old classic (domination). It's a delightful step forward in the process of evolving conflict in games to purely combat. It's tough to explain, so I'll just recommend that you give it a try so I can skip the summary of the mechanics.
I'm really at a loss for words with this game. Something about how it combines fast-paced action with Risk and Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing in a genuinely fun and engaging way just leaves me kind of awestruck.
You know what? I think I have to leave it there. I just can't say anything more about this game. Sorry for the weak review, but at least I'm making your job easier. Play this game. It's worth your time.
Until next time, stay polygonal.
Links
Accualy f33l liek Hax0rz: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1433
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Monday, April 29, 2013
HAVEN
In a world where games like Realm of the Mad God and Shovel Knight get substantial praise, I find myself wondering if calling back to the days of pixel art increases or decreases a games's favorability. Don't get me wrong, I love Realm (though I've never played Shovel Knight), but, as I sort of alluded to in my Dig-n-Rig review, I find that style kind of pretentious. I'm a firm believer that limitations breed creativity, but artificial limitations just rub me the wrong way. Don't get me wrong, not everyone has to go the Deus Ex: Human Revolution route and try to pack the game with as much glorious HD goodness as it can while still maintaining a good aesthetic, but my logic is that if NES games didn't exist, or if the current technology were the starting point, nobody would even think of designing a game in that style. All it really does is call back to a time everyone views favorably as if to say "See guys? We can totally be this good!"
Jeez, what will this guy rant about next? Next he'll spend 2 pages talking about how much he hates HD remakes (don't worry, I'm sure that time will come soon).
Anyway, let's talk about HAVEN from a non-graphical perspective. The game builds itself around combat, as so many games do, and it does so quite well. The blocking and attacking mechanics all flow really nicely into one another. Every enemy has a pattern that you have to figure out and counter. There are not so many enemies that this gets stale and before you know it, the game has taught you how to fight well enough that you can take on the final boss.
It seems like the designers really put thought into every aspect of this game (or just had a series of really luck guesses) because everything sort of acts as a tutorial for what happens next. That's the hallmark of a really well designed game in my opinion.
The final boss fight is challenging enough without being too repetitive. Although, it does come rather close because, since there's no consequence for dying other than having to guide your ghost back to your body, there's no real way to fail at killing the boss, so the fight should be over as soon as the player figures out the pattern. This in mind, the boss's health meter should have been about half as long. Not a dealbreaker, but something to be cautious of.
So yeah. Haven is a neatly wrapped, adrenaline-fueled, fun, pixelated romp that earns my seal of approval. Check it out, it's worth your time, especially considering it's only about 10 minutes long (if even that).
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay retro
Links
hacky slashy 80s callback: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26142
Jeez, what will this guy rant about next? Next he'll spend 2 pages talking about how much he hates HD remakes (don't worry, I'm sure that time will come soon).
Anyway, let's talk about HAVEN from a non-graphical perspective. The game builds itself around combat, as so many games do, and it does so quite well. The blocking and attacking mechanics all flow really nicely into one another. Every enemy has a pattern that you have to figure out and counter. There are not so many enemies that this gets stale and before you know it, the game has taught you how to fight well enough that you can take on the final boss.
It seems like the designers really put thought into every aspect of this game (or just had a series of really luck guesses) because everything sort of acts as a tutorial for what happens next. That's the hallmark of a really well designed game in my opinion.
The final boss fight is challenging enough without being too repetitive. Although, it does come rather close because, since there's no consequence for dying other than having to guide your ghost back to your body, there's no real way to fail at killing the boss, so the fight should be over as soon as the player figures out the pattern. This in mind, the boss's health meter should have been about half as long. Not a dealbreaker, but something to be cautious of.
So yeah. Haven is a neatly wrapped, adrenaline-fueled, fun, pixelated romp that earns my seal of approval. Check it out, it's worth your time, especially considering it's only about 10 minutes long (if even that).
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay retro
Links
hacky slashy 80s callback: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26142
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Hack Attack
I don't know if it's the fact that the games today are getting less and less substantial, that my will is gradually decreasing, or some combination of both, but I don't have much to say about this one at all. It's one of those Asteroids-ey multidirectional top-down shooters. You know the kind. There are two main problems I have with this game: a design issue and a control issue.
First, this game is just way too cluttered for my tastes. There are bullets and enemies everywhere and getting hit by them seems to be more of an inevitability than an option. This is largely due to the control issue:
I don't know who on the dev team thought it would be a good idea to limit the movement buttons to the arrow keys as opposed to WASD, but whoever it was is responsible for 90% of the game's frustration. See, when holding the up arrow key, the left arrow key doesn't work, meaning you can't go forward and left at the same time. I know this isn't just a problem with my computer because I remember having the same problem on other computers, albeit with different programs.
That's all I got. Until next time, stay triangular.
Links
pew pew triangles: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25882
First, this game is just way too cluttered for my tastes. There are bullets and enemies everywhere and getting hit by them seems to be more of an inevitability than an option. This is largely due to the control issue:
I don't know who on the dev team thought it would be a good idea to limit the movement buttons to the arrow keys as opposed to WASD, but whoever it was is responsible for 90% of the game's frustration. See, when holding the up arrow key, the left arrow key doesn't work, meaning you can't go forward and left at the same time. I know this isn't just a problem with my computer because I remember having the same problem on other computers, albeit with different programs.
That's all I got. Until next time, stay triangular.
Links
pew pew triangles: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25882
Grimelins
yeah, there ain't much to say about this game. I feel a bit cheated because the game's description clearly mentions multiple bosses, but the entire game is just one boss fight. The description also mentions that you're "saving your friend," but again, no such thing happens.
Well anyway, the one boss fight that does occur is more formulaic than the front page of one of my physics tests. Step 1: throw bomb. Step 2: repeat until you win.
The only real plus to this game is the visual style. If this was just a test to see if the devs could make a functional sequence with really pretty 3D graphics, then I guess it succeeds. As a game, though, it falls flat.
That's all I got. Until next time, stay repetitive
Links
Don't move, little alloy: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25904
Well anyway, the one boss fight that does occur is more formulaic than the front page of one of my physics tests. Step 1: throw bomb. Step 2: repeat until you win.
The only real plus to this game is the visual style. If this was just a test to see if the devs could make a functional sequence with really pretty 3D graphics, then I guess it succeeds. As a game, though, it falls flat.
That's all I got. Until next time, stay repetitive
Links
Don't move, little alloy: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25904
GridWarrior
so yeah, it's allergy season again. I apologize for being a bit foggy-headed, but I...uh...what was I saying? Wait, where am I?
alright so GridWarrior is a really good game that gets screwed up by one design flaw. This kind of game is my least favorite to review because I really only have one thing to talk about. Anything else would be summary rather than analysis; if my English teacher caught me doing something like that, he'd break out the paddle again.
So what is this flaw you may ask? Well, first, let me talk a little bit about how the game frames itself...I mean analyze! I'm going to analyze how the game frames itself! See, different enemies use different kinds of weapons. You can get those weapons by whittling down their health and then using your grappling hook on them. This process is dangerous, as it leaves you open to attack and diverts your attention from the million other enemies on the screen. Thus, it makes for a really engaging player choice: "do I soak up the damage to get a new weapon or do I hold off?" That is, it would, if it weren't for this game's fatal flaw:
The sword is tremendously OP. There is not a single enemy in this game that can't be beaten by simply mashing right-click at them. The most efficient method of dispatching enemies is unlocked from the word go, turning what could have been a really fun game boring and repetitive.
Everything else in this game is great. Visuals, controls, everything. That one design flaw completely undermined an otherwise thoughtful game. Just goes to show how meticulous a dev team has to be. I mean, I was playing this game for like an hour before I noticed how powerful the sword was. Before that, I was having a blast.
Oh well. If you can convince yourself not to abuse the sword, I suppose GridWarrior can still be a fun experience. That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay unbalanced.
Links
right click your way to victory: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26007
alright so GridWarrior is a really good game that gets screwed up by one design flaw. This kind of game is my least favorite to review because I really only have one thing to talk about. Anything else would be summary rather than analysis; if my English teacher caught me doing something like that, he'd break out the paddle again.
So what is this flaw you may ask? Well, first, let me talk a little bit about how the game frames itself...I mean analyze! I'm going to analyze how the game frames itself! See, different enemies use different kinds of weapons. You can get those weapons by whittling down their health and then using your grappling hook on them. This process is dangerous, as it leaves you open to attack and diverts your attention from the million other enemies on the screen. Thus, it makes for a really engaging player choice: "do I soak up the damage to get a new weapon or do I hold off?" That is, it would, if it weren't for this game's fatal flaw:
The sword is tremendously OP. There is not a single enemy in this game that can't be beaten by simply mashing right-click at them. The most efficient method of dispatching enemies is unlocked from the word go, turning what could have been a really fun game boring and repetitive.
Everything else in this game is great. Visuals, controls, everything. That one design flaw completely undermined an otherwise thoughtful game. Just goes to show how meticulous a dev team has to be. I mean, I was playing this game for like an hour before I noticed how powerful the sword was. Before that, I was having a blast.
Oh well. If you can convince yourself not to abuse the sword, I suppose GridWarrior can still be a fun experience. That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay unbalanced.
Links
right click your way to victory: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26007
Friday, April 26, 2013
Gridiron Tactics
Usually when I give a really short review of a game, it's because I genuinely didn't finds it interesting and didn't spend much time with it. This is not the case with Gridiron Tactics, which actually held my interest for quite some time...30 minutes to be exact. It's appealing in all aspects: visually, mechanically, and otherwise. The fact is that I'm very tired and sick, so I just don't feel up to analyzing the game like I normally do.
I will say this, though. There is one thing about Gridiron Tactics that turned it into "just another game on the list." I'm going to go ahead and spit some more game knowledge that I got from Extra Credits and use the term "first order optimal (or FOO) strategies." In a nutshell, FOO strategies are tactics that require little skill but offer great reward. They can be very useful when they let a new player feel comfortable stepping up to the challenge of a game (see also: the noob tube or hundred-hand slap...yeah, I know, the Extra Credits guys already talked about this...I'm so original), but in Gridiron Tactics, using one simple strategy will hand you a victory every time. I'm not going to say what that strategy is in case anyone out there wants to try this game and figure it out for themselves, but I will say that the strategy gives the game a very unappealing difficulty curve that looks something like this:
______________
|
|
|
|_________________
^ ^ ^
start strategy is learned end
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay tactical
Links
One and Only Gridiron Tactic: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=428
A more informative and entertaining thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6op8eV5OBwE
I will say this, though. There is one thing about Gridiron Tactics that turned it into "just another game on the list." I'm going to go ahead and spit some more game knowledge that I got from Extra Credits and use the term "first order optimal (or FOO) strategies." In a nutshell, FOO strategies are tactics that require little skill but offer great reward. They can be very useful when they let a new player feel comfortable stepping up to the challenge of a game (see also: the noob tube or hundred-hand slap...yeah, I know, the Extra Credits guys already talked about this...I'm so original), but in Gridiron Tactics, using one simple strategy will hand you a victory every time. I'm not going to say what that strategy is in case anyone out there wants to try this game and figure it out for themselves, but I will say that the strategy gives the game a very unappealing difficulty curve that looks something like this:
______________
|
|
|
|_________________
^ ^ ^
start strategy is learned end
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay tactical
Links
One and Only Gridiron Tactic: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=428
A more informative and entertaining thing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6op8eV5OBwE
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Grid
The first thing that impressed me about Grid was that the character on the title screen reacts to your input. This is actually a really smart way to deliver tutorials, or at least parts of them. After all, the first thing the player wants to do when he or she starts up the game is select "play," so when pressing an arrow key causes some kind of action to occur on-screen, the player is going to want to toy around for a bit. From there, the player can teach himself or herself the basic mechanics of the game before the game even begins. I like this game already! Let's see how long that lasts...
Grid is my favorite kind of game to review. Playing it was a genuinely enjoyable experience, but there are still quite a few points of constructive criticism I have, so let's get started:
At parts, makes you play at its pace. I've spoken briefly about this before, and although it isn't a huge deal in this game, it's just very frustrating when the flow of a game is interrupted because you have to wait for a platform to move to just the right place. In fact, I would say that immersion is the concept this game grasps the least. That much is evident from the death sequences. First off, when you die, you stay dead for just long enough for it to get annoying. Second, it's way too easy to die. I attribute this mainly to the isometric viewpoint, which messes with my perception of where certain platforms reside. An isometric viewpoint isn't an inherently bad trait; Bastion is evidence enough of that. I think the reason it doesn't work too well in this game is that every block really only has one texture, so it's very difficult to determine where one begins and another one ends. The same thing can be applied to your hitbox. It's somewhat difficult to tell if moving a bit to the right will put you in a blue block's line of fire or not.
