next »

[oyog]

Thanks for the tip about the missing comma.

JamesGecko:

Here's a tip, which may or not be clear until you've played for a while...
-Snip-

Well, that sold it for me.

To jump into the movie conversation;

If you get the chance, rent Juliet of the Spirits.

It's a film by Fellini from 1965 and it does a fantastic job of being dreamy while only using physical special effects (as far as I know).  I have mixed feelings about the plot but the visuals are fantastic.

[Evan Balster]

Huzzah for lucid dreaming!    I've wanted to see those films for some time.


Also, I donated $30 to you the other week after reading your writeup about your family's low-budget lifestyle; I hope you won't think me a cheapskate for paying the minimum for this game.


EDIT:  Whoah, does that mask really work?  I might need to retrain my recall!

[Peevish]

I'm having the hardest time understanding what's going on in this game. For one, pressing "T" isn't giving me the instructions again, and I don't think I quite understood them the first time. Since each game picks up where the last one left off, I'm completely lost. It seems like I just move around til I find an arrow and go up a level, but everyone's talking about "entering enemies." Also, the powerup system, I sort-of get how it works, but I feel like I'm thrown into the deep end without much tutorial.

I'm on Mac OSX 10.6.6. The "T" button thing is kind of a real problem.

EDIT: ok, some more text came up a few levels down, understanding things a bit more. "T" still doesn't do anything.

[aDFP]

I'm having the hardest time understanding what's going on in this game. For one, pressing "T" isn't giving me the instructions again, and I don't think I quite understood them the first time.

Someone's posted up a video of the first few minutes (though they've misleading said that the game is only $1.79), if that's any help.

I'm guessing deleting the files and reinstalling would also reset it.

[Peevish]

Sure sure, but since this is a Feedback thread, I figured fixing the T button would be a good idea as well.

[aDFP]

Sure sure, but since this is a Feedback thread, I figured fixing the T button would be a good idea as well.

Yeah, of course. I'm torn on the New Game option as well. I love the abstract, dreamlike feel of the game, but I also think that some players are going to get lost because some of the more customary tropes of games are not present. It took me a while to get into the feel of not having a permanent main character, or a standard front end, but I really like the dreamlike aspects now.

And seeing as this is a feedback thread, there are things about the game I would like to see changed. The music is bugging me a little. Not that it isn't well done, but there are time when the gameplay resembles a bullet-hell shooter, and I find myself missing the kind of heavy, driving, energetic music that usually accompanies them, so it would be great if the music got heavier as the action did. That may just be me though.

The other thing I would love to see in the game is Bosses. I know one of the bullet points on the site is that the game doesn't have them, but I have a strong feeling that they'd work really well with the game. It could be an ability that was present on, say every dozen levels. Just an open area, and a larger creature with no abilities except high health (with no possibility to enter, or no way until its health was reduced), and a host of other 'satellite monsters' (which could be entered), with identical abilities and movement mirrored rotationally around the boss.

[JamesGecko]

The other thing I would love to see in the game is Bosses. I know one of the bullet points on the site is that the game doesn't have them, but I have a strong feeling that they'd work really well with the game. It could be an ability that was present on, say every dozen levels. Just an open area, and a larger creature with no abilities except high health (with no possibility to enter, or no way until its health was reduced), and a host of other 'satellite monsters' (which could be entered), with identical abilities and movement mirrored rotationally around the boss.

I like the idea of bosses, but I don't like the idea of fighting them; I have a hard enough time just keeping up with normal enemies. The game is pretty exploration based, so a boss that you could enter, but you couldn't enter any of the enemies inside might be another idea. Kinda like a dungeon, where you'd have to flip switches or something inside the boss and then escape before it exploded.

[ortoslon]

But I will say that if you do get stuck in a snake pit in my game and DO eventually figure your way out of it.... that final moment can be an amazing feeling.  There's a big question about whether that payoff is worth all the helplessness and frustration that preceded it, though.

i believe it is. i feel weird when i have to die several times in a row to regain power within easier environment (i don't usually play games this way) but that's okay

i propose that we refer to switching to heart-less token set to increase firepower as "going commando"

[Jason Rohrer]

Sure sure, but since this is a Feedback thread, I figured fixing the T button would be a good idea as well.

Ah, just now recovering from GDC!

So, the T key only works to start a new tutorial if you've already finished the one you're currently running.

Sounds like you're still in the middle of the first batch of instructions (which are spread over the first 12 or so levels), so the T key doesn't do anything.

Also the T key only shows a brief version of the instructions (because, of course, it can be invoked at any time and isn't rigged into the first 12 levels like the full-blown tutorial is).

A lot of people seem confused about the game because they READ about entering stuff, but then don't know how to enter stuff in the game.  Entering is explained on level 9 or 10, I think.  And the key binding for entering stuff is disabled before that so that you won't enter something by accident.

[Jason Rohrer]

Ah, bosses!

Yeah, people have been asking about that from time to time throughout playtesting.

