b-random9's game Reviews on Newgrounds

[Beyond The Sky]

I'll cut to the chase on this one. Whilst the game has a really strong style, good music, and a great feeling mechanic for loosing the enemies, it doesn't feel like it was tested enough (by other players at least). Most of the game feels very bland and barren and there's not enough to prompt the player to actually play.

The big issue for me is the lack of anything to really do. Kill enemies, get score, sure, but that largely involves cruising through space for a while, maybe dodging some obstacles, before finally coming across an enemy. But by the time I've shaken off the pursuing ships or even just turned around to get a second shot in its already gone, and so the voyage begins again. Perhaps having arrows show up on screen to pinpoint the directions of nearby enemies would help give the game a better flow, rather than the random "hope to find gameplay" model that exists. I get that this model can work in a sandbox game for example, but in a faster paced arcade shooter it just feels null.

Even if I do kill enemies it just seems to be for a powerup or score. The powerups didn't seem to significant but there was enough to notice a difference. Score on the other hand is quite an outdated concept and it's easy to see why. I never felt as though I was accomplishing anything beyond slowly raising a number. Score milestones would probably have helped, or some means to actually progress through content, or missions, anything really to work towards. Having the score increase be more evident would help as well. As fun as it was to shake space ships, I decided to see how far I could get w/o really playing and just cruising, and I survived without barley any trouble, I just got bored after a while. I did notice afterwards that I could get quicker score by killing the tougher enemies but I hadn't noticed before hand. Perhaps if getting score boosts was more evident, say through numbers popping up, then there would be more appeal. Having to check "did my score go up" whilst playing is always slightly annoying.

You mentioned rougelike elements in the brief description which caught my attention but I'm not sure what you're referring to. This isn't so much procedural generation as it is randomly scattering objects, which works I guess but is a little misleading. Permadeath would imply I lose all my progress on death but as I said before I'm not really making any progress.

Couple of extra notes:
Rocks only being tiny or massive seems odd.
Items and enemy bullets are both white, I never plowed into bullets but I always had to make sure whats what which lessens the accomplishment somewhat.
I liked the shadows that hand off objects. Even though it doesn't make logical sense it works well.
Some indication of being able to shoot again/weapon cooldown would be very helpful given the slow recharge rate.
I like the text that pops up (long shot, ect).
Not telling the player the pause button is annoying, because I have to go around pressing each button it could be before I can pause, likely dying in the process.
A lot of the time enemies seem to just get themselves killed, at which point I feel kind of pointless.
The ship seems to randomly jitter (as does the hp bar periodically). Shake is good for feel but when used seemingly randomly/without and event prompting it, it can feel very sickening and/or disorientating. Hard to say if it's the game for certain but I felt a little sick afterwards.

Sorry if this review was a bit too harsh. I should clarify that the game is certainly cool and has a nice idea with the losing the enemies by plowing them into objects, but it quickly lost its appeal with nothing to really do besides wander, no feeling of want for anything and losing the enemies by crashing them into rocks neither gives me anything nor does it really help when they basically just pile up and get themselves killed if I go in a straight line for long enough.

[Bio Evil 4]

Firstly I should classify I've never played RE4.

Starting off, this is very clearly a well polished game, the great art, music, SFX, little effects like the enemy knockback all go towards creating a great feeling game. A puase button would have been helpful (especially for taking notes on my thoughts on the game) but aside from that there wasn't much of an issue.

The issues come more so from the gameplay. The very contra-esque gameplay is quite fun and the game introduces new enemies and obstacles at a good rate. The big problem for me is that the game doesn't take into account a new players perspective very well. So much of the game feels like it would be fun and challenging if you know what you're doing, but when it comes down to actually playing it and learning the challenges for the first time it feels cheap. I have to die learning the strange ins and outs before I can then die actually trying to beat it. I like challenge but at this point it's not fun and challenging just tedious.

I'll break down some examples.

