pixelblast325 wrote:

can i join?

lemme check with MB…

pixelblast325 wrote:

can i join?

Updating…

I added a project to roof gardens, but it's really old and impossible to win, well, probably. Most people say it is.

bigpuppy wrote:

I added a project to roof gardens, but it's really old and impossible to win, well, probably. Most people say it is.

Ok!

Borrego6165 wrote:

bigpuppy wrote:

I added a project to roof gardens, but it's really old and impossible to win, well, probably. Most people say it is.

Ok!

14 points, wow!

I am going to write a review, as soon as I read about doing it.

Yeah, i looked at the code and it's impossible. You can get the same time as the other guy, but only if your presses are all exactly 0.1 of a second apart. You can never beat him, only get the same time as him (very difficult) or below.

Review for Square Dodger
Game Design 7/10
“I liked the game, and I really think the game design was good, but I was tired of 1 place. Next time, try to make it have levels. Okay?”
Originality 6/10
“It was not very original, because the idea was from something, but it as still just kind-of original, but just a little bit.”
Ease Of Use 4/5
“It was very fun, and the controls were REALLY great, because I am used to the arrow keys. Thank you for making the controls the arrow keys!”
Difficulty Balance 5/5
“It was really hard, maybe kind-of medium. But it was still VERY hard and challenging. If you ever make a second one, try to make it just a tiny bit easier.”
Graphics 4/5
“The animation was really great, but the graphics, not so good. The square was kind-of blurry, and I just kind-of liked that.”
Sound 0/5
“Oh, please next time put music into the game. I LOVE music!”

Firing Round 7/10 (This is the addition of the following scores)
Reliability 2/2
0 (Very Glitchy) 1 (A few glitches) 2 (Hardly any glitches)
Game Length 2/2
0 (Too Short) 1 (Descent Length) 2 (Long lasting or endless)
Game Pace 1/2
0 (Very slow or too long for it's own sake) 1 (Quite engrossing) 2 (Very well paced and fun)
Replay Value 1/2
0 (Would never replay/ did not want to finish it the first time) 1 (Might replay) 2 (Too good to stop!)
Programming 1/2
0 (Simple to make) 1 (Fairly advanced) 2 (It was very complex)

Overall Experience 38/50
“I did really like it, it was very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very fun. Thank you for making it. ”
TOTAL: 71/100

Key
0-19 I could have made that in my sleep!
20-39 Needs a lot of work.
40-59 An average project I suppose.
((((((60-79 Quite a cool project.)))))))))))
80-94 Wow! It only needs a bit of tweaking.

I made this review for square dodger. http://scratch.mit.edu/discuss/topic/12398/?page=20#post-144765

You're close to getting those points when you fix these:

bigpuppy wrote:

Review for Square Dodger
Game Design 7/10
“I liked the game, and I really think the game design was good ###In what way?###, but I was tired of 1 place ###What do you mean by tired of 1 place?###. Next time, try to make it have levels. Okay?”
Originality 6/10
“It was not very original, because the idea was from something ###what was the original idea? if you don't know the name, at least describe it###, but it as still just kind-of original, but just a little bit. ###Should “a little bit” get 6 points or a little amount of points?###
Ease Of Use 4/5
“It was very fun, ###Fun comes under game design and overall experience### and the controls were REALLY great, because I am used to the arrow keys. Thank you for making the controls the arrow keys!” ###Where did it lose a mark then? And was there a tutorial?###
Difficulty Balance 5/5
“It was really hard, maybe kind-of medium. But it was still VERY hard and challenging. If you ever make a second one, try to make it just a tiny bit easier.” ###If it was too hard, maybe it should lose a point, but only one because it sounds good.###
Graphics 4/5
“The animation was really great, but the graphics, not so good. The square was kind-of blurry, and I just kind-of liked that.###Can you clarify what you mean? It looks like you kind of like the blurriness, even though you deducted a point for it. Either you thought it was bad, and you liked something else, or you thought it was good, and you deducted a point for something else.###
Sound 0/5
“Oh, please next time put music into the game. I LOVE music!”

Firing Round 7/10 (This is the addition of the following scores)
Reliability 2/2
0 (Very Glitchy) 1 (A few glitches) 2 (Hardly any glitches)
Game Length 2/2
0 (Too Short) 1 (Descent Length) 2 (Long lasting or endless)
Game Pace 1/2
0 (Very slow or too long for it's own sake) 1 (Quite engrossing) 2 (Very well paced and fun)
Replay Value 1/2
0 (Would never replay/ did not want to finish it the first time) 1 (Might replay) 2 (Too good to stop!)
Programming 1/2
0 (Simple to make) 1 (Fairly advanced) 2 (It was very complex)

Overall Experience 38/50
“I did really like it, it was very very very very very very very very very very very very very very very fun. Thank you for making it. ###As a little tip, put the score in the 5 times table otherwise it looks like you chose a random number and don't know what you're doing . Also, you need to say how memorable it was, or anything about the experience. Plus, try to mention where it lost 22 marks, which is a lot!###
TOTAL: 71/100

Key
0-19 I could have made that in my sleep!
20-39 Needs a lot of work.
40-59 An average project I suppose.
((((((60-79 Quite a cool project.)))))))))))
80-94 Wow! It only needs a bit of tweaking.