Of course, this isn't helped by the control issues. I think the main issue I have with the controls is that there's no way to change direction without moving. This would have been very helpful in those certain instances where moving one simple pixel in the wrong direction would leave me tumbling to my death.
The only other issue I had was that some sound effects are just too loud. It can be very obnoxious when you're having a grand old time platforming your way to glory when suddenly your ears blow out because you forgot to mute your computer before launching a red block into a blue block.
Other than all that, though, this game's intuitive mechanics, fluid and fun feel, and semi-appealing graphical style make it an enjoyable new toy.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay cubical.
Links
A Little Cube Finds His Way Home: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26006
Grid is my favorite kind of game to review. Playing it was a genuinely enjoyable experience, but there are still quite a few points of constructive criticism I have, so let's get started:
At parts, makes you play at its pace. I've spoken briefly about this before, and although it isn't a huge deal in this game, it's just very frustrating when the flow of a game is interrupted because you have to wait for a platform to move to just the right place. In fact, I would say that immersion is the concept this game grasps the least. That much is evident from the death sequences. First off, when you die, you stay dead for just long enough for it to get annoying. Second, it's way too easy to die. I attribute this mainly to the isometric viewpoint, which messes with my perception of where certain platforms reside. An isometric viewpoint isn't an inherently bad trait; Bastion is evidence enough of that. I think the reason it doesn't work too well in this game is that every block really only has one texture, so it's very difficult to determine where one begins and another one ends. The same thing can be applied to your hitbox. It's somewhat difficult to tell if moving a bit to the right will put you in a blue block's line of fire or not.
Of course, this isn't helped by the control issues. I think the main issue I have with the controls is that there's no way to change direction without moving. This would have been very helpful in those certain instances where moving one simple pixel in the wrong direction would leave me tumbling to my death.
The only other issue I had was that some sound effects are just too loud. It can be very obnoxious when you're having a grand old time platforming your way to glory when suddenly your ears blow out because you forgot to mute your computer before launching a red block into a blue block.
Other than all that, though, this game's intuitive mechanics, fluid and fun feel, and semi-appealing graphical style make it an enjoyable new toy.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay cubical.
Links
A Little Cube Finds His Way Home: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26006
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Greed
This is one of those online multiplayer type games. Not surprisingly, there didn't happen to be anyone online when I tried to play, so I wound up trekking through an unimaginative map collecting coins with controls that make the game feel like Bubsy 3D on speed.
next!
Links
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Gravity's Rhythm
Time for another unimpressive blog post for an unimpressive game. I'm going to start out with the bigest problem I had with the game: I was able to beat it without even looking at the screen. All you have to do is hold space and continually move right to win. This does not make for a very exciting shoot 'em up.
Alright, guess I may as well comment on the other aspects of the game. The control is a little stiff, not that it matters since all you'll be doing is going right, but still. The visual design is, eh...it's not unappealing, but it's sloppy. There should be an immediate visual difference between "running into this amalgam of pixels is good" and "running into this amalgam of pixels is bad." There is no such thing in Gravity's Rhythm.
So, let's do a quick tally before we adjourn, shall we?
-sticky game feel
-sloppy visual design
-poor level design/difficulty curve
so what else is there? It's not a horrible game, but it's just uninteresting enough for me to heartily recommend staying away.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay challenging
Links
This game has neither gravity nor rhythm: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24642
Alright, guess I may as well comment on the other aspects of the game. The control is a little stiff, not that it matters since all you'll be doing is going right, but still. The visual design is, eh...it's not unappealing, but it's sloppy. There should be an immediate visual difference between "running into this amalgam of pixels is good" and "running into this amalgam of pixels is bad." There is no such thing in Gravity's Rhythm.
So, let's do a quick tally before we adjourn, shall we?
-sticky game feel
-sloppy visual design
-poor level design/difficulty curve
so what else is there? It's not a horrible game, but it's just uninteresting enough for me to heartily recommend staying away.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay challenging
Links
This game has neither gravity nor rhythm: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24642
Monday, April 22, 2013
Gravitation
Deadlines really suck, don't they? All you want to do is bring your creative experience to life at your own pace, but having a deadline means you either need to sacrifice some of your own ingenuity or just deliver an unfinished product.
Gravitation chose the latter, and what we're left with is a demonstration for a brilliant engine for a really unique and intuitive game with no soundtrack, unrefined visuals and unreasonable health system.
There you go, that's the review. Screw all those literary snobs who say you should keep details from your audience just to make them read more of your stuff.
Of course, if you want to hear more of my ramblings, you're more than welcome to read on.
Let me get the praise out of the way first. This game understands the true purpose of combat in a game. The only games where combat should be the central focus are fighting games and beat-em-ups. Otherwise, combat is there as a way to piece the whole experience together. It's a favorite in games because there is a clear objective and means to overcome that objective. That makes it a great way to string together your game mechanics but awful as a story device (which is the main reason I and so many others dislike the recent Call of Duty games). Without the combat, Gravitation would simply have no challenge. Thus, it serves its purpose.
That covers one of the mouse buttons; how about the other? The titular gravitation mechanic is fun and intuitive. There's something really empowering about being able to bend the laws of physics to your will. There would be, at least, if the health system didn't reduce you to the human equivalent on a marshmallow on a pair of toothpicks.
And thus we move into the criticism. You take way too much falling damage in this game. As far as I could tell, there's no way to regain health either. If there was some other objective than "run around, shoot sea urchins and have fun," this mechanic might work as a way of forcing the character to strategize on how to navigate each room taking as little damage as possible. A little tweaking would have gone a long way here.
And of course, that just leaves the big one. The sound direction is nonexistent. This game is completely silent. If ever you want to see just how important a good soundtrack is in a game, look no further than Gravitation, because the mechanics hold up very well but the silence makes it a thoroughly boring and almost a little nerve-racking experience.
Great start, but needs a lot of work before it can get my seal of approval. That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay...uh...gravitational? (this is hard, leave me alone)
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=397
Gravitation chose the latter, and what we're left with is a demonstration for a brilliant engine for a really unique and intuitive game with no soundtrack, unrefined visuals and unreasonable health system.
There you go, that's the review. Screw all those literary snobs who say you should keep details from your audience just to make them read more of your stuff.
Of course, if you want to hear more of my ramblings, you're more than welcome to read on.
Let me get the praise out of the way first. This game understands the true purpose of combat in a game. The only games where combat should be the central focus are fighting games and beat-em-ups. Otherwise, combat is there as a way to piece the whole experience together. It's a favorite in games because there is a clear objective and means to overcome that objective. That makes it a great way to string together your game mechanics but awful as a story device (which is the main reason I and so many others dislike the recent Call of Duty games). Without the combat, Gravitation would simply have no challenge. Thus, it serves its purpose.
That covers one of the mouse buttons; how about the other? The titular gravitation mechanic is fun and intuitive. There's something really empowering about being able to bend the laws of physics to your will. There would be, at least, if the health system didn't reduce you to the human equivalent on a marshmallow on a pair of toothpicks.
And thus we move into the criticism. You take way too much falling damage in this game. As far as I could tell, there's no way to regain health either. If there was some other objective than "run around, shoot sea urchins and have fun," this mechanic might work as a way of forcing the character to strategize on how to navigate each room taking as little damage as possible. A little tweaking would have gone a long way here.
And of course, that just leaves the big one. The sound direction is nonexistent. This game is completely silent. If ever you want to see just how important a good soundtrack is in a game, look no further than Gravitation, because the mechanics hold up very well but the silence makes it a thoroughly boring and almost a little nerve-racking experience.
Great start, but needs a lot of work before it can get my seal of approval. That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay...uh...gravitational? (this is hard, leave me alone)
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=397
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Got to Go
Got to Go is a game most likely named after what its creators shouted when the professor started playing it to determine what grade it was getting. At least it doesn't overstay its welcome. The entire game only consists of a tutorial and one stage, after which the game completely breaks. Actually, Got to Go seemed to have an odd sense of humor about itself, almost like it was tacitly acknowledging how broken it was. At the end of the tutorial, you are greeted with a screen that reads "Tutorial Cleared!" and when you complete the stage, you are greeted with the same exact screen with the word "tutorial" scribbled out in red ink with the word "Stage" written above it. No, I'm not joking.
Usually, I praise a game for being a tightly wrapped experience, but this one's just too anemic. It simply didn't have enough time to effectively explore all of its mechanics, of which there are a surprising number (considering the game is only about 5 minutes long). The jumping physics are standard and the upgrade system is kind of fun for the 2 seconds during which it lasts. The hitbox on your character is a little large, but that only lead to one annoying death,
All-in-all, it's just another unfinished platformer. Nothing about it is horrible, but that's because the designers quit before they could screw up.
That's all for now, I got to go.
Until next time, decide whether to stay or go.
Links
I did it!: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24631
Usually, I praise a game for being a tightly wrapped experience, but this one's just too anemic. It simply didn't have enough time to effectively explore all of its mechanics, of which there are a surprising number (considering the game is only about 5 minutes long). The jumping physics are standard and the upgrade system is kind of fun for the 2 seconds during which it lasts. The hitbox on your character is a little large, but that only lead to one annoying death,
All-in-all, it's just another unfinished platformer. Nothing about it is horrible, but that's because the designers quit before they could screw up.
That's all for now, I got to go.
Until next time, decide whether to stay or go.
Links
I did it!: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24631
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Good Morning Bird
Good Morning Bird is another audacious step toward learning how to completely integrate all aspects of a game into the game's mechanics themselves. In this case, we're talking about the music. Yes, that first sentence wasn't just an expertly crafted amalgamation of words, it also contained a pun! The last game on the list to try this (or at least the last one I remember) was entitled Audacity. That game pulled off the whole "2D music platformer" thing decently. Its main flaws were that the notes that played when you picked up stuff were just a bit out of sync with the rest of the "song" and that there was no save feature (grrr).
Good Morning Bird seems to have fixed both of those. There were only a few moments when the notes were out of sync (but that's to be expected for a game this experimental), and the game is short enough to not need a save feature. So, is this it? Have we reached an apex of game design? Has the perfect platforming musical experience been crafted? Well...no, but hey, Good Morning Bird is a damn good try.
First off, let's talk visual design. There are no graphical glitches and the game is decently colorful and exciting. I'm not an artist, but I daresay any problems you may have with the visual design are personal preferences. I, personally, loved the visual design. There's something about that half-egg on legs that makes me go "daww."
Next, game feel. This is where the game took a big misstep for me. Your hitbox is a bit larger than it should be, and enemy patterns are just a bit too fast. The snakes are the worst culprits. They bounce merrily up and down so fluidly and so rapidly that it's a huge pain to time your passage over or under them accordingly. Not to mention, your character is just a bit too slow, giving that feeling of "come on, hurry up, dammit!" when you bear down on the right arrow key hoping, to no avail, that the little birdie will get a move on.
If you can get past that, though, Good Morning Bird is a neatly wrapped, fun experience. That's all for now. Until next time, stay musical.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25907
Good Morning Bird seems to have fixed both of those. There were only a few moments when the notes were out of sync (but that's to be expected for a game this experimental), and the game is short enough to not need a save feature. So, is this it? Have we reached an apex of game design? Has the perfect platforming musical experience been crafted? Well...no, but hey, Good Morning Bird is a damn good try.
First off, let's talk visual design. There are no graphical glitches and the game is decently colorful and exciting. I'm not an artist, but I daresay any problems you may have with the visual design are personal preferences. I, personally, loved the visual design. There's something about that half-egg on legs that makes me go "daww."
Next, game feel. This is where the game took a big misstep for me. Your hitbox is a bit larger than it should be, and enemy patterns are just a bit too fast. The snakes are the worst culprits. They bounce merrily up and down so fluidly and so rapidly that it's a huge pain to time your passage over or under them accordingly. Not to mention, your character is just a bit too slow, giving that feeling of "come on, hurry up, dammit!" when you bear down on the right arrow key hoping, to no avail, that the little birdie will get a move on.
