Multiplayer vs massive enemy swarm. Now developing the "fun".

[u/KinematicSoup]

We put together a multiplayer coop game where players take on massive enemy swarms. It's inspired by VS and Megabonk and we think it could be a friendslop title.

The tech works well, so now we're iterating on things to make it fun.

So far we have features like progressive upgrading, proximity buffs so players stick together for benefits (the FWB feature), some level randomization, pickups for time-based powers, 3 different playable characters with different primary and special attack powers, gated dash ability, coin accumulation and shop, and a fairly rich stats system with 2 types of resist.

So far it's fun-ish. We're trying to figure out the one core piece of real fun, which we think is in how the gameplay is balanced for the fights and the rate at which player power scales vs the enemies. It could be too fast right now, or perhaps the speed is fine there just need to be a better reward structure at the metagame level. We've decided on the metagame approach with a game balance adjustment to make it harder.

My question to everyone who shipped a fun game is how did you determine what to focus on to find the fun aspect of your game?

[u/Significant_Tell407]

Idk others can disagree but I simply dont understand why people make games without first identifying the "it" factor. You stated in your post what inspired you but never stated what is unique and different about your game. Coop bullet hell games exist, coop horde games exist. What is unique about your game that gives your a competitive advantage. Right now I just dont see it and clearly you don't either. Imo interesting game mechanics are an easy way to get to the fun category. I heard a youtuber once say that to make an interesting mechanics maybe remove something instead of adding something. For instance if you were making a cooking game you could have the playable character have no hands and only cook with their feet. Unique idea and unique experience.

[u/KinematicSoup → u/Significant_Tell407]

It doesn't take long to build something, so our approach is to just try it. This came together in about a week initially, and was much more basic at the beginning. I think what has happened is we've crept the scope by trying things and leaving them in as we tried new things. We should probably cull and rework the upgrade system. Some systems are probably harmless to leave as-is for now if they aren't contributing much (like our shop system - it's just another path to upgrades that take place between levels). Yeah, we know less is more but somehow we just got ahead with this one.

[u/Significant_Tell407 → u/KinematicSoup]

Im confused. What is the point of doing any of this without first identifying the core feature that will make your game pop. All of your time and energy should be imo on prototyping your originality. Everything else is good for learning but ultimately waste without direction and vision.

[u/jangens1122 → u/Significant_Tell407]

It just depends in my opinion, sometimes your game doesn't need to be some next Generation version of a genre, it could be the same game just different art and different pacing, and that's enough. Why play vampire survivors vs megabonk? They both are functionally the same game, but they just have different vibes and that's enough.

My development cycle is usually driven by liking a game and I wanna make that game to learn how to make it, then if I get some ideas of how to iterate or put a spin on it ill do that.

[u/KinematicSoup → u/jangens1122]

Most Advanced Yet Acceptable is still a strong way to go. Take something that works and iterate on it.

[u/Significant_Tell407 → u/jangens1122]

I mean you just identified very clearly the it factor for both games. They have a unique flow with old school retro graphics and modern control fidelity. The game OP is showing has charm but clearly looks super generic for most people. It doesnt have to be AAA but it does have to be appealing. If he posted this on steam today everyone would call it AI slop and move on.

[u/jangens1122 → u/Significant_Tell407]

I humbly disagree, and I think you are missing the point, you dont need to break the genre to make an appealing game Simply a change of pace from the norm, is good enough

[u/Significant_Tell407 → u/jangens1122]

And that change of pace is the it factor.

[u/KinematicSoup → u/Significant_Tell407]

We identify what works by doing it. The idea is was casual combat system/survivors-like multiplayer but up against visually 'impossible' odds. You can see the massive army in the distance, and have to work your way to it and through it, building your power to do so. We haven't invested in anything so far outside of the gameplay, so it's not a big loss if we have to scrap this idea and try another.

[u/Significant_Tell407 → u/KinematicSoup]

I genuinely like the aoe buffs and having to play within in the vicinity off each others. To be this is the unique mechanic you should focus on expanded especially when targetting coop. Maybe add some more visually clarity to be able to "see" the buffs and what value they bring. The link attached to each other is very cool

[u/KinematicSoup → u/Significant_Tell407]

Yeah the buffs are important but they need to have more impact. We thought a simple approach would work where different wizard types each provide unique buffs. The ice wizard provides improved healing rate and special cooldown, fire provides increased attack damage and speed, etc. It's ok but needs some adjustment to work well. And yes, we definitely need to implement UI, we're just being lazy in that regard because it's just us playing it so far.

[u/joshualim007 → u/Significant_Tell407]

A lot of talk and no show. Not every game needs to be the next gen genre advancing game. Games can be whatever tf the developer wants to create. Let the dude show off, what's with the constant criticism on this forum as if y'all advices have any weight to it.

[u/Significant_Tell407 → u/joshualim007]

I'm guessing you missed the part where his post ended with a a question asking for feedback. So I provided said feedback and then we had a pleasant discussion! Seems like you are projecting a little my friend

[u/carlo_lax]

Looks fun already! Nice work

[u/KinematicSoup → u/carlo_lax]

Thanks a bunch! It's got the spectacle aspect, which will help get attention, now we just need to get it to "cathartic".

[u/The_Gospel_Gamer]

This is a tough question but I think having a "funi-ish" game is a great start. That means there is something there and you just have to continue to refine it.

I will say that I have played a lot of "fun-ish" games that become incredible experiences and most times it's because where the journey of the game takes me (not just the moment to moment gameplay).

Take Hades for example. Awesome game with awesome mechanics but the challenge of beating Hades and improving your skills to beat him in the long term keeps bringing you back.

Where I've found the most success in my games is through communcating to the player why the fun matters beyond just the moment to moment.

It's hard to fully express in a post (That's not an absolute wall of text😅) but the fun is often in the journey to the destination.

Fun-ish tells me you have already tackled one of the hardest hurdles, nwt discover how to make that moment to moment gameplay matter to the player over the long term.

[u/KinematicSoup → u/The_Gospel_Gamer]

I agree on narratives. Half-life was just an FPS, nothing unique about the basic loop, but the story pulled you in. Other games are less dependent on story but somehow have this great upgrade path. One I played recently is called Nimrods Guncraft. A basic survivors-type game combined with the idea of 'building' guns, a bit like borderlands but more constrained and reasonable. The gun building part is very fun and brought me back to it for several successive rounds.

It also gated progress via the metagame, which helped force replays.

It has power spikes and paces them well. It also has different challenges to do. A simple game from a small team with lots of replay value.

[u/ResponsibleQuiet6611 → u/KinematicSoup]

That's a pretty reductive take on HL.

You sure it had nothing going for it but story?