What's interesting about Boomshine is they way it both fits into and defies expectations about "the game," that is, the elements that (pace Wittgenstein) all games actually do share, that makes them, in esse, games.
It's a little one-click game in which a number of colored dots wander about the screen, in a Newtonian way, bouncing off the edge of the screen. Once each level, you may click anywhere; doing so creates a bubble that quickly blows up to a fixed size, and lasts in duration for a few seconds. During that duration, any dots that encounter the bubble likewise blow up into bubbles -- and any dots that encounter this bubble then likewise cause dots to bubble up as well. In principle, you can clear the screen through a chain-reaction of bubbles; in practice, this rarely happens.
In each level, you have a target number of dots you must "bubble up"; three out of fifteen total on-screen, say. Thus, you have a goal to strive for (an essential characteristic of the game). And you do interact with the game, also an essential characteristic, though your reaction is reduced to the bare possible minimum; each turn, you click once, and while the resulting chain reaction is a consequence of your one click, you have no agency beyond your single action.
Goal-directed interaction is, of course, essential to any game; Boomshine pushes at the boundaries of this, though, because your actual agency is almost wholly irrelevant. While you can anticipate that clicking on some places will cause failure, it's essentially impossible to predict where a click will cause success. Except at the lowest levels, there are too many on-screen moving objects for you to grasp the dynamics of the system in any meaningful fashion. In other words, if one of the other essential characteristics of the game is that players' choices must be meaningful, Boomshine defies this; your choice (your single choice) is in fact not meaningful, because the complexity of the system makes it impossible for any human brain to guess meaningfully at outcomes, beyond perhaps the first few seconds after the appearance of the first "bubble."
And yet because you do have that tiny bit of agency, your choice still seems meaningful -- an illusion, perhaps, but you can tell yourself that if only you had clicked somewhere else you would have succeeded -- a truth, but you have no ability to learn or strategize where that "somewhere else" might be. It's a bit like how people respond to gambling games; the slot machine roller almost turned over to a winning image, the roulette ball almost came up with your number, and even though your control over the system is completely non-existent, you have the illusory feeling that next time you may do better.
Underneath the start screen is a statistic provided by the developer that betrays the unmanageable nature of the game; only 3.97% of all level 12 games have been won. Having played the level several times, I believe it; it requires you to clear an unreasonably large number of dots, a high percentage of a very crowded screen. Treating the game statistically is right; there's no way to predict or control it as a player. Evidently you have a 4% chance of winning each time.
Like Roulette or the slots, therefore, Boomshine is a game that provides the illusion of agency without the actuality, and yet that illusion suffices to draw you to, to get you to play the level again -- until, perhaps, you realize how unwinnable level 12 is. Of course it helps that the sensorium Boomshine provides is pleasurable; the music is pleasant and soothing, the moving colored dots and the patterns make as they bubble up pleasing. From a game design perspective, there's a lesson to be learned here: sometimes the illusion of agency suffices. And also that prettiness counts, of course.
Entertaining game - accurate review
The reviewer nailed it in terms of what elements of the game elusively hook onto you. You have that one choice each level and though I too would agree that it is difficult to ascertain a pattern there is a flow that you can rationalize at times that could give you a higher chance of success.
Peggle is insanely popular and it too has the same general mechanic - one choice to aim and shoot the ball hoping for the best possible bounce to get the best possible score. Once you make your choice, the rest is handled arithmetically. But yet such darn good fun.
Will this one hold onto you for months to come? Probably not, but it sure is fun now.
Finding patterns is rewarding
Interesting.
"...because you do have that tiny bit of agency, your choice still seems meaningful".
This game reveals the human brain's tendency to see patterns where there may or not be any. Playing the later levels of this game, I would wait and wait for several minutes before finally choosing what I thought would be the most effective moment and placing my click. But of course, I would do no better or worse than any random click. I felt I could see a pattern emerging, and I tried to exploit that pattern.
This is part of the pleasure of games: out of a barrage of sensory information, the player learns to discern patterns; in the most honoured games like Chess and Go and Poker, the player who discerns best is rewarded most. But that does not mean games like Boomshine, and other straight luck games like the card game War, are not enjoyable, because the brain will always, always look for, and find, patterns, and this is a fundamentally enjoyable and rewarding activity.
You actually know it's not meaningful?
You actually know that your choice isn't meaningful? Have you recorded your results over time, then graphed them? The 4% statistic is a recording of games played, it's not a recording of an individuals ability to win at the game given multiple plays.
How about this as a hypothesis - this game demonstrates that people will resist remaining in an uncertain state about something and would rather forgo gathering evidence and invent from wholecloth 'facts' about the game?
Graphing results might in the end prove you have no agency, but currently you have no proof but you treat it as fact anyway. I'm not saying this in a 'Ha, gotcha!' way - I'm saying this game helps one reflect on whether, in the face over overloaded information, one tend to avoid remaining in an uncertain state and instead invents 'facts'. Though the first step of that reflection is to A: admit to yourself your in a state of uncertainty in terms of the game and B: that your going to remain in a state of uncertainty as your 'reward' for admitting to yourself your uncertain - which isn't a fun reward loop, I'll admit.
I don't think it's right to
I don't think it's right to say you have no agency. After all, with only a little care, it's possible to click a spot where you'll get only one bubble or none at all. This brings it closer to games like video poker, where you don't have enough control to WIN the game, only enough NOT TO MAKE YOURSELF LOSE (by accidentally throwing away a royal flush.) Solitaire is another example, or Minesweeper. Strategy or skill is not enough; you have to be lucky too.
There's something pleasant about games where you can have a quick and ruthlessly efficent strategy right up to the point where you have to flip a coin, and then it all goes kablooey on an unlucky move. It's an acknowledgement of the random qualities of the world. You wouldn't want a game to last for more than five minutes, but you might want to try your luck at those same five minutes over and over and over again.
Thanks for the review and
Thanks for the review and everyone who has commented about my game. So far these are the most insightful commentary I've read so far on my game.
I only have one comment. I think Boomshine is different than slot machines. Slot machines uses a pseudo random number generator to determine the outcome; consequently, the player is not really interacting with the system. Moreover, the player is simply displaying the result of a function with random parameters.
Boomshine is different in this respect. You have choice. There is no time limit so the initial random configuration of the dots is insignificant. Really, there is no encapsulation of the outcome. Consequently, while the human brain may not be able to compute the outcome, a player can't blame anyone for misfortunes in the game other than themselves.
In a certain perspective, I think Boomshine is an example of a human baseed pseudo-random number generator. An outcome based on an initial seed (mouseclick).