If you can get past that, though, Good Morning Bird is a neatly wrapped, fun experience. That's all for now. Until next time, stay musical.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25907
Gobs of Color
If you've read my Claustrophere review, you probably know that I'm a big fan of the "inevitable demise" story framework. Of course it won't work for every game, but there's something about fighting your hardest in a fruitless battle that just brings up all sorts of introspective thought, at least to me. Why do I keep fighting even though I know this war zone will be my grave? Would it not be more moral and logical to simply lay down my weapon and spare the lives of my enemies, who will win the day regardless of their casualties? What am I fighting for in the first place? Who am I, even?
In the case of Gobs of Color, that questioning process goes something like this: "Why d-" and then you're dead.
Gobs of Color is a short, Asteroids-esque shooter with a difficulty curve that will beat you senseless. Each of my playthroughs lasted less than a minute before I was consumed by the pastel-colored space monstrosity. If there was ever any thought in your mind that I confuse "frustration" with "extreme difficulty," let this review put those worries to rest. This is perhaps the most difficult game on the list so far, and never once did it get frustrating.
What I like most about this game is that it scores you on two separate things that are only tangentially related: score and time survived. See, the only way to rack up points is to shoot the Crayola globules, but doing so makes them explode and spread out, making them more likely to hit you and chip away your health. Thus, the game allows for two distinct types of playstyles: pacifism and aggression. What's better is that it's completely up to the player to decide which playstyle is preferable...huh, maybe this game is deeper than I initially thought.
This game is short, sweet, unique (kind of), and challenging. It definitely gets my seal of approval and it's perfect for anyone who needs some quick sensory stimulation after a mentally draining stretch of homework or filing taxes or what have you.
That's all for now. Until next time, stay colorful and gelatinous.
Links
Space Play-doh: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=8724
In the case of Gobs of Color, that questioning process goes something like this: "Why d-" and then you're dead.
Gobs of Color is a short, Asteroids-esque shooter with a difficulty curve that will beat you senseless. Each of my playthroughs lasted less than a minute before I was consumed by the pastel-colored space monstrosity. If there was ever any thought in your mind that I confuse "frustration" with "extreme difficulty," let this review put those worries to rest. This is perhaps the most difficult game on the list so far, and never once did it get frustrating.
What I like most about this game is that it scores you on two separate things that are only tangentially related: score and time survived. See, the only way to rack up points is to shoot the Crayola globules, but doing so makes them explode and spread out, making them more likely to hit you and chip away your health. Thus, the game allows for two distinct types of playstyles: pacifism and aggression. What's better is that it's completely up to the player to decide which playstyle is preferable...huh, maybe this game is deeper than I initially thought.
This game is short, sweet, unique (kind of), and challenging. It definitely gets my seal of approval and it's perfect for anyone who needs some quick sensory stimulation after a mentally draining stretch of homework or filing taxes or what have you.
That's all for now. Until next time, stay colorful and gelatinous.
Links
Space Play-doh: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=8724
Friday, April 19, 2013
Gnomble (kinda)
An interesting thing happened the other day. I had some spare time, so I decided to go back and replay some old DigiPen games (because why else would I be keeping them all on my hard drive?) and I clicked, out of pure curiosity, on Data Runner. Much to my combination of surprise, delight, and dismay, it actually worked even though I declared that it was broken on this very blog.
This got me feeling kind of guilty. I felt like I should give that combination of Tempest 200 and the most annoying level of Spiderman 64 the review it deserved. Then I got thinking: what other games did I deprive of a review just because it didn't work for me? How come I can declare a game broken just for installing incorrectly, which seems to have been the case for Data Runner (and, indeed, Gnomble) yet I can spend half an hour searching for an alternate download of Crazy Cross?
At the end of the day, it just all comes down to a lot of factors: how busy I am, my mood, etc. There are going to be times when I don't review a game that has potential.
Fear not, though, for there is hope. Remember a while back when I got my buddy Luis to do my job for me? Well, I'm not above accepting other people's work for my "reviews" of broken games. If I say a game is broken but you can get it to work and you feel like writing up a short review, by all means, send it in. Also make sure to send me your name (or alias) so I can credit you. I know my audience isn't that big...not even close, actually...but still, there's a chance that someone out there would be willing; I'm gonna take it. After all, my miniscule audience has already proven that they care enough about these games to make contributions (that's right, Yose, I'm talking to you and your impressive fix for Claustrophere), and that was before I somehow managed to get at least one viewer from Poland...
Trust me, I'll review games myself whenever I can, but sometimes the cookie just doesn't crumble in my favor. It's like of the girl from Julie and Julia went to the store to buy the ingredients for her newest dish and they just didn't have any...stuff happens.
Well, that's all I got today. Until next time.
This got me feeling kind of guilty. I felt like I should give that combination of Tempest 200 and the most annoying level of Spiderman 64 the review it deserved. Then I got thinking: what other games did I deprive of a review just because it didn't work for me? How come I can declare a game broken just for installing incorrectly, which seems to have been the case for Data Runner (and, indeed, Gnomble) yet I can spend half an hour searching for an alternate download of Crazy Cross?
At the end of the day, it just all comes down to a lot of factors: how busy I am, my mood, etc. There are going to be times when I don't review a game that has potential.
Fear not, though, for there is hope. Remember a while back when I got my buddy Luis to do my job for me? Well, I'm not above accepting other people's work for my "reviews" of broken games. If I say a game is broken but you can get it to work and you feel like writing up a short review, by all means, send it in. Also make sure to send me your name (or alias) so I can credit you. I know my audience isn't that big...not even close, actually...but still, there's a chance that someone out there would be willing; I'm gonna take it. After all, my miniscule audience has already proven that they care enough about these games to make contributions (that's right, Yose, I'm talking to you and your impressive fix for Claustrophere), and that was before I somehow managed to get at least one viewer from Poland...
Trust me, I'll review games myself whenever I can, but sometimes the cookie just doesn't crumble in my favor. It's like of the girl from Julie and Julia went to the store to buy the ingredients for her newest dish and they just didn't have any...stuff happens.
Well, that's all I got today. Until next time.
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Gloom
That's right, you all know what time it is. Time for an Andrew Nack game! Let's see how this one holds up.
Another thing I found interesting is that the instructor for this game is none other than James Portnow, who writes for that Extra Credits thing I always link you guys to. Now that I think of it, why doesn't every game team credit their instructor in their projects? Ah whatever. The point is, this game is the product of a game designer whom I greatly respect and a game design instructor whom I also revere. Needless to say, my hopes are high.
Well, it certainly was an experience...very different from the typical...um...what the hell is this, anyways?
If you were to ask Andrew Nack, he'd probably say it's a "platformer RPG that focuses on minion control mechanics." I agree with that for the most part, though I'm not sure how much of an RPG it is just because you can upgrade minions. That's like calling Call of Duty: Modern Warfare an FPSRPG because you can put mods on your guns. Also, calling them "control mechanics" is a bit generous. The minions seem to do whatever they want for the most part
okay, that's a bit harsh. In all honesty, I think the controls are designed pretty ingeniously because I genuinely couldn't tell you how they work. They just...do. Honestly, I think that's Andrew Nack's strongsuit. He can really deliver on flow.
The story, while taking a backseat to the mechanics, is decent. I think I know a little bit about Portnow's storytelling preferences from watching Extra Credits, and this game is rife with them. Very little is explained about the characters and setting of the game, and when it is, it's always explained via chatter and otherwise auxiliary text. The game is never interrupted for the sake of storytelling or instruction, which is just one of the many reasons this game can send you into a trance and make you forget that reality exists...or does it?
at its core, Gloom is about getting from one place to another by mastering the mechanics. It allows for many varying play styles and the plethora of upgrades makes this game a replayable, unique experience. That said, there are some things I didn't like about it...well, really only one thing...a stylistic thing, too.
First off, let me say that in terms of visual design, you don't get much more talented than Nack. I'm a huge fan of the style of his other works, but this one...eh...it's a bit too....Limbo for me. Everything is a silhouette with the exception of the bright, glowy eyes of the characters. Couple that with the dark backgrounds and it's just a little too confusing to look at for my tastes. Of course, that's not helped by the fact that the characters don't seem to have any individual physics themselves. They're all just ragdolls to be thrown around in different sequences by the physics engine. In fact, the whole game kind of plays like a really in-depth Happy Wheels map.
Oh well. This is still a great game that I had fun with. It may not be perfect, but it tried something new. Not only that, but this is probably the most intricate game of Nack's that I've reviewed yet. I was never one to accept excuses, but I think "I'm one guy who had to design and program characters, levels and a crapload of upgrades" works in this context.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay imaginative.
Links
Hail the Great Pig: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26419
Another thing I found interesting is that the instructor for this game is none other than James Portnow, who writes for that Extra Credits thing I always link you guys to. Now that I think of it, why doesn't every game team credit their instructor in their projects? Ah whatever. The point is, this game is the product of a game designer whom I greatly respect and a game design instructor whom I also revere. Needless to say, my hopes are high.
Well, it certainly was an experience...very different from the typical...um...what the hell is this, anyways?
If you were to ask Andrew Nack, he'd probably say it's a "platformer RPG that focuses on minion control mechanics." I agree with that for the most part, though I'm not sure how much of an RPG it is just because you can upgrade minions. That's like calling Call of Duty: Modern Warfare an FPSRPG because you can put mods on your guns. Also, calling them "control mechanics" is a bit generous. The minions seem to do whatever they want for the most part
okay, that's a bit harsh. In all honesty, I think the controls are designed pretty ingeniously because I genuinely couldn't tell you how they work. They just...do. Honestly, I think that's Andrew Nack's strongsuit. He can really deliver on flow.
The story, while taking a backseat to the mechanics, is decent. I think I know a little bit about Portnow's storytelling preferences from watching Extra Credits, and this game is rife with them. Very little is explained about the characters and setting of the game, and when it is, it's always explained via chatter and otherwise auxiliary text. The game is never interrupted for the sake of storytelling or instruction, which is just one of the many reasons this game can send you into a trance and make you forget that reality exists...or does it?
at its core, Gloom is about getting from one place to another by mastering the mechanics. It allows for many varying play styles and the plethora of upgrades makes this game a replayable, unique experience. That said, there are some things I didn't like about it...well, really only one thing...a stylistic thing, too.
First off, let me say that in terms of visual design, you don't get much more talented than Nack. I'm a huge fan of the style of his other works, but this one...eh...it's a bit too....Limbo for me. Everything is a silhouette with the exception of the bright, glowy eyes of the characters. Couple that with the dark backgrounds and it's just a little too confusing to look at for my tastes. Of course, that's not helped by the fact that the characters don't seem to have any individual physics themselves. They're all just ragdolls to be thrown around in different sequences by the physics engine. In fact, the whole game kind of plays like a really in-depth Happy Wheels map.
Oh well. This is still a great game that I had fun with. It may not be perfect, but it tried something new. Not only that, but this is probably the most intricate game of Nack's that I've reviewed yet. I was never one to accept excuses, but I think "I'm one guy who had to design and program characters, levels and a crapload of upgrades" works in this context.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay imaginative.
Links
Hail the Great Pig: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26419
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Glo
meh.
I'm tired and frustrated today, so it's gonna be one of those reviews. It's not like this game gave me much to work with anyway. I ragequit pretty early on.
First off, let's talk about the control scheme. This is one of those "enemy-hell" kind of games where there are always a million and a half enemies on the screen and it's your job to dispatch them all. You never run out of ammo, and the special weapons are timed, meaning not only does the game not punish the perpetual use of LMB, it promotes it. I feel like if I had a mouse, it wouldn't be that much of a problem (especially if it was my old mouse where you could press a button and it would treat the mouse buttons as toggles rather than holds), but I have to say that this setup made the game very uncomfortable to play. Being a game that is not enjoyable physically certainly is falling at the first snail on the racetrack that you've mistaken for a hurdle.
The aesthetic is bland. The only appeal comes from the "neon light" look that I'm really getting tired of now. There doesn't seem to have been any real thought put into the enemy or level design.
Which leads me into the big problem. The reason why I ragequit. See, after a while, I realized that you automatically shoot towards your cursor, so I could just not touch my trackpad and circle-straffe around everything and be untouchable. Apparently, the game knew that I'd found out how to exploit it, so it decided to pull a complete 180 from being unfairly easy to unfairly...well, unfair. I was immediately blindsided by 5 enemies at once who drained all my health before I even realized I was taking damage. I was then taken to the very beginning of the stage.
A game that is designed like this does not deserve to be played. nope.
ok so maybe "meh" doesn't quite sum up my discontent for this game, but eh. It's what I'm feelin
That's all for now. Until next time, stay indifferent
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24641
I'm tired and frustrated today, so it's gonna be one of those reviews. It's not like this game gave me much to work with anyway. I ragequit pretty early on.