Can I get a re-review for square dodger? Because I made some changes.

jh1234l wrote:

Can I get a re-review for square dodger? Because I made some changes.

Well if you scroll up you'll notice that the review had some problems anyway, so parts of it will have to be rewritten anyway.

Could I have my game Your Artistic Level reviewed please?

Pencilmaster wrote:

Could I have my game Your Artistic Level reviewed please?

Adding to the list, but it might take a while as there are four other requests, and each review is long! My longest was 57 paragraphs long

If you became a member and did some of the other reviews, even if you did just two of them, that would speed up the process for me, plus you get 10 points per review! You could have 20 points on your first day! You only need about 10 paragraphs anyway, I did 57 that time because that was when I used to get less requests and I were bored, To get started just click on “Members” read through that, then click on “Write a review”.

I would like to join, please!

Updated!

The Money Maker: Maximum Platinum

“Run a corporation! Hire workers! Train the workers to gain more money. If you hire too much workers but do not train them, they will give you less money than the wages you pay them, so you will go bankrupt. Hire Miners, sell gold, make more money. Pay taxes. We do not care what you do.”

Game Design 3/10
The gameplay is very basic, but rest assured that this is so easily fixable that an update is bound to come out, so no need to worry my loyal readers. This isn't really much of a tycoon game as such, and more like a “click the red button” style game, with the exception that there's more than one button to choose from. You run a corporation as mentioned above, hiring miners and workers. That's it.

One of the key aspects to any tycoon game is the strategy elements. Basically the strategy is to hire a worker, and use the rest of your starting money to train it. Training it increases how much money a worker brings in, so without training the worker, they will use more money on wages than what they're bringing in. However, there isn't really much more to it than that. You could also hire some miners to gain gold that can be used to hire and train more staff, but the strategy doesn't get much further in depth than that.

To make this more addictive and engaging, there needs to be things to worry about. Your company seems to print money, as nowhere in the game could I tell my workers what they were actually meant to be doing. A nice view of the office block, with the ability to customarily design it would have provided a whole new set of strategies to this game for the player to consider, rather than just how many times should a button be pressed? The objects you place affect not only the productivity of your staff, but also what they produce such as sweets, toys, or even planes! This would have added an element of excitement from being to see all of the products being manufactured in your business.

So, now back to the actual game. There was a lack of things to do, and a greater lack of things to look at. However, with the addition of a design mode, a product select screen, and animated workers that you can see producing things, this would become a classic. At the moment, the gameplay is too basic to enjoy; this is the strategy game without any strategies. At least you can lose money in this, I've seen games on Scratch where everything you place gains you money (minus the initial cost of placing it) resulting in even easier gameplay! So I suppose this earns more than a couple of points.

Originality 5/10
Running a corporation on Scratch is something I haven't seen before. It's also rare that you get to train your staff rather than just hire more. However the lack of design tools and product management, in addition to the very basic set of features brings the score down. So, this is averagely original.

Ease Of Use 3/5
The game is very easy to use, but there is no in-game tutorial. If I were to download this, and I couldn't fund the project notes, I would have no idea how to play this. Still, the simple gameplay scores this a three, even if the lack of tutorials knocks two off from the possible five.

Difficulty Balance 1/5
The game was too simple and basic, but with the addition of more strategies, along with most of the points I mentioned in Game Design, this would have scored higher. At least you could lose money every few seconds, unlike others where no choices you make have negative outcomes, but that's it.

Graphics 2/5
The creator did bother to put the variables neatly on the bottom with text, and everything aligns up neatly. The Sell All Gold button could have gone with the other buttons in the same line though, but that's only a minor point. The major point is that this game would have benefitted so much from having a view mode for your office. Due to that lack of things to look at, this can only earn a below-average score of two.

Sound 0/5
There were no sound effects or any songs.

