itch.io

The art for the first stage and the end looked really good.

The maze was an interesting change of pace, and I liked the comical ending.

It's a shame your original game got corrupted, but if you did this in 12 hours, then well done, most people would have probably given up after realising their work had been corrupted and then tried a different jam later, but you stuck with it and made a game.  It's a bit smaller than some of the ones on here, there is however a game to be played, with mechanics to make it interesting, and an ending.

If you did this in 12 hours, I would have liked to have seen the originally planned game.

I was lucky to have the week off of work, even still I spent more than 80 hours on this jam.

It was the biggest scope game I've tried to do for a jam, and I still had things I didn't have time to get into the game or tidy up the way I would have liked.

It's also my third jam, so I've gotten a bit better in planning out my time on the jam and the breakdown of the work.  I tend to split it up into art, coding, sound and finishing up.  But for this one I spent 27 hours just on the art.  I know it's pixel art and simple, but you have a pixel in the wrong spot or wrong shade and it can make a good sprite look bad.  I then spent about 40 hours on the coding (I reckon about 1,500 lines of code), and the rest for everything else, due to the time constraints I wasn't able to make brand new music specifically for the game, so I reorganised a couple of songs I made a month or so ago when I was playing about with the DAW (instruments, length, and trying to make them loops).

I would like to do it full time, but at the moment I haven't earned a penny, not spent one either.

Don't worry about not fitting it into the jam.  The suggestions are just if you want to carry on with the game, and are only suggestions, you could take it in a completely different direction.

The reason why I mentioned about removing trails is because as the number of objects to be processed and rendered increases, performance will start to drop off.  This performance drop will then start to impact the way the game plays.  I'm only assuming the next bit, but I take it that the poison spots have a script or timer attached to them and some kind of detection area for physics?  Each instance will take it's own chunk of system resources, if this doesn't get cleaned up or recycled, this is when it starts to hit performance.  If you don't want to remove the objects, there might be another way of streamlining the objects to reduce the performance overhead.

Thanks again for the game.

It's a question everyone has in their first jam and I've never really found anything official on how it works, but based on the jams O've been in, this seems to be about the way it works.

We never normally make great games for jams.

But they do give us the opportunity to test ideas, practice our skills and experiment.

Just making and submitting a game for a jam is a challenge in itself, and when you've never done it before I find you end up thinking "will it be enough?" Or "what if no one plays or likes it?"

In the jams I've been in, I've always found the community welcoming and understanding, we all put the effort in and want to improve, and it's all part of the fun.

The gameplay is pretty fast paced, and I like the idea of poisoning enemies, but something about it didn't feel great (fun for a minute or two, but not great), I'm not sure if it is the number of enemies swarming you, or the limited variety of attacks available to control the swarm.

Maybe if there are different types of poison attack that are provided pick up items or something like this, like an attack that does area of effect poison in an explosion, or an attack that leaves a poison pool on the ground?  I feel like you just need a way to control the swarm better, to make the melee and close encounters a bit more manageable.

Thanks for the game.

I like the art style for this game.

I couldn't get used to the controls though, and the level design doesn't really give you the chance to get comfortable with the controls before needing to use the jumping and attacking mechanics.  When you jump into the game, the first pit seemed like you could just walk past it, with the enemy on the other side indicating a direction of travel.  So my first death was to walk towards the enemy and then fall to my death, instantly.  I'm also unsure if you are supposed to be able to attack while jumping but I was unable to, while the level design appeared to need this.  I'm playing through my browser on a laptop.

Thanks for the game.

Initially I thought this would be simple platformer, but the mechanic of leaving a trail of poison that becomes lethal means you can't just bounce around aimlessly, you have to think about your path through each level to ensure that you can complete it without bumping into the lethal poison.

Beyond the need for sound, I think that the way the poison trail (or the controls) works needs to be looked at.  If you start moving and then stay still for too long, you end up being killed as the poison is still spawning where you're standing, and with the controls as they're set up now, it is very easy for a jump to fail or for you to fall off a ledge and into the poison trail.  On one level I also got a stutter towards the end of the level which I assume is because of the number of poison spots that were spawned in and because I played through the browser.  It might be possible to have a maximum number of these sprites that can spawn, and when that limit is reached you remove the oldest sprite.  This would still leave a trail that could stop you from doubling back on yourself, but would help performance by limiting the number of poison sprites spawned at any given time.