First off, let's talk about the control scheme. This is one of those "enemy-hell" kind of games where there are always a million and a half enemies on the screen and it's your job to dispatch them all. You never run out of ammo, and the special weapons are timed, meaning not only does the game not punish the perpetual use of LMB, it promotes it. I feel like if I had a mouse, it wouldn't be that much of a problem (especially if it was my old mouse where you could press a button and it would treat the mouse buttons as toggles rather than holds), but I have to say that this setup made the game very uncomfortable to play. Being a game that is not enjoyable physically certainly is falling at the first snail on the racetrack that you've mistaken for a hurdle.
The aesthetic is bland. The only appeal comes from the "neon light" look that I'm really getting tired of now. There doesn't seem to have been any real thought put into the enemy or level design.
Which leads me into the big problem. The reason why I ragequit. See, after a while, I realized that you automatically shoot towards your cursor, so I could just not touch my trackpad and circle-straffe around everything and be untouchable. Apparently, the game knew that I'd found out how to exploit it, so it decided to pull a complete 180 from being unfairly easy to unfairly...well, unfair. I was immediately blindsided by 5 enemies at once who drained all my health before I even realized I was taking damage. I was then taken to the very beginning of the stage.
A game that is designed like this does not deserve to be played. nope.
ok so maybe "meh" doesn't quite sum up my discontent for this game, but eh. It's what I'm feelin
That's all for now. Until next time, stay indifferent
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24641
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Glitch
To me, naming a game Glitch is even more of a death sentence than naming a book "highly combustible pages" or a movie "someone dragged a key across the film."
Much to my delight, Glitch does nothing to deserve its name, in that it is one of the best games on this list so far. Yes, it's no secret that I'm a fan of the FPS, but there's a good reason for it. I have no problem tearing apart bad FPS games like Echo. Before this turns into some genre war, let me say that I judge all games equally, regardless of the genre. I have my preferences, but so does everybody. If I don't like an RTS, for example, it's not just because I find no joy in micromanaging things that feel so distanced from me that I may as well just be a spectator, but it's moreso probably because it conveys its instructions through text dumps, has graphical problems or what have you. I swear, I'm a totally credible critic.
Anyways, Glitch is one of those "beautiful in its simplicity" kind of things. As you guys can tell, it's late and I'm tired, so I'm not going to go into huge detail or spend tons of time looking through my blog archive for games to compare it to. I will, however, highlight some of the things I enjoyed about Glitch.
First, let's talk visuals. The stills for this game make it look absolutely awful, but once the polygons are in motion, it really becomes a feast for the eyes. All the colors are bright and contrasting, making everything easy to see.
The level design is...well, it's a bunch of narrow square platforms that connect on all four sides and wave up and down like the Tacoma Narrows bridge. Simple, but allows for a lot of variety (which is a good one-sentence review of this game as a whole).
What really sold me is the game feel. Usually, when I've been playing a game for about half an hour and I haven't died yet, I'll say "okay, let me just kill myself so I can see what the game over screen is like and get bloggin." I couldn't bring myself to do that in this game. I had to keep playing because I was just having too much fun. I attribute this mainly to the weapons. Each one is varied enough to be fresh when you pick it up. You can only hold one weapon at a time, but the stage is always littered with pickups. Dodging enemy fire and taking down tough targets is an immensely rewarding experience. This game definitely earns my seal of approval.
Links
pew pew yaaay: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1470
Much to my delight, Glitch does nothing to deserve its name, in that it is one of the best games on this list so far. Yes, it's no secret that I'm a fan of the FPS, but there's a good reason for it. I have no problem tearing apart bad FPS games like Echo. Before this turns into some genre war, let me say that I judge all games equally, regardless of the genre. I have my preferences, but so does everybody. If I don't like an RTS, for example, it's not just because I find no joy in micromanaging things that feel so distanced from me that I may as well just be a spectator, but it's moreso probably because it conveys its instructions through text dumps, has graphical problems or what have you. I swear, I'm a totally credible critic.
Anyways, Glitch is one of those "beautiful in its simplicity" kind of things. As you guys can tell, it's late and I'm tired, so I'm not going to go into huge detail or spend tons of time looking through my blog archive for games to compare it to. I will, however, highlight some of the things I enjoyed about Glitch.
First, let's talk visuals. The stills for this game make it look absolutely awful, but once the polygons are in motion, it really becomes a feast for the eyes. All the colors are bright and contrasting, making everything easy to see.
The level design is...well, it's a bunch of narrow square platforms that connect on all four sides and wave up and down like the Tacoma Narrows bridge. Simple, but allows for a lot of variety (which is a good one-sentence review of this game as a whole).
What really sold me is the game feel. Usually, when I've been playing a game for about half an hour and I haven't died yet, I'll say "okay, let me just kill myself so I can see what the game over screen is like and get bloggin." I couldn't bring myself to do that in this game. I had to keep playing because I was just having too much fun. I attribute this mainly to the weapons. Each one is varied enough to be fresh when you pick it up. You can only hold one weapon at a time, but the stage is always littered with pickups. Dodging enemy fire and taking down tough targets is an immensely rewarding experience. This game definitely earns my seal of approval.
Links
pew pew yaaay: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1470
Monday, April 15, 2013
Gigoon
Sometimes you play a game...sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't
Sometimes the game just doesn't load. Sometimes it doesn't let you get past its menu screen. In my opinion, the most disheartening kind of broken game is the one that looks like a functioning, finished product but is unplayable because of it's sloppy mechanics and blatant lack of playtesting. The last game I recall from memory that fit into this category was A Series of Tubes.
Gigoon can now be added to the list.
essentially, this game is Attack of the 50ft Robot if the robot was a brilliantly designed monster that, more often than not, refused to move. This game had the foundation to be the most fun thing since sliced yo-yos. The only thing I didn't like about Attack of the 50ft Robot was the visual style. This game looked like it was going to fix that, but broken mechanics ensured that no fun times would be had.
That's all I got for today. Until next time, stay mobile
Links
Move, dammit!: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=398
Sometimes the game just doesn't load. Sometimes it doesn't let you get past its menu screen. In my opinion, the most disheartening kind of broken game is the one that looks like a functioning, finished product but is unplayable because of it's sloppy mechanics and blatant lack of playtesting. The last game I recall from memory that fit into this category was A Series of Tubes.
Gigoon can now be added to the list.
essentially, this game is Attack of the 50ft Robot if the robot was a brilliantly designed monster that, more often than not, refused to move. This game had the foundation to be the most fun thing since sliced yo-yos. The only thing I didn't like about Attack of the 50ft Robot was the visual style. This game looked like it was going to fix that, but broken mechanics ensured that no fun times would be had.
That's all I got for today. Until next time, stay mobile
Links
Move, dammit!: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=398
Sunday, April 14, 2013
GeoWarfare
GeoWarfare advertises itself as an "RTS without the resource management." This resource management has ruined many a game before it, but that's due to poor implementation. I don't think resource management is, in and of itself, a problem, so removing it entirely might not be the majestic epiphany the RTS genre needs. Still though, the way it advertises itself denotes that it thinks of itself as very different, and I'm all about different. Let's see what it has in store.
Well, after playing with it for as long as it took to get me more bored than I was just sitting in a cafeteria waiting for my friends to get knocked out of a debate tournament one by one, I can make one definite conclusion...there's definitely no resource management.
Maybe I just don't understand how to play games like this, but I'm with Yahtzee on this one. sending hoards of my men to get slaughtered by equally numbered, equally armed, yet somehow infinitely more able to cut through troops then my guys just doesn't appeal to me.
GeoWarfare is probably the most simple an RTS can get and it's still too complex for me. Personally, I think this genre doesn't really deserve its moniker. I get the whole "real time" thing, but where does the strategy come in? Personally, every day I find more and more evidence for the theory that RTS games were just conceived for the purpose of attracting boring, self-proclaimed intellectuals who view the video gaming artform as the human equivalent of throwing poo at a wall and giggling. Thus, they were given a genre just as banal as themselves, with the title of "strategy game" to make them feel smart, which is what they thrive on. That title is doubly insulting because it implies that other games, even noble shooting galleries like Starfox 64, don't require strategy.
Perhaps I'm being too close-minded about the RTS, but honestly the only fun I've ever had with RTS elements is when I was playing Starfox 2, and that game wasn't even released. I had to play on an emulator.
Recently, I've attempted to inflate my own ego by looking at by viewership statistics, and it appears my meager blog has reached more than just my few close friends and the occasional DigiPen student. I've still got an audience small enough to make the world's biggest hipster squeal with glee, but I'd wager at least one guy out there likes RTS games. By all means, explain why. I've always held to the notion that there is beauty in every genre, but I'm having a rough time applying that notion to the RTS.
Well, there's my rant for today. Until next time, stay strategic.
Links
more splodey cubes: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=490
Yahtzee's feelings on RTS games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6JNqMjouNc
Well, after playing with it for as long as it took to get me more bored than I was just sitting in a cafeteria waiting for my friends to get knocked out of a debate tournament one by one, I can make one definite conclusion...there's definitely no resource management.
Maybe I just don't understand how to play games like this, but I'm with Yahtzee on this one. sending hoards of my men to get slaughtered by equally numbered, equally armed, yet somehow infinitely more able to cut through troops then my guys just doesn't appeal to me.
GeoWarfare is probably the most simple an RTS can get and it's still too complex for me. Personally, I think this genre doesn't really deserve its moniker. I get the whole "real time" thing, but where does the strategy come in? Personally, every day I find more and more evidence for the theory that RTS games were just conceived for the purpose of attracting boring, self-proclaimed intellectuals who view the video gaming artform as the human equivalent of throwing poo at a wall and giggling. Thus, they were given a genre just as banal as themselves, with the title of "strategy game" to make them feel smart, which is what they thrive on. That title is doubly insulting because it implies that other games, even noble shooting galleries like Starfox 64, don't require strategy.
Perhaps I'm being too close-minded about the RTS, but honestly the only fun I've ever had with RTS elements is when I was playing Starfox 2, and that game wasn't even released. I had to play on an emulator.
Recently, I've attempted to inflate my own ego by looking at by viewership statistics, and it appears my meager blog has reached more than just my few close friends and the occasional DigiPen student. I've still got an audience small enough to make the world's biggest hipster squeal with glee, but I'd wager at least one guy out there likes RTS games. By all means, explain why. I've always held to the notion that there is beauty in every genre, but I'm having a rough time applying that notion to the RTS.
Well, there's my rant for today. Until next time, stay strategic.
Links
more splodey cubes: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=490
Yahtzee's feelings on RTS games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6JNqMjouNc
Friday, April 12, 2013
GenJox
Alright, I admit I got a little heated in my last post. Certain aspects of game design just get me kind of...emotional. But I've cooled down now. I'm ready to take on the next challenge.
Much to my relief GenJox is an IGF student showcase finalist from the grand ol' year of 2001. Now, being an IGF finalist is by no means an instant indicator of quality (or even functionality if Commando Attack Sub is any indication), but it guarantees that at least one person playtested it...right?
well, yes. I would wager that multiple people playtested this one. The learning curve is a little too steep too fast, but once you get the hang of it, it's really fun.
It's your standard top-down bot vs bot deathmatch ordeal. you glide around the map, pick up weapons, use said weapons on other bots, profit. I honestly don't have much praise or criticism to offer, so I'm just going to comment on a few things that interested me.
First off, I don't think this game keeps score. It just seems to be an endless deathmatch (unless of course you play last man standing). It goes to show what this game is trying to be: a stress reliever. In that respect, it passes with flying colors. Since there's really no consequence for dying, you can just charge into battle carefree. That's not a positive quality in and of itself, but it's certainly great for catharsis.
uhm....yeah. That's it, really. It's a good stress reliever. I had fun with it, so yeah. Go nuts. Good job, DigiPen.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=556
Much to my relief GenJox is an IGF student showcase finalist from the grand ol' year of 2001. Now, being an IGF finalist is by no means an instant indicator of quality (or even functionality if Commando Attack Sub is any indication), but it guarantees that at least one person playtested it...right?
well, yes. I would wager that multiple people playtested this one. The learning curve is a little too steep too fast, but once you get the hang of it, it's really fun.
It's your standard top-down bot vs bot deathmatch ordeal. you glide around the map, pick up weapons, use said weapons on other bots, profit. I honestly don't have much praise or criticism to offer, so I'm just going to comment on a few things that interested me.