However, it was usually because of some other weakness in the game.  Something missing from the core gameplay.  Usually, when I found out what that was and fixed it, the desire for bosses seemed to evaporate.

I think there's probably some weakness in the core gameplay still.  And, yeah, there are no bosses in Pac Man or countless other games that manage to sustain interest over the long haul.

This game seems particularly vulnerable to rage quitting.  I find myself rage quitting when I play!  I think that's partly because the game tempts you into "going commando" with no hearts, but then you inevitably get knocked down when you try that.  Speaking for myself, I simply cannot learn that lesson, and I keep trying it over and over and over.

And I didn't design it on purpose to tempt people in this way... but I do think it's interesting that the temptation is operating.  I mean, I don't think I've seen another game that makes the "bullet power" vs "health" trade-off.  It's a strange trade-off to make, for sure.

So then I'm struggling with whether I should "fix" the game to make it more gratifying to people OR preserve it as an interesting experiment.  Like, the trade-off and temptation does something kinda new to your brain.  And that's good, right?

Also, the "just one more play" bug that so many other games have (Spelunky, Pac Man, etc) seems to stem from the chance to wield your new, improved mastery over the lower, easier levels so that you can build up an even better foundation to tackle the hard level that you last failed at.  Each time you play "one more time", you get a fresh start at level 0.  A fresh chance to build up even MORE hearts (or lives) before you face that beastly level X again.  Plus, you have a chance to wallow in your mastery as you cruise through the early levels.

This game has none of that!

Instead, it lets you work your way up to your failure point, and then it holds you there forever, with you failing again and again and again.

Hmm... but Super Meat Boy and VVVVVV kinda do the same thing as well.  Grinding you against your current failure point forever.

But those games feature an "immediate rechallenge" that feeds the "one more play" bug.  My game knocks you down away from the challenge and presents you with a sub-challenge (which also gives you a chance to change you load-out).

But you often don't want to face a sub-challenge, nor do you really want to change your load out, so that feels frustrating.  I guess it could just knock you back to a level reset, which would give it the SMB/VVVVVV immediate rechallenge bug.  But you usually do need to adjust your load out, even if you don't want to.  You could always enter yourself voluntarily to change your load-out.

Though getting knocked inside yourself is a really cute mechanic, thematically.

[Guert]

Hello Jason! If you need some extra testers for your game, I'd be happy to help out!
Later!

[deathtotheweird]

Hello Jason! If you need some extra testers for your game, I'd be happy to help out!
Later!

the game is already released you goose

[Guert]

It is? Ha ha! Then I guess I'll have to check the game out!

[ortoslon]

I think that's partly because the game tempts you into "going commando" with no hearts, but then you inevitably get knocked down when you try that.

inevitably? no way. i can clear ten levels with a good commando set, then get hit and still recover quickly and painlessly

But you often don't want to face a sub-challenge, nor do you really want to change your load out, so that feels frustrating.  I guess it could just knock you back to a level reset, which would give it the SMB/VVVVVV immediate rechallenge bug.  But you usually do need to adjust your load out, even if you don't want to.  You could always enter yourself voluntarily to change your load-out.

Though getting knocked inside yourself is a really cute mechanic, thematically.

when i'm weak, i usually prefer getting knocked down over entering myself because 1) i receive hearts and 2) my tokenset will get passed up when i come back renewed

[ortoslon]

watch me play from level 9 (end of the tutorial) to level 63



i quit when i got into serious trouble, i'll probably show how i'll regain power in the next video

[Jason Rohrer]

watch me play from level 9 (end of the tutorial) to level 63

You have gotten farther than anyone else, I think!

So, I'm currently turning a problem over in my mind... the "no point" problem that has been discussed over and over.

I'm wondering if the "grind against your current failure point" model (Super Meat Boy and VVVVVV) only works in a non-proc-genned game.  I spent quite a while playing SMB this afternoon, and I really wanted to keep playing more and more.

Those games have you climbing a tall mountain, yeah, but it's THE mountain.  The same one that everyone else in the world who plays the game faces.  When you pass something hard, you feel some sense of accomplishment.  You want to see what's coming next.  Partly because it's THE next.

I'm having trouble squaring that against Spelunky, where each person's challenge is unique.  After dying, you want to play the whole game again to see what will happen next time.  After dying in SMB, you want to try that last challenge again to get past it and to see what is coming next.

In my game, there's something coming next, but it's kind of a throw-away next.  (Something proc-genned just for you that no one else in the world will see).

SMB is also totally different from Pac Man, Spelunky, and other "see how high you can get" games... because you KNOW you can get to the end if you just keep trying.  Or at least it seems feasible.  I have no hope of getting to the end of Pac Man or Spelunky.

My game has the "you know you can get past this hard part eventually" feel of SMB, but after that is just another even harder part.  So there's no sense of progress.

Hmm... I feel like I'm lost and rambling a bit here.