Thanks for the game.

Any chance you could have a look at mine as well?

Types of ratings on Itch

So far as I have been able to tell from other jams, there are 2 rating systems on itch.io, a global, generic rating system that is rated through the game page of any game you can play or download on the platform, and a Game Jam Rating System that is specific to a game jam and can be configured by the hosts to use categories for voting.  This information is voted/submitted on a game's submission page in a game jam.

To see how many people have rated your game in the jam

To identify how many people have rated your game in a game jam, you need to look for the information on your game's jam submission page.  These ratings do not show up in your dashboard because they are specific to the game jam you have entered and appear to use a completely different system to the global ratings, that do show on your dashboard.

During the voting period in any jam, you can only see how many people have rated your game, not the full results.  These are aggregated at the end of the game jam and will show on your game's game jam submission page.

When the Results are In

This is the point where there can be some difference between game jams.

For some game jams, you will get an "Overall" rating, and ranking for your game in the jam, and this can be the only overall ranking provided or considered.  In other game jams, you can get an Overall ranking, and a ranking for each category that is voted for in the jam.  For example, if your game had brilliant and terrible gameplay, and categories are voted for separately, you could get a good ranking in Art, but a terrible rating for Gameplay.  Your Overall rating would be balanced between the 2, but your rankings in each category would be different base on how people voted.

The rating system also does some maths in the background to try to balance the disparity between games that had a very low number of ratings and games that had a very number of ratings.  Normally for games with the highest number of ratings, the vote results tend to be considered as what was voted for, because with the greater number of votes, the average results for each category are considered to be providing a truer representation of the community's view of the game.  For games with a low number of ratings, the background algorithm appears to look at how the game has been rated, and tries to provide an overall result as if the game had received more ratings.  It might do this by looking at we have rated other games, and how others have rated those games, and then as you may have rated a game with a low number of ratings, it might try to apply a final rating based on how your voting pattern compared to other members of the community.  It's a bit of a black box for this part, but I could see it working this way or something similar to this.

This is interesting, The algorithm always wins in the end.

On the surface, it's like you have some control, but if you want to build that "shock factor" in real life, you have to use a limited set of language to get people to view or click your posts, and it is normally based on incorrect or twisted information.  The same thing happens in the game where you can only choose from limited options from a subset of viral language, normally with negative alignment, to "get" views and followers.  However, this subset is presented to you by the "algorithm" removing any real choice you might have had.

The crazy thing is that now we have AI generative chatbots, the sort of social media exploitation that was used by people to get quick reactions and views can now be used by businesses with these bots to basically say anything they want and influence public opinion.  A big example in the UK during Covid lockdowns was the suggestion that the new 5G phone masts were causing the virus, or that the vaccines were forcibly installing monitoring tech into our bodies that used 5G, while not done by businesses, it was done by organised groups that believed in the same principles whether they were correct or not, and they used social media to influence public opinion.  People literally started to burn down and destroy 5G phone masts when they had nothing to do with a viral outbreak, or the vaccines that helped to reduce the impact of the virus.

Thank you for the nice feedback.

I was lucky enough to have a week off so I was able to put more time into this one than I would normally be able to.

The scope was a bit too big to get everything I wanted into the game for a 1 week jam and it also meant that I had to submit with things that worked but may not be be complete.

I'm still trying to learn how to make games, and I try to do as much of it by myself as I can.  It's simpler to think about when I create all of my own assets, and I enjoy the variety of work this allows.

When I figured out what I was doing the game was pretty fun.  On starting the level I didn't realise to interact with the notice board to get the instructions.

I just wish there were more levels.  They make for fun little puzzles.

Thanks for the game.

This is an interesting concept for a game.

I know it might be because of the limited time in a game jam, but I would have liked to be able to merge different types of poison together to create unique combinations that you couldn't buy in the shop.  You wouldn't need to cover every permutation, but it would be fun to maybe mix the tornado with a "liquid" poison to make something like acid rain.