First off, I don't think this game keeps score. It just seems to be an endless deathmatch (unless of course you play last man standing). It goes to show what this game is trying to be: a stress reliever. In that respect, it passes with flying colors. Since there's really no consequence for dying, you can just charge into battle carefree. That's not a positive quality in and of itself, but it's certainly great for catharsis.
uhm....yeah. That's it, really. It's a good stress reliever. I had fun with it, so yeah. Go nuts. Good job, DigiPen.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=556
Gene
Guess what, guys?! I finded a Wifi!!
*ahem*
To quote the wise game philosopher Jon Jafari, I don't know what anything in this game is. It's one of those mind-rapey RTS games with horrible conveyance like Empyrean Contrata. I'm really tempted to stop the review there and dismiss it as a bad game, but I wouldn't feel right about that. After all, I did blaze right through the text dump at the beginning that explained what i needed to do (even though it's my right as a gamer to do just that). I will say, though, I'm starting to get suspicious of the professors over at DigiPen. I'm sure they're all very qualified and all, but how do you let your students get away with stuff like this? This should be one of the first lessons they learn: text dumps bad! It's fine if one or two bad apples try and pull it, but when there are more games that just settle for the lazy text instruction method than games that even try conveying instruction through the mechanics, something has definitely gone wrong. I understand that it's hard to convey all the necessary knowledge to play a complex genre like RTS, but you could at least give it a try!
ugh...alright, so now I'm going to strap in and force myself to read the instructions at the beginning. Let's see how it goes.
Welp, that did absolutely nothing. I'm going to establish a rule now for text-based tutorials. First off, you're not allowed to have them. If that fails, for whatever reason, you have to at least proofread the text on the screen. Come on, DigiPen is a college. How do they get away with the kind of mistakes that would make a 4th grade English teacher spiral into drunken depression? Even if the tutorial were grammatically sound, which it's not, it would still make no sense. They used too much game-specific terminology and the text wall was too esoteric as a result. I don't know what it means to mutate a gene in the context of a game I haven't played yet.
Okay, I think I've made my point by now that the game fails miserably at conveying instruction to the player, which is definitely enough to get thrown into my junk pile from the get go. However, I'm not going to let all this free hotel wifi go to waste. Let's dig in deep and get nitpickin...
*5 minutes later*
AARGH nevermind! I can't take it anymore! I refuse to accept that this is a problem with the genre. There is just no excuse for game design this esoteric and asinine! Again, I'm not a game designer. I couldn't make this game if I tried. But you know what was the key word in there? TRIED! I know it's tough to make a game that's actually fun to play, but please, please put in the effort and try to make it a little bit enjoyable!
As I subjected myself to this game, one of the other guys in my hotel room was playing The Walking Dead on his Ipad. He could hardly contain the paroxysms of glee that came from a game that was designed around the player. Gene seems like a game that was not meant to be played. Seriously, I'm guessing somewhere down the line, the designers made some kind of mistake that was so garish and game breaking that they decided to design the game so that the player ragequits before he gets to it.
That's all for now. I gotta cool down with some Astrobunny or something...
Links
This: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1550
PS- this game advertises itself as "Simple and fun." FFFFFFFUUUUUU-
*ahem*
To quote the wise game philosopher Jon Jafari, I don't know what anything in this game is. It's one of those mind-rapey RTS games with horrible conveyance like Empyrean Contrata. I'm really tempted to stop the review there and dismiss it as a bad game, but I wouldn't feel right about that. After all, I did blaze right through the text dump at the beginning that explained what i needed to do (even though it's my right as a gamer to do just that). I will say, though, I'm starting to get suspicious of the professors over at DigiPen. I'm sure they're all very qualified and all, but how do you let your students get away with stuff like this? This should be one of the first lessons they learn: text dumps bad! It's fine if one or two bad apples try and pull it, but when there are more games that just settle for the lazy text instruction method than games that even try conveying instruction through the mechanics, something has definitely gone wrong. I understand that it's hard to convey all the necessary knowledge to play a complex genre like RTS, but you could at least give it a try!
ugh...alright, so now I'm going to strap in and force myself to read the instructions at the beginning. Let's see how it goes.
Welp, that did absolutely nothing. I'm going to establish a rule now for text-based tutorials. First off, you're not allowed to have them. If that fails, for whatever reason, you have to at least proofread the text on the screen. Come on, DigiPen is a college. How do they get away with the kind of mistakes that would make a 4th grade English teacher spiral into drunken depression? Even if the tutorial were grammatically sound, which it's not, it would still make no sense. They used too much game-specific terminology and the text wall was too esoteric as a result. I don't know what it means to mutate a gene in the context of a game I haven't played yet.
Okay, I think I've made my point by now that the game fails miserably at conveying instruction to the player, which is definitely enough to get thrown into my junk pile from the get go. However, I'm not going to let all this free hotel wifi go to waste. Let's dig in deep and get nitpickin...
*5 minutes later*
AARGH nevermind! I can't take it anymore! I refuse to accept that this is a problem with the genre. There is just no excuse for game design this esoteric and asinine! Again, I'm not a game designer. I couldn't make this game if I tried. But you know what was the key word in there? TRIED! I know it's tough to make a game that's actually fun to play, but please, please put in the effort and try to make it a little bit enjoyable!
As I subjected myself to this game, one of the other guys in my hotel room was playing The Walking Dead on his Ipad. He could hardly contain the paroxysms of glee that came from a game that was designed around the player. Gene seems like a game that was not meant to be played. Seriously, I'm guessing somewhere down the line, the designers made some kind of mistake that was so garish and game breaking that they decided to design the game so that the player ragequits before he gets to it.
That's all for now. I gotta cool down with some Astrobunny or something...
Links
This: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1550
PS- this game advertises itself as "Simple and fun." FFFFFFFUUUUUU-
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Gelatin Joe
Context time, yay! As I write this I'm "researching" for a debate tournament tomorrow. State champs, woohoo! Anyways, I'm going to be pretty inactive this weekend for that reason. I'll try to make up for it on Sunday, but the backlog of homework is probably going to prevent that. Oh well.
Let's talk about Gelatin Joe. The main premise of the game is that you roll around collecting different color blobs. You use these blobs to solve puzzles and progress through the levels. It's a simple mechanic that was pulled off very well. See, when you use a particular blob, that blob gets dropped on the floor so that if you mess up, you can just get the blob and try again. Who cares if it violates the law of conservation of energy? It's awesome!
I can't spend much more time writing this, so I'm just going to recommend this game. It achieves everything it sets out to. The only problem I have with it is that when you die, you go back to the beginning of the level. Everything else about it is good. perfect. flawless. 10 stars. cut, print, genius.
yay.
Links
Jelly Gerard: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=459
Let's talk about Gelatin Joe. The main premise of the game is that you roll around collecting different color blobs. You use these blobs to solve puzzles and progress through the levels. It's a simple mechanic that was pulled off very well. See, when you use a particular blob, that blob gets dropped on the floor so that if you mess up, you can just get the blob and try again. Who cares if it violates the law of conservation of energy? It's awesome!
I can't spend much more time writing this, so I'm just going to recommend this game. It achieves everything it sets out to. The only problem I have with it is that when you die, you go back to the beginning of the level. Everything else about it is good. perfect. flawless. 10 stars. cut, print, genius.
yay.
Links
Jelly Gerard: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=459
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
GEAR
Ever wonder what happens when you mix Froggle, Astrobunny and Super Castlevania 4? Me either.
well, those last two broken games sapped a good amount of time from my day, meaning I'm going to have to be brief with this one. That's a shame because GEAR is genuinely one of the best designed games I've come across so far. I guess it's not too bad because there's not much in the way of constructive criticism I have for this game.
Let me be a bit more pointed in my praise. GEAR really excels in the area of level design. The game makes absolutely sure that the player knows how to play it. granted, it's not a very complex game, but still, you'd be surprised how easy it is to obscure simple commands like "run, jump and shoot a gear on a string thingy" with bad instructions and level design. Even the player who speeds through the textual instructions can easily pick up on what to do through the level design. "Oh look, there's a thingy that's colored differently from all the other thingies. I wonder what happens if I click it..." You get the idea
I'm struggling to think of more things to say. I betcha if I'd played through the whole game I would have found something that annoys me, but I just didn't have the time for that. For ostensibly completely delivering on the artistic vision with genuinely good programming and design, this game gets my seal of approval.
Links
Jump! https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=8716
well, those last two broken games sapped a good amount of time from my day, meaning I'm going to have to be brief with this one. That's a shame because GEAR is genuinely one of the best designed games I've come across so far. I guess it's not too bad because there's not much in the way of constructive criticism I have for this game.
Let me be a bit more pointed in my praise. GEAR really excels in the area of level design. The game makes absolutely sure that the player knows how to play it. granted, it's not a very complex game, but still, you'd be surprised how easy it is to obscure simple commands like "run, jump and shoot a gear on a string thingy" with bad instructions and level design. Even the player who speeds through the textual instructions can easily pick up on what to do through the level design. "Oh look, there's a thingy that's colored differently from all the other thingies. I wonder what happens if I click it..." You get the idea
I'm struggling to think of more things to say. I betcha if I'd played through the whole game I would have found something that annoys me, but I just didn't have the time for that. For ostensibly completely delivering on the artistic vision with genuinely good programming and design, this game gets my seal of approval.
Links
Jump! https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=8716
GAmbit
No, that's not a typo. That's actually how they stylize the title. I kinda thought it was cool when AEscher did it, but now I can't just dismiss it as an attempt to be artsy because more than one work used it. Oh well...
aaaand it's a not real exe...
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=597
aaaand it's a not real exe...
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=597
Galaxy Express
I've said this before, but I love how every broken game on this list is broken in a unique and different way. For instance, in this game, I'm presented with as black screen and the only thing I can do is make the word "housing" appear if I mash the "esc" key. Games are fun, huh?
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24676
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24676
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Fuzure
reeeally short review today, guys. It's not like today's game is all too substantial, anyways.
In this game, you hold the left arrow key, mash "x" and "c" and you win. Simple as that.
Fuzure is your basic minimalistic hack 'em up. Great for spectacle and the game feel is damn amazing at certain parts. I'm going to guess the main goal of this game was to deliver a satisfying and empowering experience. In that respect, it succeeds. At least, it would succeed were it not for two annoying flaws.
First off, the game provides you a method of moving quickly through the levels (jumping speed is far higher than walking speed). Therefore, all gamer sensibility would lead you to jump merrily throughout the level, killing all who dare oppose you. The problem with that is that moving quickly makes it easy to completely skip over an enemy. This would be fine if the levels were glorified races to the finish. That way, the player would have the choice of trying to dodge enemies as they accumulate or plowing through them to clear a path, possibly soaking up damage along the way. Bam, one simple tweak delivers an experience twice as deep, if not moreso.
The second problem is that the enemies are kinda glitchy. The first time I played, I got through every enemy in the first level and was met with a brick wall. Unbeknownst to me, an enemy had lodged itself within the architecture of the level, making it impossible to kill. Thus, the game was broken.
Other than that, the game is very simplistic. I think those two tweaks would have made for a solid foundation for a very entertaining game, certainly one worthy of my seal of approval. Because of those flaws, however, it falls just short.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay frantic.
Links
happy killtimes: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=570
In this game, you hold the left arrow key, mash "x" and "c" and you win. Simple as that.
Fuzure is your basic minimalistic hack 'em up. Great for spectacle and the game feel is damn amazing at certain parts. I'm going to guess the main goal of this game was to deliver a satisfying and empowering experience. In that respect, it succeeds. At least, it would succeed were it not for two annoying flaws.
First off, the game provides you a method of moving quickly through the levels (jumping speed is far higher than walking speed). Therefore, all gamer sensibility would lead you to jump merrily throughout the level, killing all who dare oppose you. The problem with that is that moving quickly makes it easy to completely skip over an enemy. This would be fine if the levels were glorified races to the finish. That way, the player would have the choice of trying to dodge enemies as they accumulate or plowing through them to clear a path, possibly soaking up damage along the way. Bam, one simple tweak delivers an experience twice as deep, if not moreso.
The second problem is that the enemies are kinda glitchy. The first time I played, I got through every enemy in the first level and was met with a brick wall. Unbeknownst to me, an enemy had lodged itself within the architecture of the level, making it impossible to kill. Thus, the game was broken.
Other than that, the game is very simplistic. I think those two tweaks would have made for a solid foundation for a very entertaining game, certainly one worthy of my seal of approval. Because of those flaws, however, it falls just short.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay frantic.