First is the axe throwing enemy. Whilst not a bad enemy in itself, it doesn't fit with the fast paced gameplay. It's the type of game where thinks happen very quickly and you need to be able to respond quickly, but then the axe guy comes along and you have to figure out he has a very slow 3-cycle. Not out of place in say Mario, more so here. Then each subsequent encounter I can't tell at a glance where he is in his cycle, unless I've already played the part several times before I have to stand around and figure it out which is incongruent with the game's "GO GO GO" nature that's key for survival. At the point past the bridge collapsing I stopped to take care of threats which didn't directly screw me over, but this lead me into a situation where the axe guy, bear trap and stabby women combined to make a situation that was almost impossible to get past. Then I'd die and come back, only to discover I was meant to just keep going non stop, else I'm screwed forever. Perhaps if everything was better synced up or the stabby women spawning had some consistence I could figure this stuff, but so much of that information is pretty much invisible to the player.

This brings me on to another couple of this. The first one is probably a little controversial, a wider screen width. I get that you wanted to be NES faithful and fast reaction is part of the game but it does go towards keeping info from the player that they'd only know had they played the game before to a wearing degree. Even Shovel Knight, known for being strongly NES inspired had 16:9 res. Keeping the box-like resolution reminds me of that Yahtzee Croshaw quote "It was like going to the renaissance fair only catch the bubonic plague and have the kind shag your wife".

The second issue being the lack of recovery. To go back to the Contra comparison, in contra (Super C and Alien Wars at least) when you get hit you disappear before you come back flashing, giving the screen time to clear. Here, if you get hit once then even if you come back flashing you're already overwhelmed by that point and are likely to take a hit again.

Overall, I should clarify that the game is really well made and the gameplay is fun when you know what you're doing, but a lot of it feels like if you try one approach but it wasn't the "intended" approach then you're screwed without even knowing it. It's almost bad adventure game like in that you need to know the one intended solution and any other seemingly valid approach falls apart due to lackluster information provided.

Gypopothomas responds:

Whoa! Thanks a lot for taking the time to write this up. There IS a pause button. It's return. But I s'pose I could have said that at some point in the game. Haha!

Aye, I see where you're coming from with the Contra comparison. I'm thinking of going for lives instead of health now.

I had the game running in 16:9 at one point, but I didn't like it. It felt weird to me. I think it's 'cause the game was designed around 4:3. But maybe in the future, I could meddle with the width again.

Hmm... There's a lot to think about here. Thanks again for the feedback. It's gonna really help.

[My Dreams Are Made of Clay]

Nose, peace, feet. Telling weather this game is meant to be art or weather it's just a parody was confusing at first but after translating the random wingdings into that, I'm guessing the latter. I'll be straight in saying I'm not really sure how to review this, do I look at it's message or go over the gameplay?

I'll start with the gameplay as that's easiest. Controls alright. I think having the platforms be vertically thinner would help when jumping up through them.

Having the enemies float directly towards you feels very unnatural and incohesiveness and uhh....I'll skip to the point.

From what I can tell, this game is a parody of sorts on games that try to be "arty", throwing around a lot of elements that are meant to be meaningful whilst putting up a rather traditional mimicry of retro "fun" gameplay.

Everything feels like it was rushed together with the mentality of "fuck it, this doesn't really matter". I'm almost certain the construct 2 particles were used without changing much with them at all. A lot of elements feel like they're there just because they should be there for it is a video game and that's the only point.

And yet, in what feels like one of the most half assed games I've played in a while where it's purpose seems to be to mock arty games, I can't help but think this is in itself ironically one of the more arty game's I've played recently. I'm serious. Where as most games set out to try and make "a good video game", this feels like it has a message, like it what's to convey a feeling of pointlessness, just throwing elements in without much thought because "fuck it, it doesn't matter" I think quite strongly reflects that. The equivalent to this would be writing a book filled with cliches and parts of other shitty pretentious books and going "Look, books aren't art!".

So whilst the gameplay is fairly bland and uninteresting, this game about games not being art succeeds at being art. Was this intentional, no idea. I would like to hear your intentions making this though, if any of what I said you feel is correct.

[The Chain]

The idea of alternating between shooting and pulling back is quite a creative and unique. Having two elements tied together elegantly can be good design so this drew me in. However, I'm not sure it works too great here. Rather than creating a combo of mechanics that aid each other, they feel at odds. It feels quite awkward to go between combat and slowly and tediously pulling back the bar.