But my core question is whether these features of my game are seriously problematic.  I'm obviously trying to do something different here with the mechanical meta-structure.  But is the result different in a good way or different in a bad way?

Obviously, this is a game about the infinite....

But I may have painted myself into a corner where the final take-away from the experience is tedium and frustration.

But when I watch Ortoslon play at level 63, I see something beautiful and interesting there.

But most players never get to that point, I think.

I'm torn.

[Jason Rohrer]

Oh, and one other thing that I should run by people:

I could "fix" the seed so that everyone in the world is playing against the same "trunk" of core levels, all the way up.  I.e., level 63 for Ortoslon would be the same level 63 that I would eventually encounter.

Right now, when someone says, "I made it to level X", it doesn't mean much, because it was their unique trunk up to that point... it could have been a particularly easy trunk of levels for all I know.  Some people see harder stuff than others.

But is there some magic to seeing a series of levels that is unique to you?  Would that be spoiled if everyone in the world was playing the same trunk?  Or would it be even cooler?

(Obviously, branches---like when you enter an enemy or get knocked down---would still be freshly generated and unique to each player).

[Gyt]

Oh, and one other thing that I should run by people:

I could "fix" the seed so that everyone in the world is playing against the same "trunk" of core levels, all the way up.  I.e., level 63 for Ortoslon would be the same level 63 that I would eventually encounter.

Right now, when someone says, "I made it to level X", it doesn't mean much, because it was their unique trunk up to that point... it could have been a particularly easy trunk of levels for all I know.  Some people see harder stuff than others.

But is there some magic to seeing a series of levels that is unique to you?  Would that be spoiled if everyone in the world was playing the same trunk?  Or would it be even cooler?

(Obviously, branches---like when you enter an enemy or get knocked down---would still be freshly generated and unique to each player).

I think it's better to make some "special" (not procedurally generated) levels instead of this (for example, level 10, 20, 30, 40 and so on).
btw, I'm on level 52 now.

[Destral]

Oh, and one other thing that I should run by people:

I could "fix" the seed so that everyone in the world is playing against the same "trunk" of core levels, all the way up.  I.e., level 63 for Ortoslon would be the same level 63 that I would eventually encounter.

Right now, when someone says, "I made it to level X", it doesn't mean much, because it was their unique trunk up to that point... it could have been a particularly easy trunk of levels for all I know.  Some people see harder stuff than others.

But is there some magic to seeing a series of levels that is unique to you?  Would that be spoiled if everyone in the world was playing the same trunk?  Or would it be even cooler?

(Obviously, branches---like when you enter an enemy or get knocked down---would still be freshly generated and unique to each player).

Each has its own appeal. If you have a common trunk that people can play, they can compare notes and strategies for certain tough levels, for example, which gives the game a social aspect. In this case, things like Youtube videos of playthroughs have that common ground to garner interest in players.

At the same time, the randomly generated nature of the game gives it a lot of replay value. If you reach a point where you're stuck, you can always start over with a different seed.

You could always have 2 gameplay modes, one that is the common one that people can compare progress on, etc. - the 'Gold Standard' so to speak, and then have the current completely randomised experience (you might even allow people to vary the seed settings for an easier or harder experience).

From the testing it looks like you're collecting a lot of data from the game about playstyle and so forth. You might be able to use that to create some form of online leaderboards, which ties in nicely with a common trunk. At the same time, if there is a way to gauge the difficulty of a randomly-generated trunk, that would also be interesting to see on leaderboards.

[ortoslon]

I could "fix" the seed so that everyone in the world is playing against the same "trunk" of core levels, all the way up.  I.e., level 63 for Ortoslon would be the same level 63 that I would eventually encounter.

Right now, when someone says, "I made it to level X", it doesn't mean much, because it was their unique trunk up to that point... it could have been a particularly easy trunk of levels for all I know.  Some people see harder stuff than others.

i faced similar objections when i speedran Spelunky. people said, "can you even call that 'speedrunning' when the game is random and run times aren't exactly comparable?" i said something like 1) i call that 'speedrunning' because i do run as fast as i can 2) i wouldn't speedrun the game if it wasn't random (i hate memorizing levels and planning routes to the extent necessary in traditional speedrunning) 3) run times are still fuzzily comparable (if i beat Spelunky in three minutes and someone hasn't broken 3:30, it's quite certain that i'm better)

(Obviously, branches---like when you enter an enemy or get knocked down---would still be freshly generated and unique to each player).

from my experience, most luck happens in token branches

Each has its own appeal. If you have a common trunk that people can play, they can compare notes and strategies for certain tough levels, for example, which gives the game a social aspect. In this case, things like Youtube videos of playthroughs have that common ground to garner interest in players.

i can't imagine anyone having fun comparing notes and strategies for beating a procedurally generated level

At the same time, the randomly generated nature of the game gives it a lot of replay value. If you reach a point where you're stuck, you can always start over with a different seed.

i agree. btw, i started over five times before recording the video because i wanted to get a good engine from the start