Links
happy killtimes: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=570
Monday, April 8, 2013
Future Fort Defense
Welp, school's back. That means no more delightfully detailed posts, much to my dismay.
And speaking of dismay, the first game to be reviewed since the start of school features the words "fort," another word for tower, and "defense."
*long, drawn out sigh*
Well, on the bright side, the game sets quite a relaxing mood on startup. For better or for worse, this mood doesn't stay very long. This game tasks the player with quite a lot. Between resource mining, tower building, fighter guiding, and enemy shooting, all the while having to calculate the flow of asteroids to your advantage, this is perhaps the most complex game on the list so far.
Taking that into account, all the design choices compliment this. The music, the color scheme, everything is designed around giving the player brief moments of reprieve, allowing him or her to "recharge" before taking on the next threat. All things considered, the game design is praiseworthy. I feel like if I were a tower defense aficionado, I would be incredibly enthusiastic about this game.
Though I might not be a fan of the genre, Future Fort Defense really does everything right, and for that, it earns my seal of approval. Well, it almost does everything right. If you press "esc" at any point in-game, you get sent right back to the menu screen, losing all your progress in the level. This sucks, but it certainly isn't a dealbreaker, especially considering the stages are short, there's a stage select on the main menu, and the "esc" key is nowhere near the main buttons, so it's bound to be a mistake you only make once.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay relaxed
Links
Space Towers: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26141
And speaking of dismay, the first game to be reviewed since the start of school features the words "fort," another word for tower, and "defense."
*long, drawn out sigh*
Well, on the bright side, the game sets quite a relaxing mood on startup. For better or for worse, this mood doesn't stay very long. This game tasks the player with quite a lot. Between resource mining, tower building, fighter guiding, and enemy shooting, all the while having to calculate the flow of asteroids to your advantage, this is perhaps the most complex game on the list so far.
Taking that into account, all the design choices compliment this. The music, the color scheme, everything is designed around giving the player brief moments of reprieve, allowing him or her to "recharge" before taking on the next threat. All things considered, the game design is praiseworthy. I feel like if I were a tower defense aficionado, I would be incredibly enthusiastic about this game.
Though I might not be a fan of the genre, Future Fort Defense really does everything right, and for that, it earns my seal of approval. Well, it almost does everything right. If you press "esc" at any point in-game, you get sent right back to the menu screen, losing all your progress in the level. This sucks, but it certainly isn't a dealbreaker, especially considering the stages are short, there's a stage select on the main menu, and the "esc" key is nowhere near the main buttons, so it's bound to be a mistake you only make once.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay relaxed
Links
Space Towers: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26141
Sunday, April 7, 2013
Saturday, April 6, 2013
Froggle
The title of this game sent me into a delusional contemplation of some sort of hybrid between Frogger and Peggle, which seems about as appealing as the monkey frogs from Beerfest.
Luckily, I got no such thing.
The first thing I noticed about Froggle was just how charming the game is, aesthetically and otherwise. That really is the word for it. It has lots of charm. From attention to detail to button tutorial signs that are actually interwoven into the narrative to references to Frogger to just the cute aesthetic of a little frog dealing with the tedium of daily life...except he's a frog. It's flippin adorable!
I will say that for all its charm, the game isn't really exceptionally put together. Within the first minute of having control over my character, I managed to get stuck under a bench, unable to move. Thankfully, I was able to complete the task at hand nonetheless, but still, it's worth noting that it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to break this game, especially considering pressing "enter" can make the game crash, even though there are multiple times in which the game tells you to press enter! Like...what?
okay, I can shake that one off. Let me get focused here...okay. Let's talk about the mechanics...
Here's the best way to describe this game in my opinion: take Just Cause 2, strip it of every element except the grappling hook, design the entire game around the grappling hook, make the grappling hook about a million times more volatile, and make the game about frogs.
All things considered, the mechanics actually hold up extraordinarily well. The frog-tongue grappling hook makes moving around the (very well designed) overworld quite enjoyable. Yes, controlling the tongue can get a bit difficult at times, but it never got frustrating. I think this is mainly due to the fact that you can keep your tongue outstretched while still moving around to find a suitable surface while in midair. While not the most realistic design choice, it certainly keeps the game from getting frustrating. The main mechanic is simple and explored to the fullest without getting repetitive. That is the hallmark of a well designed game.
The narrative is the glue that holds it all together. It's a simple tale of frustration at the DMV...er...I mean DFL...from the accounts of both the employee and the victim...er...I mean, customer. Even though this story hits a bit close to home for a 17 year old who just failed his road test because the ignoramus in the passenger seat doesn't know that you have to be in the left lane before you make a left hand turn I mean seriously what is this world coming to whenwehaveapublicdepartmentwherethepeoplewhoworkthereHAVENOIDEAWHATTHEY'REDOINGAND
*cough*...sorry about that...
Nevertheless, the story is, at the risk of severely overusing this word, charming. Between it, the fun and intuitive mechanics and the pleasing visual style, this game seems to be in perfect shape to earn my seal of approval
...until...
Remember earlier in this review how I said the game crashes easily? Good. Now, remember a good long time ago when this blog was just getting started and I would constantly complain about games lacking save features?
Well, guess who's back!
Froggle isn't a very long game, and can be blown through in less than an hour, so I normally wouldn't mind that it doesn't have a save feature. The narrative length and style is somewhat similar, after all, to Starfox 64, one of my favorite games of all time. The difference is that Starfox 64 doesn't crash...ever. Froggle crashed within the first 15 minutes of my playthrough. That caused me to unjustly lose not quite enough progress to justify ragequitting, but just enough to make my experience tedious and frustrating. Fix your game so that it doesn't crash or put in a damn save feature, dammit!
*sigh* okay...I've gotten quite worked up this time around, haven't I? Well, before I sign off, I should talk about the bonus games. Froggle Soccer is a fun little variation of gameplay mechanics that would require you to think strategically about how to use them to your advantage if the game wasn't easily broken by standing in the goalpost and licking all the balls that come your way...don't think too much about what I just said.
Seedler Soccer, the other bonus game, is essentially a 2.5D version of Slime Soccer, which has brought me a good amount of amusement as well as boredom from being sent to detention for playing it during school hours...It's a solely 2-player experience, which is good because now I have another way to amuse both myself and a friend during debate tournaments when I have my computer on me but lack internet. The physics are a bit off in this bonus game, but I still had fun with it and it's not even part of the main game, so no harm done.
Alright, that's all for now. Until next time, stay swingin'
Links
Long tongue, long review: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1502
Luckily, I got no such thing.
The first thing I noticed about Froggle was just how charming the game is, aesthetically and otherwise. That really is the word for it. It has lots of charm. From attention to detail to button tutorial signs that are actually interwoven into the narrative to references to Frogger to just the cute aesthetic of a little frog dealing with the tedium of daily life...except he's a frog. It's flippin adorable!
I will say that for all its charm, the game isn't really exceptionally put together. Within the first minute of having control over my character, I managed to get stuck under a bench, unable to move. Thankfully, I was able to complete the task at hand nonetheless, but still, it's worth noting that it doesn't take a whole lot of effort to break this game, especially considering pressing "enter" can make the game crash, even though there are multiple times in which the game tells you to press enter! Like...what?
okay, I can shake that one off. Let me get focused here...okay. Let's talk about the mechanics...
Here's the best way to describe this game in my opinion: take Just Cause 2, strip it of every element except the grappling hook, design the entire game around the grappling hook, make the grappling hook about a million times more volatile, and make the game about frogs.
All things considered, the mechanics actually hold up extraordinarily well. The frog-tongue grappling hook makes moving around the (very well designed) overworld quite enjoyable. Yes, controlling the tongue can get a bit difficult at times, but it never got frustrating. I think this is mainly due to the fact that you can keep your tongue outstretched while still moving around to find a suitable surface while in midair. While not the most realistic design choice, it certainly keeps the game from getting frustrating. The main mechanic is simple and explored to the fullest without getting repetitive. That is the hallmark of a well designed game.
The narrative is the glue that holds it all together. It's a simple tale of frustration at the DMV...er...I mean DFL...from the accounts of both the employee and the victim...er...I mean, customer. Even though this story hits a bit close to home for a 17 year old who just failed his road test because the ignoramus in the passenger seat doesn't know that you have to be in the left lane before you make a left hand turn I mean seriously what is this world coming to whenwehaveapublicdepartmentwherethepeoplewhoworkthereHAVENOIDEAWHATTHEY'REDOINGAND
*cough*...sorry about that...
Nevertheless, the story is, at the risk of severely overusing this word, charming. Between it, the fun and intuitive mechanics and the pleasing visual style, this game seems to be in perfect shape to earn my seal of approval
...until...
Remember earlier in this review how I said the game crashes easily? Good. Now, remember a good long time ago when this blog was just getting started and I would constantly complain about games lacking save features?
Well, guess who's back!
Froggle isn't a very long game, and can be blown through in less than an hour, so I normally wouldn't mind that it doesn't have a save feature. The narrative length and style is somewhat similar, after all, to Starfox 64, one of my favorite games of all time. The difference is that Starfox 64 doesn't crash...ever. Froggle crashed within the first 15 minutes of my playthrough. That caused me to unjustly lose not quite enough progress to justify ragequitting, but just enough to make my experience tedious and frustrating. Fix your game so that it doesn't crash or put in a damn save feature, dammit!
*sigh* okay...I've gotten quite worked up this time around, haven't I? Well, before I sign off, I should talk about the bonus games. Froggle Soccer is a fun little variation of gameplay mechanics that would require you to think strategically about how to use them to your advantage if the game wasn't easily broken by standing in the goalpost and licking all the balls that come your way...don't think too much about what I just said.
Seedler Soccer, the other bonus game, is essentially a 2.5D version of Slime Soccer, which has brought me a good amount of amusement as well as boredom from being sent to detention for playing it during school hours...It's a solely 2-player experience, which is good because now I have another way to amuse both myself and a friend during debate tournaments when I have my computer on me but lack internet. The physics are a bit off in this bonus game, but I still had fun with it and it's not even part of the main game, so no harm done.
Alright, that's all for now. Until next time, stay swingin'
Links
Long tongue, long review: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1502
Friday, April 5, 2013
Fragmentia
I've said some pretty controversial things on this blog, at least to the gaming population. I've bashed Super Smash Bros Brawl and, much to my delight, was spared the same fate as more famous internet personalities as Yahtzee Croshaw. Perhaps I'm testing my luck by doing this, but I'd like to take this opportunity to add another popularly praised game to my list of garbage games. That game is A Link to the Past. I appreciate that a good Zelda game will challenge the player's mind, but there's a difference between presenting genuinely challenging puzzles and just confusing the player with an amalgam of bad conveyance, sticky combat (yeah, I said it), and completely unmotivating narrative.
Fragmentia fixes all three of those problems. Granted, the latter two are fixed by simply eliminating combat and narrative from the game entirely, but at least the conveyance is decent. And before you ask, no, Fragmentia and A Link to the Past have nothing to do with one another. I was just playing the latter recently and I needed to vent my frustrations.
Right, then. I talk about conveyance quite a lot and I will probably continue to do so. Yes, it's well known that I watched that one Egoraptor video, but no, that's not why I value conveyance so much. Anyway, let's slow down for a minute and explain exactly what conveyance is. Simply put, it's the way you teach the player about the mechanics of your game. The "mechanics," of course, can refer to controls and basic functions of the game. Sometimes it's necessary to tell the player straightaway, but usually the best option is to design the game so intuitively that the player can figure it out on their own. The reason I got so peeved at A Link to the Past earlier is because the game is trying to convey more than one detail at a time. This must be against the scientific method or something. I have this magic mirror that can shift me between dimensions, and the world just involuntarily shifted into one of these dimensions, so naturally I figured I have to use the mirror to get to my next objective. Turns out, nope: I just have to go into some shrubbery where there are microscopic holes at the top that I might have noticed if I wasn't so focused on the mirror that was apparently so important.
*pant pant* ok, I'm done now. The point of all that was that Fragmentia doesn't make the same mistake. It reveals one thing at a time, like a game should. More on that later.