Not personally a fan of the controls either. I'm guessing the heavy floaty feel was intentional but I'm not sure why, feeling so tanky doesn't flow to great with fast paced shooting. Additionally, the slide-y movements make it hard to be accurate which feels rather obnoxious when not wasting shots is so important here.

Whilst I focus on mechanics, there's clearly a lot of effort been put into the art and feel. The way the monsters jiggle and explode feels very life-like but when combined with how floaty/slippery everything is it makes the game feel jelly-like; everything's so wobbly and wavy that I feel like I have so little control in a game that demands a lot.

All in all, whilst there is smart design on play I don't think it's used effectively or appropriately. A lot of elements just feel contradictory, which may work in a different setting where creating a struggle is intentional, but when trying to create something fun it feels jarring. It highlights an important point that you can throw in interesting design ideas and lots of juice but it won't necessarily create an experience that's good if the elements aren't carefully chosen/curated.

PaperCookies responds:

Thanks for the write-up and honest review of my game! I really do appreciate it. I have a tendency to make things jelly-like. The impact this gives on the feel of the game is indeed quite backwards with the gameplay elements, I'd agree. It's definitely something I hadn't taken into consideration as of now. I am very passionate about game feel so I can't stress enough how much I appreciate your feedback.

[Handulum]

I quite like the feeling of momentum in this game. It goes a long way to create that tension of "is it going to make it!?" which creates a great experience.

I have two main criticisms. First, and most prominent, is the control. Having to quickly move your mouse to re-position the rope feels a bit awkward and kinda clashing with the who "launch at the optimal point" focus. This ties quite strongly into new game plus which limits you to just 1 rope; which does fix this to a degree but I'd already beaten all but 1 levels using just one rope because it was more fun and less obnoxious, not to mention the fact that using minimal swings is ideal anyway for keeping up momentum. So when I got to N+ and it was like "hey, you can now replay the same levels but with one mild limitation", it felt rather cheap.

Perhaps a better approach would be to do the thing with stars, or something similar if you want to be more original. Rather than having new game plus, reward the player stars based on how few swings it took. This way it's still approachable for those who want to append their mistakes but there's that extra "one swing challenge" without feeling like padding. Having every level be beatable with 1 swing but not rewarding the player just feels off to me.

My other complaint is just the lack of polish. There's nice screenshake and sound effects where it's vital, but I feel there could be a little more (some music, screen transitions, perhaps a menu rather than a non-stated need to click at the end of each level).

I wouldn't say I think this game could be improved, rather I think it SHOULD be improved. Sorry about the large amounts of criticism vs compliments, that's just my review style. The gameplay is fun, particularly when I'm not worrying about quickly moving my mouse and am instead trying to impressively serve my ball through tight spaces in one quick hit. It would be nice to see this game truly complete.

If you agree, disagree or already decided against any of the ideas above for whatever reason I'd be curious to here your reasoning and perhaps discuss it further. =

[Lava Maze]

The first thing that stands out is how awkward everything is. I'm not sure what changed but nothing seemed to work at first, no countdown, I couldn't move. It was strange. Then, when everything does get going, there's no room for pause. It feels awkward not being asked to continue or change the parameters, instead going to the next level, pausing, changing the parameters and then starting a new level. Come to think of it, why even start before the player makes the first move, you could have it begin when they take their first step.

Then there's the thing where numbers only appear when you press the buttons. Why, why not just have them constantly display like "Size:6"?! A reset button would be a welcome addition as well.

I think my biggest hurdle is that there's no structured challenge. A game is often at it's best when everything ramps up over time, when there's an overall feeling of progression. Give people the ability to adjust the numbers w/o providing a default progression means they run the risk of screwing themselves over. I would appreciate customization as an addition but not in place of a structure challenge.

Now that I've complained for 3 paragraphs straight, I should probably say that the game is good and fun. There's a constant feeling of pressure that makes it compelling, and the character controls fittingly quickly without any issues (besides the finger death).

So whilst the core gameplay is fun, this feels very bare-bones and unpolished. Lacking structure, menus and any form of sound. Perhaps an addition in mechanics would help too. I get that you probably wanted to focus on a compelling core without any extra elements (which you succeeded at) but those other elements are vital to creating a truly compelling game, without these you have a proof of concept, a fun proof of concept, but still not really a complete game.

