I respect your opinion and other here but maybe you can help me see the light. Why do you think the 2 new features we added to the game 2048 do not improve the game? Sorry I cannot meet you at a coffee shop and discuss this which would be nice. Shared opinions is a very important part of this business. here is the Apple link https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/2048.v2/id937669142?mt=8 If you are an android user here is that link https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.firstSPIN.V2_2048 To refresh your memory the 2 new features are: You can move the tiles diagonally which in the original version you could only move vertical and horizontal. This now gives 2048 lovers 8 directions to move the tiles instead of 4. All the tiles that can be join in the direction of the swipe get joined with one swipe. The original version you have to multi swipe to join all the tiles. We looked at it as a faster game yet we added something to make it as difficult to get the 2048. If you can be more detailed in you answer that would be nice. Don't hold the punches I can take it.
It is about simplicity. The original was so easy to play. I think the diagonals makes the game easier but increase the complexity. I think it is debatable if those features improve the game but they definitely aren't game changers and doesn't make it stand out (it just looks like the same game).
Thanks for your opinion All my life I have been a problem solver and for this reason I like puzzles. 2048 was shown to me and after playing if of a couple of weeks on and off I immediately went to the why can't you move diagonally and why do you have to swipe a line as much as 3 times to complete the join of tiles. Limiting your options and wasting time. Those produced the 2048v2 idea with 2 major upgrades. I like the game but still even with these 2 changes which make the game faster I still feel it takes too long to complete a game and you spend 75% of your time joining the smaller numbers to get to the fun part which is how do I get out of this mess. With our game ff you think long enough there are solution because of the 2 new features. So problem solved onto the next one. 2048v2 seems to be holding it players but time will tell. I still cannot read the Apple comments from China so I don't have direct feed back. This coming week I will be working on another puzzle game and can't wait to test it. I got to say this is a lot of fun.
Our first game, Samba Soccer Pursuit, took about three months. Our second game, Tap10! (coming soon), took about four months. In my experience, the last 20% of the process takes 80% of the time. We have identified some points of efficiency and will be able to release quality games at a faster clip in the future.
I started my game in the 1990s, started it over several times on various platforms, and still haven't finished it even though it was playable and fun on my own iPhone years ago I've now back-burnered it and have now almost completed a totally different game. But I'll get back to the old project! It's sooo close.... Just a little more work... and a little more...
Great. Give me a phone call when you are free and we can chat. My number is 13823519471 (86) area code
My game, "Invasion From Planet X", just launched after about 11 months of work. This is just a hobby so that was lunch breaks and weekends before the kids get up. For me though the coding and graphics were all iterating as I tried out different things until I got the look or effect I was after. I was in polish mode for the last 2 months.
It is a strange thing, trying to improve games. Working out what makes a game fun can be very hit and miss. And a lot of the time, the part you might find fun in a game, only a small number of other people also do. As a developer myself I find complex puzzles a challenge, but in reality only a small number of people are in this group. Most of making a game is the psychology of the player. It is easy to forget about the player when making games, and instead get focused on the features and functions. And it is very easy to add too much that actually detracts from what makes the game fun in the first place. Casual games are a kind of way to relax, and relaxing is all about stimulating the brain in such a way that it has the constant sense of reward and progress, yet actually doing very little work. One of the most common processes that relax the brain is pattern matching. So if you want a formula for making a good casual game then the player needs to perform a simple pattern matching task, with massive reward. So many games use this, Slot Machines, Match 3, 2048, even some card games would kind of follow this. If you look at 2048 like this, you can see that its success is probably more to do with the fact that even a baby can score pretty high on it, because it actually doesn't require much thinking at all to feel like you are doing pretty well. Like if you just randomly swipe in different directions you can actually score pretty high, maybe even win if you are very lucky. So the game has the illusion that you are doing well, and are able to complete a very complex maths problem, when actually it is very simple. So the simple action of swiping and then matches makes it fun. So if you wanted to destroy the fun in 2048, the fastest way would be to increase the complexity, so you actually have to think about the game you are playing. So 1. remove the easy pattern matching, by making everything that can join happen in one swipe. Now when the player swipes they get confused as to what just happened. They thought 2 and 2 would be 4 but it is now showing an 8, so their brain is no longer in its relaxed vegetable state. 2. add extra swipes, so now the user has 8 options instead of 4. The number 4 is small enough that generally everyone can hold it in their brains, so it is relaxing. Candy crush, you can move a candy in 4 directions. So it is easy for people to see the patterns, if a candy could be moved in 8 directions, the game would no longer be fun, because it becomes too complex to see the matches. So basically I think you have actually succeeded at making 2048 less fun, and should probably just have left it as it was. But then again its worth doing some experimenting with things, just in case. Just have to be willing to give up on them and move on very quickly.
I agree sometimes simple repetitive mechanics feel rewarding. That is what makes a lot of mini games very attractive. They are simple to play and feeling repeatedly rewarding.
Good read. This can explain why some games look simple but more people are willing to play. On the other hand, some complex games may look fun but less people are actually playing them.
It would be nice if there was a rule to follow to create a successful game. My feeling is that mindless games may get a quick crowd but will not have staying power. Mind you a quick crowd will also give you a good return so it should not be discounted.