I've always held to the belief that if you're playing with a controller (and thus, a limited amount of buttons), then there is no need to ever have button tutorials, because if the player get stuck, he or she can just mash buttons until the thing that they want to happen happens. PC gaming is a bit different in that there are too many keys that do nothing in the game for this strategy to work. Fragmentia gave me an interesting idea on how to remedy this problem. On the "controls" screen, a little graphic of a keyboard is shown with all the buttons that actually perform functions in the game lit up. Underneath this graphic was an explanation of what each button does, but riddle me this: what if those explanations were not there? Would this not be the perfect method of conveying controls to the player? Tell them which buttons are in use and then say, "good luck, junior." This will make the player feel rewarded for figuring stuff out on their own. The reason I hold this particular design quality above so many others is that I truly feel it encapsulates everything that's wonderful and unique to the gaming medium. Yes, you can feel rewarded for figuring out the twist ending to a movie or book, but what other kinds of media can reward you with the intrinsic elements of the medium? Ok, fine, knowing an esoteric vocab word in a book can be rewarding, as can figuring it out from context, but I still think there's something unique to interactive media (ergo, video games) that all falls apart when a game has bad conveyance.
Oh me oh my, I haven't even started reviewing Fragmentia yet. Alright, let's get to that.
Fragmentia is a very simple game. As I mentioned before, there is no story and the mechanics are limited. All the game really has to be reviewed are the art style and the mechanics, both of which I think were delivered terrifically. The art style has a kind of "felt cut-out" feel to it. Whether you love it or hate it, it's certainly unique and can definitely be appreciated.
Then there are the mechanics. Fragmentia really only has one puzzle: stop time at the appropriate place. I won't explain it more than that for fear of spoiling the answer to the only riddle in the game. Honestly, this is a little disappointing, but the one puzzle is conveyed so well and the game itself is so short and sweet that I can't get too mad.
And that's it! There you have it, 90% blog, 10% review. The take-away from today's little rant session is that when it comes to conveyance, less truly is more. As long as the player isn't completely clueless, let them figure stuff out on their own. I know it may be tempting to clue your little lab rat into every aspect of the game that you've toiled over so very laboriously, but trust me, missing one or two aspects of the game is worth it if it means good conveyance. Besides, it might even give the player a reason to replay your game. And for God's sake, please only convey one element of the game at a time.
That's all for now. Until next time, stay intuitive
Links
Key+Door=Profit: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=18540
Fragmentia fixes all three of those problems. Granted, the latter two are fixed by simply eliminating combat and narrative from the game entirely, but at least the conveyance is decent. And before you ask, no, Fragmentia and A Link to the Past have nothing to do with one another. I was just playing the latter recently and I needed to vent my frustrations.
Right, then. I talk about conveyance quite a lot and I will probably continue to do so. Yes, it's well known that I watched that one Egoraptor video, but no, that's not why I value conveyance so much. Anyway, let's slow down for a minute and explain exactly what conveyance is. Simply put, it's the way you teach the player about the mechanics of your game. The "mechanics," of course, can refer to controls and basic functions of the game. Sometimes it's necessary to tell the player straightaway, but usually the best option is to design the game so intuitively that the player can figure it out on their own. The reason I got so peeved at A Link to the Past earlier is because the game is trying to convey more than one detail at a time. This must be against the scientific method or something. I have this magic mirror that can shift me between dimensions, and the world just involuntarily shifted into one of these dimensions, so naturally I figured I have to use the mirror to get to my next objective. Turns out, nope: I just have to go into some shrubbery where there are microscopic holes at the top that I might have noticed if I wasn't so focused on the mirror that was apparently so important.
*pant pant* ok, I'm done now. The point of all that was that Fragmentia doesn't make the same mistake. It reveals one thing at a time, like a game should. More on that later.
I've always held to the belief that if you're playing with a controller (and thus, a limited amount of buttons), then there is no need to ever have button tutorials, because if the player get stuck, he or she can just mash buttons until the thing that they want to happen happens. PC gaming is a bit different in that there are too many keys that do nothing in the game for this strategy to work. Fragmentia gave me an interesting idea on how to remedy this problem. On the "controls" screen, a little graphic of a keyboard is shown with all the buttons that actually perform functions in the game lit up. Underneath this graphic was an explanation of what each button does, but riddle me this: what if those explanations were not there? Would this not be the perfect method of conveying controls to the player? Tell them which buttons are in use and then say, "good luck, junior." This will make the player feel rewarded for figuring stuff out on their own. The reason I hold this particular design quality above so many others is that I truly feel it encapsulates everything that's wonderful and unique to the gaming medium. Yes, you can feel rewarded for figuring out the twist ending to a movie or book, but what other kinds of media can reward you with the intrinsic elements of the medium? Ok, fine, knowing an esoteric vocab word in a book can be rewarding, as can figuring it out from context, but I still think there's something unique to interactive media (ergo, video games) that all falls apart when a game has bad conveyance.
Oh me oh my, I haven't even started reviewing Fragmentia yet. Alright, let's get to that.
Fragmentia is a very simple game. As I mentioned before, there is no story and the mechanics are limited. All the game really has to be reviewed are the art style and the mechanics, both of which I think were delivered terrifically. The art style has a kind of "felt cut-out" feel to it. Whether you love it or hate it, it's certainly unique and can definitely be appreciated.
Then there are the mechanics. Fragmentia really only has one puzzle: stop time at the appropriate place. I won't explain it more than that for fear of spoiling the answer to the only riddle in the game. Honestly, this is a little disappointing, but the one puzzle is conveyed so well and the game itself is so short and sweet that I can't get too mad.
And that's it! There you have it, 90% blog, 10% review. The take-away from today's little rant session is that when it comes to conveyance, less truly is more. As long as the player isn't completely clueless, let them figure stuff out on their own. I know it may be tempting to clue your little lab rat into every aspect of the game that you've toiled over so very laboriously, but trust me, missing one or two aspects of the game is worth it if it means good conveyance. Besides, it might even give the player a reason to replay your game. And for God's sake, please only convey one element of the game at a time.
That's all for now. Until next time, stay intuitive
Links
Key+Door=Profit: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=18540
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Fragment
Aww, look at da cute little kitty
Ok so the first thing I noticed about Fragment was that the art style kind of reminds me of a more modern Crazy Cross. The "cutscenes" are given in like a pencil-storyboard format (or at least the first one was). Once I had time to appreciate that I was thrust into the game whereupon two more things grabbed my attention. First, whatever planet you're on must be made of Fun Zone balls or something because your jump can easily catapult you right off the screen. Second, the music is, to quote a wise philosopher, quite bitchin' (oh, that's not a swear. Ger over it).
As I write this, I'm no more than 30 seconds into the actual game, and I can say that I have really high hopes for it. Let me talk about two more things that I noticed right off the bat. First off, the graphical style is not for everybody, but it is certainly for me. I personally love the cartooney, cell-shaded Wind Waker-ey style, but I know a lot of people who don't. Anyway, that's the kind of thing Fragment is going for.
Second, let me talk about that glorious Egoraptorian ideal of perfect conveyance. Fragment starts you off with absolutely no knowledge. All you had was an insubstantial "cutscene" thing. And you know what? That's how I like it! Fragment truly does rely on the game mechanics to teach the player about themselves. Here's an example. Right when you start off, the level is designed in a very linear way. You press "D" and you progress through. It looks like a 2.5D sidescroller at first. Then, I reached a dead end and thought "well what the hell, I'm only 15 seconds in and I already reach a dead end?" But, as it turns out, I was just being an idiot. See, right before I reached the dead end, the world kind of curved a little bit to give the feeling of depth. From this, one may infer that this actually isn't a 2.5D game, but a full-fledged 3D, third-person experience. The game never explicitly told me I had to completely change the paradigm of how I went about playing to progress, but the level design made it easy for me to infer it. This is how you design a game!
and, of course, right as I say that, the ever-infamous information disks are introduced. Whatever, though. In this case I think they're kind of necessary. I would never have figured out that "F" gives me a bird's-eye view of the level I'm at. Oh wait, this game was designed to be used with an Xbox 360 controller, so there's pretty much no excuse...and since I don't have any of those controllers lying around, there are some pretty annoying things I have to deal with.
I want to know who was in charge of mapping the PC controls for this game. Then I want to know if they've ever played a game before. The mouse controls are completely inverted and it feels extremely unnatural, especially when you try to adjust your view while blasting forward and end up probing through your character's nostrils because the mouse controls are a mess!
*pants angrily*
Ok, I think I'm good now. Were it not for the messy control scheme, I'd be really enthused about this game. I love how everything is presented, I love the art style, I love the pacing, I love how the world gradually expands, giving it a tangible sense of enormity. I guess the best way to describe this game is "the result when the best designers out there meet a team of really promising young programmers and one simpleton who thought it was a good idea to completely invert the mouse controls and make playing on a PC an absolute nightmare."
That's all I got for now. If that one guy who's responsible for the shameless act I mentioned happens to read this, sorry for being so harsh, but come on. I can't let something like that slide. Until next time, stay purrrrfect.
Links
Space Meow! https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24674
I like cats, if you couldn't tell...
Ok so the first thing I noticed about Fragment was that the art style kind of reminds me of a more modern Crazy Cross. The "cutscenes" are given in like a pencil-storyboard format (or at least the first one was). Once I had time to appreciate that I was thrust into the game whereupon two more things grabbed my attention. First, whatever planet you're on must be made of Fun Zone balls or something because your jump can easily catapult you right off the screen. Second, the music is, to quote a wise philosopher, quite bitchin' (oh, that's not a swear. Ger over it).
As I write this, I'm no more than 30 seconds into the actual game, and I can say that I have really high hopes for it. Let me talk about two more things that I noticed right off the bat. First off, the graphical style is not for everybody, but it is certainly for me. I personally love the cartooney, cell-shaded Wind Waker-ey style, but I know a lot of people who don't. Anyway, that's the kind of thing Fragment is going for.
Second, let me talk about that glorious Egoraptorian ideal of perfect conveyance. Fragment starts you off with absolutely no knowledge. All you had was an insubstantial "cutscene" thing. And you know what? That's how I like it! Fragment truly does rely on the game mechanics to teach the player about themselves. Here's an example. Right when you start off, the level is designed in a very linear way. You press "D" and you progress through. It looks like a 2.5D sidescroller at first. Then, I reached a dead end and thought "well what the hell, I'm only 15 seconds in and I already reach a dead end?" But, as it turns out, I was just being an idiot. See, right before I reached the dead end, the world kind of curved a little bit to give the feeling of depth. From this, one may infer that this actually isn't a 2.5D game, but a full-fledged 3D, third-person experience. The game never explicitly told me I had to completely change the paradigm of how I went about playing to progress, but the level design made it easy for me to infer it. This is how you design a game!
and, of course, right as I say that, the ever-infamous information disks are introduced. Whatever, though. In this case I think they're kind of necessary. I would never have figured out that "F" gives me a bird's-eye view of the level I'm at. Oh wait, this game was designed to be used with an Xbox 360 controller, so there's pretty much no excuse...and since I don't have any of those controllers lying around, there are some pretty annoying things I have to deal with.
I want to know who was in charge of mapping the PC controls for this game. Then I want to know if they've ever played a game before. The mouse controls are completely inverted and it feels extremely unnatural, especially when you try to adjust your view while blasting forward and end up probing through your character's nostrils because the mouse controls are a mess!
*pants angrily*
Ok, I think I'm good now. Were it not for the messy control scheme, I'd be really enthused about this game. I love how everything is presented, I love the art style, I love the pacing, I love how the world gradually expands, giving it a tangible sense of enormity. I guess the best way to describe this game is "the result when the best designers out there meet a team of really promising young programmers and one simpleton who thought it was a good idea to completely invert the mouse controls and make playing on a PC an absolute nightmare."
That's all I got for now. If that one guy who's responsible for the shameless act I mentioned happens to read this, sorry for being so harsh, but come on. I can't let something like that slide. Until next time, stay purrrrfect.
Links
Space Meow! https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=24674
I like cats, if you couldn't tell...
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
FP-FS
Oh goodie, another FPS game! Will it be a fun and intuitive experience like Fight Zone or will it give me more headaches than Echo did? Yes, I've had a pretty interesting experience when it comes to DigiPen FPS games. The noble first person shooter is, while not really a genre in and of itself, my favorite "breed" of video game. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those foam-mouthed thrill seekers who play FPS games for the rush of the violence. In fact, I think it's a shame that modern FPS games tend to stick to the same formula when my favorite game of all time (slight props to anyone who can figure it out) deviated so greatly from the "linear shooting gallery" rigmarole. The perspective allows you to truly inject yourself into the character and experience the narrative to the fullest extent and the mechanics of a typical "shooter" game tend to be intuitive and natural. That said, it's very easy to use those qualities as fallbacks to justify an overall mediocre experience.