I also feel like there needs to be a purpose for making the poisons beyond a bank account because after unlocking all the poisons you can just spam the nuke button and get infinite money, making the idea of mixing poisons or buying them from the shop a bit pointless.

I liked the animals bouncing around the world though, it's fun watching them move around the map.

Thanks for the game

I tried to just run for it and keep running for it.  Is there an exit because I just kept running for a while before eventually being killed by spiders as they spawned in front of me while running?  I'd hate to think I was just running in circles, but wouldn't be surprised.

I liked the premise of the game, but feel that this is also a work in progress.  Even with the simpler looking assets you have managed to create an atmospheric experience, thanks for the game.

Thanks for the feedback.

I think that if I carry on with this one, which I would like to, that there are more than a few mechanics I would like to refine.  Due to the scope and the time a lot of the systems are rough around the edges at the moment.

Thank you, I spent more time than I'd like to admit on making the sprites.

Thanks for playing.

On the surface the main mechanic seems really simple, but I can imagine it took a couple of tries to get it working nicely, and it shows in the way it plays.

I've only played about a quarter of the games on here so far but it is definitely in my top 10 for the jam.

This is a really fun game with a nice art style.  The mechanic of "flopping" is a really fun mechanic and nicely animated.

Not sure if I just need to get better at timing the flops, but I got stuck on level 5.

Had a few moments before this level where I just seemed to get stuck on a spring, and on level 5 just ended up with the same cycle about 20 times where I would bounce around the corner and not be able to flop or bounce towards the spring between 2 poison pools at the start of the level.

I like the game though, thanks.

They're not really problems, but I think the game might play better with such changes.  For a first jam it's a really good submission.

Just had a look at your game.

I liked the idea of playing as a bottle of poison, and you have used the premade assets with your own nicely.

The level design is pretty good as well as the levels get more difficult, with new obstacles as you progress.

2 things I think could be improved are the controls, they a bit too responsive, there is no forgiveness in them, and the other is that there is no sense of urgency in the game.  For a platformer, this is normally done with a time limit, or something constantly chasing you that will cause you to lose the game if it catches up.

Thank you for the game.

I've not had the chance to try your game yet, but when test/play the games in a jam I to aim to play 1 decent run, for a game that has controls to adapt to, or where the challenge means I die quickly, I will keep trying until I figure out the mechanics.  The run after this point tends to be what I call the decent run.

I then play until I die or beat the game, but because I want to play as many as I can, around daily life, I don't keep playing to finish the game.

I will try to have a look at your game and if I do make it to the end I'll let you know.

Being able to do most of it without tutorials is already pretty good going.

Don't be afraid to use them though, I used to work in business IT and noticed that even professional coders need to use cheat sheets and look stuff up from time to time.

You can have a firm grasp of a language or system and still need help from time to time.

Yep, sometimes the ones you miss can be the best ones.

I'm not surprised you were tired in the end.

I agree with the idea of trying to be fair amd playing as many games submitted as possible.  In the other game jams I've been in, including this one, I normally start with the list of games in need of ratings until everyone has some kind of feedback.  It does mean that I don't normally get the chance to play the most popular games or the ones with the highest number of ratings, but I would rather walk away knowing everyone's games had at least someone else play them than there being a group of people that got no ratings or feedback.  One of the submissions to another game jam I reviewed once was even a document for rules for a table top game they had come up with.

So let me just get this straight, there are 178 submissions in this game jam and you have played 177 games the last few days, and you submitted 1 yourself.

...

Fair play, this guy needs a coffee, or a beer ... I have also seen that you have been giving feedback on what seems to be every game as well.  If it was up to me, you'd win just for this fact.

I'm pretty sure you mentioned somewhere that it's your first jam as well.  I hope you've enjoyed the experience, but just to make sure, you don't have to play every game that's submitted, although I'm sure everyone will appreciate you engagement and your feedback.  I know I've already said it on my game page, but thanks again for having a look and leaving feedback.

