[GAME] Paint the Town Red

[Travis Antosh]

Howdy y'all! I've known about PS for a while but just in the last week I've finally started playing around with it. Last night I published my first PS game, Paint the Town Red:

Here!

It's on the easy side and sort of just prototypes some directions you could go with the core mechanics. I'm fairly new to making puzzle games in general and I think one of the issues for me is puzzle blindness; after a certain point I can no longer tell what the difficulty of a given puzzle or its inherent logic might feel like to others. I know that playtesters are a simple solution for this and a great way to get feedback but I'm curious what other ways y'all might tackle this in addition to that? General theory/specific examples both welcome. Enjoy PtTR!

[Chris Pickel]

I think it works pretty well and the difficulty progression is good. I felt a little lost in the levels with 4+ painters but the ones with 2 worked fine.

Puzzle blindness is definitely a problem for everyone and I don’t know any better way than playtesters to deal with it.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PuzzleScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puzzlescript...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Alan Hazelden]

I often don't enjoy ice puzzles or multiple player puzzles, but this worked well and didn't overstay its welcome!

I'd agree that the 4 player levels aren't great - they're more about trial and error than thinking anything through (the final level is the exception here).

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puzzlescript+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PuzzleScript" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puzzlescript+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Travis Antosh]

Thanks! Sounds like there is something less than awesome for people in the middling numbers of players, which is good to know. I might iterate on them again at some point to see whether the design space is just shallow or if I missed out on some funner elements.

[Travis Antosh]

Thank ya! I really liked the last level, if only because it's such an exaggerated jump in numbers from everything previous :D

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 1:07:30 PM UTC-8, Alan Hazelden wrote:

I often don't enjoy ice puzzles or multiple player puzzles, but this worked well and didn't overstay its welcome!

I'd agree that the 4 player levels aren't great - they're more about trial and error than thinking anything through (the final level is the exception here).

On 24 January 2018 at 07:10, Chris Pickel <sfi...@twotaled.com> wrote:

I think it works pretty well and the difficulty progression is good. I felt a little lost in the levels with 4+ painters but the ones with 2 worked fine.

Puzzle blindness is definitely a problem for everyone and I don’t know any better way than playtesters to deal with it.

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 6:41 PM Travis Antosh <travis...@gmail.com> wrote:

Howdy y'all! I've known about PS for a while but just in the last week I've finally started playing around with it. Last night I published my first PS game, Paint the Town Red:

Here!

It's on the easy side and sort of just prototypes some directions you could go with the core mechanics. I'm fairly new to making puzzle games in general and I think one of the issues for me is puzzle blindness; after a certain point I can no longer tell what the difficulty of a given puzzle or its inherent logic might feel like to others. I know that playtesters are a simple solution for this and a great way to get feedback but I'm curious what other ways y'all might tackle this in addition to that? General theory/specific examples both welcome. Enjoy PtTR!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PuzzleScript" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puzzlescript...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PuzzleScript" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to puzzlescript...@googlegroups.com.

[Hand-E-Food]

Nice simple mechanics!

I've found a bug on level 8.  If the first move you make is left, the top two guys collide and combine into one guy.

[Hand-E-Food]

I agree this just pushes the limits of a fair puzzle vs trial-and-error.  Having four players really makes things tricky, but if you stop to see how they partition the playing field, it's not so bad.  Funnily enough, I think level 16, with only two players,  was my least favourite.  There seemed to be too many options.

Is there a rule that you're not allowed to stop next to a cop?  I saw that you lost if you hit a cop, but I seemed to also lose if a player stopped adjacent to a cop, even though they moved in a different direction.

[Xavier Direz]

Le mercredi 24 janvier 2018 02:58:33 UTC+1, Hand-E-Food a écrit :

Is there a rule that you're not allowed to stop next to a cop?  I saw that you lost if you hit a cop, but I seemed to also lose if a player stopped adjacent to a cop, even though they moved in a different direction.

I had a hard time figuring out this rule too. Probably because the game restart as soon as you loose. We can't see what really appends, especially with many 'players'. Adding some move and dying animations can solve this little drawback. Otherwise, the game is well ballanced and solving the last puzzle was quite rewarding.

[Travis Antosh]

Yeah, I didn't do a good enough job teaching that finishing a turn adjacent to a cop is a lose condition just like running into a cop is. A better teaching level and more feedback would help.

Thanks for the c&c, y'all!