But now I'm just rambling, so I'm going to cut myself off there. Let's get into the review and find out where on the FPS spectrum FP-FS lands, shall we?
Well, upon starting up FP-FS I was delighted to see that it seemed to take a bit of inspiration from my aforementioned favorite game of all time, using words like "augmentation" and "multitool" (is it clear enough yet?). Indeed, the soundless tutorial screens got me fired up enough to tear through this game like a hot knife through butter. It was when I started looking for the "start game" button that I noticed the words "now loading" at the bottom of the screen. This had been going on for a good 5 minutes, and there was no progress bar to speak of, so I just assumed the game had crashed.
As I write this, I plan to start the game up again and let it sit for as long as it needs to. Hopefully I'll be able to occupy myself with whatever happens to be on Animal Planet...
*sigh* Yeah, this game is just a loading screen. Darn, I was really looking forward to it, too. Oh well. I hope my random musings on FPS games were at least somewhat entertaining. Until next time...
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=448
But now I'm just rambling, so I'm going to cut myself off there. Let's get into the review and find out where on the FPS spectrum FP-FS lands, shall we?
Well, upon starting up FP-FS I was delighted to see that it seemed to take a bit of inspiration from my aforementioned favorite game of all time, using words like "augmentation" and "multitool" (is it clear enough yet?). Indeed, the soundless tutorial screens got me fired up enough to tear through this game like a hot knife through butter. It was when I started looking for the "start game" button that I noticed the words "now loading" at the bottom of the screen. This had been going on for a good 5 minutes, and there was no progress bar to speak of, so I just assumed the game had crashed.
As I write this, I plan to start the game up again and let it sit for as long as it needs to. Hopefully I'll be able to occupy myself with whatever happens to be on Animal Planet...
*sigh* Yeah, this game is just a loading screen. Darn, I was really looking forward to it, too. Oh well. I hope my random musings on FPS games were at least somewhat entertaining. Until next time...
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=448
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Foxglove Copperfield: Robot Hunter
Whoa, nelly! This is gonna be interesting. Not only is this the biggest game (with the exception of Crazy Cross, which I'm still working on) so far, but it's the only one that requires Steam to play it. This is getting serious.
Unfortunately, this is 300+MB of deadweight. That's right, it's another broken game. What a shame. It crashes right after the initial loading screen.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25276
Unfortunately, this is 300+MB of deadweight. That's right, it's another broken game. What a shame. It crashes right after the initial loading screen.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=25276
Founder's Glory
At first I thought this game had the opposite problem as Flux in that the video was working fine with no audio. Then I fired my weapon, having forgotten that I turned the volume all the way up in confusion, and now my ears are spewing rivers of blood and grey matter. Hopefully I'll stay alive long enough to finsh thisdfa afghakjrgh glujgksjbn
Just kidding, of course. Let's talk about Founder's Glory
The first problem I noticed straightaway is the ever irksome issue of bad conveyance. Let's get one thing clear, alright? If you must convey basic instructions on how to play the game via text dumps from uninteresting characters (which is never, by the way) please please PLEASE do not restrict control or progress of the player during these text dumps. All I'll want to do is go forth and shoot things, but I can't do that until I've sat through a lecture where Einstein teaches me that if my health bar goes down, I die. Thanks, Einstein! What would we do without you?
Here's my overall summareview for this game: it has the foundation for a great and innovative masterpiece, but it's filled with little things that annoy me to the point of unenjoyment.
The control scheme is great. Seriously, it's perfect for a 2D platformer of this kind. You're pretty much unrestricted in all ways that make sense, and any feeling of disempowerment fits in with the narrative, which is also executed fairly well (minus the whole text dump malarkey).
The levels are designed fairly well and the enemy placement is almost Castlevania levels of ingenious. The game has you imparting strategies (which I DIDN'T need explained to me by a crotchety old professor, thank you) like jumping atop enemies to get a better vantage point from which to shoot other enemies, etc.
Okay, enough praise. Let's get into why I don't like Founder's Glory.
I don't see how you're supposed to get through even the first level without dying. Seriously, there's not really a difficulty curve as much as there is a difficulty skyscraper. The enemies can litter the stage with bullets and you're so slow and clunky that it's nigh impossible to dodge enemy fire. This would be fine if you could exchange enemy scrap for health at any point in the levels or even if there were occasional health drops, but neither of those occur, making this game frustrating rather than challenging.
The rest of the game is honestly white noise as far as I'm concerned. I could go to the R&D shop, but why would I unless I have enough scrap metal to buy anything? How do I get scrap metal? Well by completing that impossible level, of course!
Alright I gotta cut it off here or else I'm going to get angry. Until next time, stay mechanical
Links
Gorey Flounders: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1416
Just kidding, of course. Let's talk about Founder's Glory
The first problem I noticed straightaway is the ever irksome issue of bad conveyance. Let's get one thing clear, alright? If you must convey basic instructions on how to play the game via text dumps from uninteresting characters (which is never, by the way) please please PLEASE do not restrict control or progress of the player during these text dumps. All I'll want to do is go forth and shoot things, but I can't do that until I've sat through a lecture where Einstein teaches me that if my health bar goes down, I die. Thanks, Einstein! What would we do without you?
Here's my overall summareview for this game: it has the foundation for a great and innovative masterpiece, but it's filled with little things that annoy me to the point of unenjoyment.
The control scheme is great. Seriously, it's perfect for a 2D platformer of this kind. You're pretty much unrestricted in all ways that make sense, and any feeling of disempowerment fits in with the narrative, which is also executed fairly well (minus the whole text dump malarkey).
The levels are designed fairly well and the enemy placement is almost Castlevania levels of ingenious. The game has you imparting strategies (which I DIDN'T need explained to me by a crotchety old professor, thank you) like jumping atop enemies to get a better vantage point from which to shoot other enemies, etc.
Okay, enough praise. Let's get into why I don't like Founder's Glory.
I don't see how you're supposed to get through even the first level without dying. Seriously, there's not really a difficulty curve as much as there is a difficulty skyscraper. The enemies can litter the stage with bullets and you're so slow and clunky that it's nigh impossible to dodge enemy fire. This would be fine if you could exchange enemy scrap for health at any point in the levels or even if there were occasional health drops, but neither of those occur, making this game frustrating rather than challenging.
The rest of the game is honestly white noise as far as I'm concerned. I could go to the R&D shop, but why would I unless I have enough scrap metal to buy anything? How do I get scrap metal? Well by completing that impossible level, of course!
Alright I gotta cut it off here or else I'm going to get angry. Until next time, stay mechanical
Links
Gorey Flounders: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=1416
Flux
aight guys, I'm going to try and rip through a bunch of these today, so the reviews are gonna be short and (hopefully) sweet.
That said, Flux is broken. Yay?
I start the game up and the music ans SFX start playing but there's no video. Oh well. Next.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26614
That said, Flux is broken. Yay?
I start the game up and the music ans SFX start playing but there's no video. Oh well. Next.
Links
https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=26614
Monday, April 1, 2013
Fluffy Puff Rampage
I'm going to start out this review by paraphrasing the great Yahtzee Croshaw, as I oft do, and throw my support behind his notion that a game that fails due to over-ambition is much preferable than a game that fails because it tried to play it safe. Fluffy Puff Rampage strikes me as an ambitious project that eventually frustrated its creators to the point where they decided to throw up their arms and say "screw it, that'll do."
Making a game must be a lot of work, and Fluffy Puff Rampage is, I hope, proof of that. It's riddled with design choices that strike me as "quick fixes" to problems that the devs didn't know how to fix. "Hey, boss, I don't know why, but the save feature isn't working." "Did you look over the code?" "yeah, I don't know what's wrong." "Alright, just create a bunch of default save files that start off the player from every conceivable angle so that the game at least has the semblance of having a save feature" "now that I can do!"
From a gameplay standpoint, Fluffy Puff Rampage is okay. The levels are short to the point of being unsatisfying and the controls are quite sticky, especially when trying to pull off fancy combos or special moves, which all involve the use of that finicky block button. Other than that, it's a standard 2D beat em up not quite as good as the ones that litter Newgrounds.com.
The visual style is really good...I think. The levels are all themed really well and the enemy sprites seem to have a good bit of variety to them, but they're gone so soon after they appear that you don't really get any time to appreciate them.
Honestly, my only real gripe with this game is the whole "sticky controls" thing I grazed over. Everything else can be looked past, but this game really is a button masher on account of the sticky controls. Some people like that sort of thing, but I'm not a fan of button mashers. I find them to be repetitious and dull. Pulling off combos seems cool at first until you realize that spamming "kick" is infinitely more effective. Dominant strategy, yo. Were it not for that, I might have given this game my seal of approval.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay aggressive
Links
The Pillow Fights Back: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=426
Making a game must be a lot of work, and Fluffy Puff Rampage is, I hope, proof of that. It's riddled with design choices that strike me as "quick fixes" to problems that the devs didn't know how to fix. "Hey, boss, I don't know why, but the save feature isn't working." "Did you look over the code?" "yeah, I don't know what's wrong." "Alright, just create a bunch of default save files that start off the player from every conceivable angle so that the game at least has the semblance of having a save feature" "now that I can do!"
From a gameplay standpoint, Fluffy Puff Rampage is okay. The levels are short to the point of being unsatisfying and the controls are quite sticky, especially when trying to pull off fancy combos or special moves, which all involve the use of that finicky block button. Other than that, it's a standard 2D beat em up not quite as good as the ones that litter Newgrounds.com.
The visual style is really good...I think. The levels are all themed really well and the enemy sprites seem to have a good bit of variety to them, but they're gone so soon after they appear that you don't really get any time to appreciate them.
Honestly, my only real gripe with this game is the whole "sticky controls" thing I grazed over. Everything else can be looked past, but this game really is a button masher on account of the sticky controls. Some people like that sort of thing, but I'm not a fan of button mashers. I find them to be repetitious and dull. Pulling off combos seems cool at first until you realize that spamming "kick" is infinitely more effective. Dominant strategy, yo. Were it not for that, I might have given this game my seal of approval.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay aggressive
Links
The Pillow Fights Back: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=426
Floor It!
Floor It is a game by the McLovin Squad (no, I'm not joking) that captures the emotional roller coaster of the tale of a ghost car wandering through a barren city, desperately trying to find fulfillment in his endless purgatory of existence.
April fools. It's just an unfinished racing game.
First off, I thought one of the prerequisites to being called a "racing" game was that there had to be a "race" of some kind, but the car you control is the only animated thing in the whole city.
More glaringly, however, the game just *feels* unfinished. I don't know whether to blame the engine or the graphics or what, but a game that can have you phasing through buildings to get swiftly to your next checkpoint doesn't really seem like a finished product.
When I found out that you could go through buildings without getting hurt, the game just became a round of "point your car in the direction of the little phallic arrow above you and hold 'W' until the arrow changes direction."
Then, I drove straight into a lake and transformed into what I think was a boat. Then the real fun began. At least as a car, I could enjoy the revving of my engine and the adrenaline rush that came from the speed I'd gather. In the boat, there are no such things. At least there was another boat chasing me, though. Even though it did absolutely nothing even when it rammed into my backside, it at least gave the whole experience the semblance of a racing game.
Then, I morphed into a plane and rocketed off into the sun, a confused, broken shell of a man.
The end.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay complete
Links
A Series of Roads: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=16249
April fools. It's just an unfinished racing game.
First off, I thought one of the prerequisites to being called a "racing" game was that there had to be a "race" of some kind, but the car you control is the only animated thing in the whole city.
More glaringly, however, the game just *feels* unfinished. I don't know whether to blame the engine or the graphics or what, but a game that can have you phasing through buildings to get swiftly to your next checkpoint doesn't really seem like a finished product.
When I found out that you could go through buildings without getting hurt, the game just became a round of "point your car in the direction of the little phallic arrow above you and hold 'W' until the arrow changes direction."
Then, I drove straight into a lake and transformed into what I think was a boat. Then the real fun began. At least as a car, I could enjoy the revving of my engine and the adrenaline rush that came from the speed I'd gather. In the boat, there are no such things. At least there was another boat chasing me, though. Even though it did absolutely nothing even when it rammed into my backside, it at least gave the whole experience the semblance of a racing game.
Then, I morphed into a plane and rocketed off into the sun, a confused, broken shell of a man.
The end.
That's all I got for now. Until next time, stay complete
Links
A Series of Roads: https://www.digipen.edu/?id=1170&proj=16249
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)