P.s. - I normally aim to play at least 50% of the games in a jam unless it is a huge game jam with thousands of submissions, time permitting of course.

I hope you do as well, or better than you hope.

When I get the time to go through some more games tomorrow I'll give yours a look as well.

It's always interesting to see how we did.

After all the effort we all put in we all want to see how it was received.

The fun bit when the results are posted is seeing where you came in the rankings for each section.  There often tends to be an overall ranking and then a ranking for each category we vote on.

Good luck with it.

When dealing with sensitive subjects it can be easy to give people the wrong impression but I think you've gone about it the right way.

Sorry for the delayed response.

If you are wanting to see what people have rated you for in the jam, this only becomes available when the voting period ends.  For this jam that will be this Saturday.

At the moment your screenshot shows how many people have rated your game in the jam but you won't be able to see how people have rated your game until Saturday.

I don't know how you set up the poisons, so I could have just been lucky if it was truly random.

With the selections I was getting and that each phase was 4 poisons that didn't refresh each turn, it felt like I needed to strategise to beat it.

No offence intended.

It's a part of the game jam system that isn't very well explained, it confused me for a bit in my first game jam as well.

How my dashboard said no ratings yet my game jam page said I had ratings submitted.

What I realised was that when you rate a game in the jam, the rating categories can be defined by the jam host and are specific to the game jam in question.

These also don't show on the dashboard because they are specific to the jam and could be defined as anything from how nice the art and game play is, to how many times a ball bounced.

If someone rates your game on the game page, this is for the main itch.io ratings that are global across the platform.  These are the ratings that will show on your dashboard, but they are not configured into the categories that can be used within the game jam rating system and won't be able to tell you anything that can help you improve.

In a game jam people normally only rate the game for the jam.

If you wanted to get general ratings as well, you would either need to produce the perfect game that people would be willing to pay for, or spend a lot of time and effort on marketing your game to the wider public.

For most people a game jam is about the experience, not money or fame.

There's 2 different ratings, ratings for the game jam only show on your submission page.

The ratings you see in your project info are the normal ratings for any game on itch.

You can play any game outside of a game jam and give it a rating but it's a different system and doesn't have the option categories that are set up for rating games in a jam.

If you got the submission page for the project you should the number of ratings just above the project info on the right.

We all do it at some point.

Thanks for having a look.

The aim of the game at the moment is to hunt creatures and harvest resources to be able to craft items to be able to hunt creatures and harvest resources.

The game is set up so that you can craft items at the crafting table, eat at the dining table, interact with objects, and enter/exit maps.

If you didn't read the intro you might have missed the controls.

I had planned on a more explanatory tutorial but due to the scope and the time I was unable to fit this in.

Part of my reason for doing things like this is to try to use that potential and do it my way.  After trying the "normal" way, office, travel and the like, and ending up saying "thank you have a nice day" a lot, the saying of if you want something done right ... then do it yourself came to mind.

Still got a day job, but forever hoping one day I won't need it anymore.

It was still pretty fun though.

The combat was oddly satisfying.

Also, a strange thought, if you made a buggy game about bugs, would it really be buggy?

Planning is always important, and planning effectively comes with practice and experience.  By making games for jams, or just when you have the time, you'll get a feel for how long it is likely to take to do different parts of the process.  It doesn't mean you'll always get the balance right but you'll be able to succeed more than fail in planning.

For this jam I overscoped a bit, but by knowing how long parts of the process were taking and having a rough idea of how long other stages might take, I was able to rescope and deliver something playable that had the core pieces of my original scope.

I found when I did my first jam that "level of ability" didn't really matter too much unless you were massively ambitious and wanted to chase the top spots.

So long as you can make something do something that has an objective to complete or an aim to strive towards, it's a game.

In the few jams I've done I've played games that were text based, games where the sound is terrible and blows your eardrums out, games that leave you thinking "this dev must have been on something?" ( these can be the most interesting ones, or the worst ).

So long as you submit something and get some feedback you can learn how to improve or what you might want to really do, be a coder, an artist, musician or a designer, or all of it.  Above all, try to enjoy it, if you don't you're either going about it the wrong way or maybe gamedev isn't what you really want to do.