Firing Round 2/10 (This is the addition of the following scores)
Reliability 2/2
0 (Very Glitchy) 1 (A few glitches) 2 (Hardly any glitches)
Game Length 0/2
0 (Too Short) 1 (Descent Length) 2 (Long lasting or endless)
Game Pace 0/2
0 (Very slow or too long for it's own sake) 1 (Quite engrossing) 2 (Very well paced and fun)
Replay Value 0/2
0 (Would never replay/ did not want to finish it the first time) 1 (Might replay) 2 (Too good to stop!)
Programming 0/2
0 (Simple to make) 1 (Fairly advanced) 2 (It was very complex)

Overall Experience 10/50
For a strategy/tycoon game there was very little brain power needed; this greatly suits platformers or fps' that are skill-based, but for a brain game it was too easy. For all you readers out there wanting to make a tycoon game, make sure that there are many routes the player can take. Give them an easy route, that gives them a small bit of success. This might be in an airport game, where the player serves cargo only. This requires little security and only basic management. Then once they get used to it, allow them to expand to passenger services. This requires the player to build entertainment, extra security, as well as facilities such as parking and toilets.

The above was just an example, but the point is that the player could choose when they wanted to accept passengers. Once they were ready, they could take the challenge. Looking after hundreds of passengers would be difficult (if you're a good enough game designer), but at least it would provide players who want a challenge with something to get them really thinking. Unfortunately, the lack of strategies in this game made it fairly linear, and there's nothing that memorable about this game. For these reasons, this deserves a low mark of ten. It gets a ten for at least having negative values (when you hire too many staff without training them), plus this game required a little bit of thinking.

TOTAL: 26/100

Key
0-19 I could have made that in my sleep!
20-39 Needs a lot of work.
40-59 An average project I suppose.
60-79 Quite a cool project.
80-94 Wow! It only needs a bit of tweaking.
95-100 You're the top cat!

Square Dodger

“Avoid red AI controlled drones which can spawn anywhere, and red lines that can sweep across the board. Post your local high score below! Use full screen for best effects.”

Game Design 4/10
The game was addictive at first, although it didn't take me long to lose interest. Nevertheless, there can never be enough enemy-dodging maze games. The title says “Square Dodger” for some reason, even though you avoid dots. I really don't know how to rate this, so I'd say it was average. It has classic gameplay elements, and there's nothing particularly wrong with this other than it could have been spiced up a bit more with collectables. There's no story element or reason why I should keep playing, and a variety of levels would have been a welcomed edition if it was included.

Originality 1/10
It's a maze game with moving enemies, so it's not very original. To be fair, there's not really much that can be done to make this more original, other than just not to make simple maze games. Sorry readers!

Ease Of Use 3/5
The game was very easy to pick up, however a mini start up guide would have been nice to gain the extra two points.

Difficulty Balance 4/5
The game is actually a good balance between easy and hard. The difficulty progresses nicely, although I felt that the rate you bounced off of walls was a little too much. I would lightly touch a wall by mistake and the square would bounce off of it by a lot! When you hit a wall at an angle, you should come off at the opposite degrees, not bounce back on what you hit it on.

Graphics 2/5
The graphics are very basic, however each object moves smoothly. It's below average, but not bad.

Sound 2/5
Credit for a couple of sound effects, but there weren't many and nor was there any music.

Firing Round 6/10 (This is the addition of the following scores)
Reliability 2/2
0 (Very Glitchy) 1 (A few glitches) 2 (Hardly any glitches)
Game Length 1/2
0 (Too Short) 1 (Descent Length) 2 (Long lasting or endless)
Game Pace 1/2
0 (Very slow or too long for it's own sake) 1 (Quite engrossing) 2 (Very well paced and fun)
Replay Value 1/2
0 (Would never replay/ did not want to finish it the first time) 1 (Might replay) 2 (Too good to stop!)
Programming 1/2 *The pathfinding was fairly advanced encase you're wondering.
0 (Simple to make) 1 (Fairly advanced) 2 (It was very complex)

Overall Experience 20/50
As I said earlier, this is difficult to rate. In originality, there was nothing original to say about it, yet there were no improvements I could think of. Same with the Game Design. Nevertheless, I still had a slightly below average experience; I felt rather bored. Maybe a tip to my readers would be to avoid maze games, unless you can list five ways your idea is unique and exciting. If you can't come up with five, only make maze games for practise if you must do.

TOTAL: 42/100

Key
0-19 I could have made that in my sleep!
20-39 Needs a lot of work.
40-59 An average project I suppose.
60-79 Quite a cool project.
80-94 Wow! It only needs a bit of tweaking.
95-100 You're the top cat!

REVIW PAUL PLEZ IT GUT 10 10 ON ING

PAULPAULPAULPAULPAULPAUL

PLYZ

BobTest wrote:

REVIW PAUL PLEZ IT GUT 10 10 ON ING

PAULPAULPAULPAULPAULPAUL

PLYZ

For a start it didn't score 10/10 on IGN, secondly I'm sorry that we don't review these types of projects but it's not really classed as a game so we can't review it, and thirdly whilst I respect that you have the right to ask for a review, if you keep coming back I'll class it as spam as I told you already we can't review it.

PS. You're the grand creator of Wasteland for god's sake. Grow up.