VincentLagerros responds:

Thanks for the feedback, this really helps :)

As you say, this game is not really polished (No sound ect) and that will be changed. This is still somewhat of early access.

A can see where you are comming from, but some things exist for a reason. The instant start is to give the player a feel for speed and not make them wait. Can be made to a setting if you want it so.

Also, there is no reset button in the menu, but pressing "r" will reset it. I can change that today if you want. :)

EDIT: Added reset and start when move buttons

[If Potato meets Flag Then]

So many who teach game design focus on this idea of teaching the rules to the player through mechanics rather than just telling us, so to having telling us be part of the mechanics got a laugh out of me and is quite and effective method.

In short, I really like this game. This is such a clever way of using programming to solve the puzzles. However, there's too many things wrong with it for me to give it the 5 stars.

For starters, some things are a little confusing. Colour is used both used for showing what type something is (action or conditional) as well as if it's locked or not, which confused me early on and made the UI a bit of a pain to work with.Perhaps having some have lock symbols or dotted outlines or something would be better, even no outline could work for those locked in place, then have every conditional be the same colour locked or not.

My second issue is the red herrings. One room in particular had a bunch of leftover elements, when I just had to change one thing. This was a good joke, I think. The problem is this comes across as "was that a glitch". Perhaps making it more extreme would fix it? What confuses me more so is the next level, not a joke, had an unused yellow guy. I think I get what you're going for with leftover pieces but it feels really unsatisfying not having all the pieces come together.

My biggest issue however is that this game has some really fantastic puzzles but they're spread really thinly. Gimmicks such as the falling ceiling or button (which really should not have been introduced with the and mechanic which made it very confusing) are introduced once and thrown away when some cool puzzle that builds on the existing could have been done instead. Then there's the gimmicky parts where I have to align Mr potato and the player which doesn't really build on the core mechanics so much as it does build on a side effects of the mechanics instead. Same can be said of the platforming, there's lots of it early on despite the fact that half the time it doesn't build on the core or work with the puzzles but rather replaces it.

Couple of other gripes such as how the potatoes won't kill you if dead, yet they can still move you which I get but it feels inconsistent. But for as much as I've complained, I still can't overstate how much I did enjoy the game. There were so many puzzles that really clicked in my head and I absolutely loved them, I just wish that the game was all to this quality. The platforming does have it's merits but it doesn't blend well and I wouldn't say it's enough to justify sacrificing puzzles. All in all, I know I've complained a lot but it's not because the games bad, it's simply that this game at it's peaks is amazing and to see that consistently with some polish would certainly be a 5 star game.

Also totally not a criticism but please make the credits screen beatable Jesus Christ THE FLAG IS RIGHT THERE! (JK....but also not)

[StomaccAndFriends]

Well this is one of the strangest games I've played in a while. Something about it reminds me of Mario and Luigi Bowsers Inside Story. I'm not a big fan of Mario games generally, but both that game and this one have a similar charm, the way everything jiggles and bounces. Was this intentional.

Besides the game's feel, there are also interesting mechanics at play. Not being able to die but just change form is an interesting mechanic and the collecting different "friends" gives each level a feeling of progression. My first gripe is that I wasn't going "ah ha" as much as I was going "I guess that's what I do"; reason being that it's hard to keep track of what each thing does, more specifically their stats. For example, one puzzle I didn't know that Mr speedy couldn't jump as high as Mr plain block, I just kinda went "I guess he must jump higher because it's the only way to solve this" where as I could have been going "Aha, now I need Mr jumpy." Simply having a way to check each stat would fix this, though somehow I doubt you'd feel that would fit the game. A better approach then may be to A. have their designs better reflect their skills B. have more distinct skills. Perhaps rather than standard high jump, the block jumping higher could have a double jump, or some slight variant on a jump that helps it stand out in the players mind. The size mechanic is a good start.

