Crafting a game in under a week is hard work; making a game fun is harder still. Managing to pull off both with aplomb is by no means an easy feat, so I have to hand it to Mr. McCoy here. Every 168 hours this man graces us with another short-form game that isn't only just playable, but actually pretty fun. The game mechanics that are the crux of these two titles are solid and well designed. Admittedly the two games I'm highlighting have spheres for protagonists, but who plays indie games for sexy graphics anyways?
Wavespark is the lovechild of Excitebike/Truck and RunMan. It takes the positioning mechanic of Excitebike -- but instead of tilting a bike you merely have to land on a downwards slope -- and combines it with a satisfying sense of speed. It's a one button affair, press any key to increase your sphere's gravity. It's ultimately a test of timing and momentum. Land on a downwards slopes and you'll get a speed bonus, but land on an uphill section and you'll grind to a near-halt. It doesn't sound exciting on paper but trust me, it's an absolute blast. There's four modes of play, of which Time Attack is my favorite; the time restriction lends itself well to quick-play sessions for whenever you have a few minutes to kill. Once you get the ball rolling (Editor's Note: because putting these in somehow qualify as an excuse for a shitty joke) and get a hang of things you'll most likely get addicted to its simple yet charming gameplay. Now how about an iPhone version?
If the above sounds too Jay Is Games for your taste (which it shouldn't, you snob) Dragondot should give you a reason to break out your prosthetic Hyrulian ears. It's an action RPG that's in the vein of Game Boy Zelda titles or, say, Shining Soul for Game Boy Advance. You take control of a dragon, erm, dot and fight your way through screen after screen of enemy dots. It controls fairly well, imagine wielding a sword and Roc's Feather in LoZ and you'll have a good idea of combat. Despite the lack of innovation in the character designs the enemies have distinct movement and combat patterns. There's also a nice attention to detail; if you're savvy enough you can have enemies whack each other a la Wind Waker. The game exploits your hard-wired love of doled-out progression by having an RPG system in place that gives you extra health and the occasional attack to your solitary combo. It's pretty basic but good and stupid fun.
Both of these games aren't especially deep but are solid foundations for larger projects, should McCoy want to pursue these further. The quality of these weekly experiments have been consistently fun, so I'd keep an eye on this guy if I were you.
I always wonder about X time
I always wonder about X time period games challenges - does thinking about and envisioning the game prior to the time period count as time spent making the game? If it does, what about all the time you spent learning to code? Or learning game structures? Why doesn't that count as well?
I mean, they could be but generally aren't pitched as a 'here's a reason to stop procrastinating!' thing. Their pitched as if the games made are really made inside the allocated time. When really these games are years in the coming...
~~~
Philosopher Gamer Blog
My latest short game - Bullet Prose: Have No Part
Time Takes Its Crazy Toll
By your line of logic your above post didn't take the thirty seconds it took to type, it's a cumulation of the decades it took you to learn sentence structure, typing, and (faulty =p ) lines of reasoning.
These short-form games are a great method for developers to stop procrastinating and make design decisions in a small time-frame though.
I don't think you've
I don't think you've actually described any fault there?
ESL grammar nazi sedmonking
s/Their( pitched as if)/They are\1/
snark
"does thinking about and envisioning the game prior to the time period count as time spent making the game? If it does..."
No, none of that time counts. They're given a certain amount of time to make a game. Maybe they're given a theme or some constraints to quote-unquote 'ensure' that it's a new concept, or at least likely to be a new variation on something they've been thinking about for a while.
But seriously, what's your concern here? Do you feel cheated? Are we -- those not participating, which I assume you're not -- robbed of something if someone submits a game that they in fact spent a month polishing at home before passing it off as a 24 hour creation?
"Their [sic] pitched as if the games made are really made inside the allocated time."
You mean you feel like this is some harmful form of false advertising? Like you're not getting what you paid for?
Apologies for going off on you like this, but I feel like you're being belligerent about it. I probably wouldn't have bothered writing if it hadn't been for your follow-up "I don't think you've actually described any fault there?"
--
What I really came here to mock-snidely point out is that TheDustin's JayDar seems to be on the fritz, as it looks like Jay Is Games has done a write-up of Dragon Dot, but not of WaveSpark.
My concern is that baby
My concern is that baby armadillos are going to die...
Apart from that, I was philosophically examining it simply out of interest. No harm has to be about to befall anyone, to think about something and examine it.
In regards to
"I don't think you've actually described any fault there?"
Dreadful words indeed.
Except, presumably, if the other person hasn't described a fault, right? I mean, just inferring there's a fault isn't enough, right?
~~~
Philosopher Gamer Blog
My latest short game - Bullet Prose: Have No Part