Death, Love & Carrots
Version 0.2.0 is out now!
Death, Love & Carrots » Devlog
Hey there, lovely peeps!
A new update has just dropped for Death, Love & Carrots, bringing the game to its current version 0.2.0. With that comes what you've all been waiting for: a free demo to download and play to your heart's content.
As a quick note: this demo is currently on par with the paid version, but won't receive any further updates. This allows you to get a good understanding of what the game is about, while everyone who already purchased it will have much more exciting new content to look forward to.
But let's get into what's actually new:
- TWITCH INTEGRATION! You may now have your Twitch viewers interact with the game to make things more challenging. Please refer to the file "twitch.ini" in the installation directory for further information on how this works.
- TOWER ATTACK as a new challenge mode! Legend has it that there's a smoking hot bunny at the top... *coughs*
- Quality of Life improvements: added effects for actor and bullet impacts, refined player movement.
- Several "under-the-hood" improvements and minor bug fixes, most notably: slope collision is now (finally!) working as intended. Yay me!
Stay updated on all things DLC (god, I love that acronym) at @DLC_GG on Twitter!
Files
DLC_Game_v0.2.0.exe 28 MB
Apr 04, 2020
DLC_Game_v0.2.0_demo.exe 28 MB
Apr 04, 2020
Get Death, Love & Carrots
Buy Now1.00€ EUR or more
Death, Love & Carrots
Shots Fired! Kill, Sweep, Die, Repeat!
| Status | On hold |
| Author | Thraxx Media |
| Genre | Platformer, Action |
| Tags | 2D, Funny, jumping, Narrative, Pixel Art, Retro, Singleplayer |
| Languages | English |
More posts
- Version 0.1.3 is out now!Apr 22, 2019
Comments
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.
Extra feedback: the optional(?) area in the bottom-left corner of the map is blocked by an ice floor, even though the player can't shoot down. That would be fine if said ice floor wasn't also placed right after a spike corridor that's tricky to get past. Progression-roadblocks should never be placed after linear obstacles as a dead-end like this, so I recommend adding another destructible-block-floor just before the spike corridor.
By the way, TOWER ATTACK is a very misleading name for your Bennet-Foddy-clone (because what tower attack *actually* means is reverse tower defense), but if you're dead-set on making the mode's entire challenge based around that clunky jump mechanic, at least show the trajectory beforehand while the player is charging the jump, because right now, I don't see how it's possible to get past the second screen.
I've got some feedback in case you pick this project back up: the first boss is annoying. It's completely invulnerable for a while, forcing the player to sit there and wait for a long time. Worse, during the brief moment the eyes are open, the invulnerable bees can easily get in the way, blocking attacks completely and not giving enough time to reach the other vantage point before the eyes close again. EDIT: and the eyes are so transparent while open, players might not even realize they animated; please add some white to those scleras. Also, the falling hazards should have some warning of where they'll fall since some of the waves don't give enough time to reach safety should the player end up in the wrong spot at the wrong time.
Other misc. issues: the moving platform just to the right of the large tree moves too far away, once again forcing players to sit there and wait should they just barely miss it. Lastly, I'd appreciate if the movement physics were tweaked so that letting go of left/right in midair instantly stops forward movement. This would make the controls more responsive and allow for more tricky platforming in later levels.
P.S. The tutorial text seemed to say that I'd lose my double-jump on death, but that never happened. If this was a mistake, I think it should be kept this way (redoing the tutorial text) since the game didn't seem completely designed around not having double jumps. If this was because I played on Casual difficulty, I'd like the difficulty selection to explain what the differences are between said difficulties. I also don't think this game should have a lives system given how much content is already between each checkpoint.
Hi there,
thank you very much for the feedback! Please allow me to address a few points you raised, to give you a better idea of the design decisions behind them:
a) Movement physics in this game, bare bones as it may be, were extensively tweaked and tested. While I know exactly what you mean, and I perfectly understand where you’re coming from with your assessment, those mechanics are very unlikely to ever change; at least not in the way you suggested.
The reason being that this is highly subjective - I’ve personally played a couple of indie platformers where the character behaves exactly like you described (i.e. abruptly stopping mid-air, killing all momentum); alas this is just not how physics work, and feels very jarring and unnatural to me.