My second quarrel is with what the game is. Is it a puzzle game, is it a platformer? No idea. The short answer is both but this always raises issues. One part faced me with multiple challenges that I had to keep redoing the first just to beat the second all the while trying to solve a puzzle. HOWEVER, except for maybe 1 or 2 examples where it can become a bit tedious, this isn't really a problem in this game since taking damage/"losing" doesn't reset the puzzle and only pushes you back a little whilst also acting as an augmentation to the puzzle rather than a straight loss. For the most part I think this game actually does a great job of blending puzzling and platforming, not very punishing and everything's on screen so I don't have to overcome platforming/navigation just to find out what I'm doing *cough* Iconoclasts *unconvincing cough*.

I do have some other gripes, the part where I had to wait for the timing to line up between the enemy and the falling block was annoying (FTR, this is the part I complained about earlier), and I'm not sure about the part where you have to jump up into the brown spewy to progress as I'm not really solving anything, yet when I solved it I did more so feel "oh that's cool" rather than frustrated. There's not much I can complain about without it turning positive which overall I think says all it needs to. This game feels childish in a strong sense, everything has googly eyes, it's creative, it's bouncy and energetic and half of it's "flaws" are more endearing than anything. With all that said, even in a kinda shitty mood I managed to enjoy this game which is impressive; so congratulations, you get the seal of approval from a random person on the internet.

joqlepecheur responds:

Hello, you made my day!

You are raising lots of interesting points.

Making things giggle was indeed to give an organic feel. As for the eyes, not being much of an artist I use it to easily show expression.
I am a big fan of Mario but haven't got to play "inside bowser", considering your comment I will probably play it in the near future. So to answer you this was not deliberate, but I guess some means come naturally to achieve some ends.

Stat wise, I indeed would like to avoid any display of numbers. I could have designed an earlier level so that you already have a better feel of heights when you get there. I will see if I can fit something in to have the thought come more naturally.
I am not confident in my ability to have pertinent designs, but I guess I could at least make a green friend shaped more like an I than a square, which could in turn offer level design opportunities.
The double jump idea is brilliant. The only downside is that it needs to be presented to the player somehow.
I am considering adding 12 levels for an alternate adventure (game+ that can be played right away), if I do I will make sure to include double jump for the green friend.

I will tweak level 12 (falling blocs + fast moving little spikey) to try to mitigate that frustration, reduce the cadency of blocs dropping (just enough to mess with player's planification), and I will move things to make the jump over 1st spikey easier.

Thanks for your detailed feedback.

[Swap]

Pretty good puzzle game. There's a nice and fair ramp up in difficulty and every mechanic is easy enough to understand.

The one flaw the stands out is the amount of steps required to solve each puzzle. There's this idea that a good puzzle has little to no steps that don't contribute anything. The problem with this mechanic is that there's a lot of doing the same thing over again which can be a little tedious.

Whilst the core may not be as elegant as it could, it still greats for an interesting and fairly satisfying experience.

[Guiding blocks]

I think this game has been on the Under Judgment section for a long time and it's clear why, nobody has any idea what's going on.

Whilst I understand that we can explain mechanics through gameplay, that doesn't mean we should completely neglect any worded explanation. I beat the first level without any idea of what had just happened and was tempted to just review it poorly then. Restarting and replaying the first level I eventually figured out the core mechanic; you press the red thing and get launched from one symbol towards blocks and have to make a path to the goal.

This introduces way too many mechanics at once. For starters there's the pressing the red thing launches you from one of the green symbols, then there's the pushing blocks, then there's the mechanic where blocks pull you towards them, but why did that blocked get pushed when it pulled me. But wait, this is canceled out when you put a block behind a wall. What order do blocks pull you, can you change the direction you launch or is it predetermined. So many questions I need to figure out and I'm not even sure what the goal is.

I managed to push on and figure out the core mechanic, and it is a clever core mechanic, but even then I have no idea how anything works. Why did that block get pushed back when I got pulled, why didn't the next block take over, what order do they go in if equally distanced, why did I go down to the red thing, is it also magnetized!? These are all questions that took over. I can't solve a puzzle if the mechanics are so poorly explained.

Then there's the very odd design choice that blocks don't reset when you fail. Since they get pushed around in play, this really screws you over so they may as well just reset.

Buried under the poorly explained mechanics are some interesting puzzles, but unless those mechanics are explained then I'm not solving a puzzle because I don't have the puzzle pieces.