I imagine many others would say the same. Popular examples of platformers with proper momentum: Super Mario Bros 3, Super Metroid. I’ve never heard anyone argue that the controls of these games feel “less responsive” in any way.
b) Regarding the somewhat unclear tutorial text instructions, I will agree that in part they might be a bit confusing. However, they’re not wrong: you do in fact lose the ability to call Luna (not just the double jumping, since that is inherently tied to the squirrel) both whenever you die or lose all health as Bella.
I’ve just tested this, and it’s working as intended. The reason why you may not actually notice any difference upon respawning is because you appear right on top of the last acorn you picked up, instantly restoring that lost ability - as indicated by the same pickup sound. Bella doesn’t have double jumps (much like Luna doesn’t have any form of attack), and while it may not be evident from whatever content is currently there, this still factors heavily into the overall game and level design philosophy.
Seeing that the project is “on hold” at the moment, I wouldn’t be able to give you any date or schedule for when new content will be added though. My sincerest apologies.
c) The “Tower Attack” mode is not a “Bennet Foddy clone” but rather a “Jump King clone” if you so will. Therefore, since the mechanics in both games are nearly identical, they are likely not changing either. I understand that it’s not for everyone, but that’s precisely why it’s an optional mode, disconnected from the main story. The name is NOT meant as a genre identifier, but is subject to change, like most of the UI and flavor text still is. So I will keep your feedback in mind, since I had actually no idea that a genre called “tower attack” even exists.
d) I agree on the boss fight being a bit wonky and not very satisfying. Turning a stationary object (like a tree) into an enemy encounter poses a unique challenge that needs iterations and fine tuning. Again, I’ll keep your feedback in mind and am open to any kind of suggestions.
e) The “optional area” in the bottom left corner of the map is a prime example of “work in progress” - while nothing is stopping you from exploring, currently it serves no purpose, but will do so eventually. Whenever that time comes, please expect the area to be reworked to accommodate any changes made accordingly.
Thanks again, and I hope you had a wonderful holidays.
I can respect that, but you should know that it's equally unnatural to have your entire momentum ricochet in the opposite direction upon pushing the other direction button, which is how your game works right now. My original suggestion was twofold: 1) ground movement already responsively stops your momentum completely upon letting go of forward (even though both characters are running and would realistically slide forward a bit upon abruptly stopping), so duplicating that for midair movement would add congruency to the controls, and 2) you make the player jump on several one-tile-wide platforms in a row, thus making the player quickly push left/right alternating to avoid overshooting/slipping back instead of simply letting go of the button. This is annoying, not challenging.
You reference Mario 3, but that game merely slows you down at first upon holding backwards, thus eliminating the back/forth issue since you can just hold back for a bit to stop all momentum. Plus, Mario 3's ground movement also has momentum, meaning the player doesn't have to learn and instantly flip between two different movement physics within the same game. Even Super Metroid doesn't quite work the same as your game, because if you tap backwards quick enough, you kill your momentum and fall straight down (and even holding backwards, it takes a split second for you to actually move in the other direction).
By the way, both of your examples have run buttons, giving the player even more control over movement/momentum. Your game doesn't have a run button.
You want physics? You want momentum? Then COMMIT, because right now, your game's controls are much closer to all those indie games you take umbrage with than either of the two games you brought up to defend yourself.
Well to be frank: I wasn’t necessarily “defending” myself, but rather giving you insight in regards to the decisions that went into the current state design. My apologies if it rubbed you the wrong way. I will add though that some people tend to forget: developers (in most cases) aren’t just “work horses” disconnected from the actual gaming space; I am a long time old-school gamer myself, so I’m certainly not going into this “blind” and just applying random values that may or may not look nice on paper.
What I’ve playtested so far felt good enough to me, as well as to a bunch of other people who didn’t complain. Maybe they did so because they were friends and didn’t wanna upset me; maybe they simply didn’t know better. Whatever the case, I didn’t think much of it and left the mechanics as-is. That’s really all there is to it.
Again, I apologize if your opinion differs. After all, everyone is entitled to their own tastes and preferences, that’s reasonable. I took note of everything you brought forth and have you know that it’ll be considered moving forward with this project. I just don’t want to make any promises I can’t keep, is all.
Cheers
Okay, I see where you're coming from. To explain myself, I've noticed people tend to make games "inspired" by those old-school classics without fully understanding WHY something worked in those games. It's less "work horse/you never played them" and more pointing out minutiae you seem to have missed or forgotten. Also, keep in mind that your game only has one simple area right now; your friends most likely didn't bring the issue up because it isn't a huge issue YET.
Sorry if it feels like I keep harping on the same thing, but your response seems to ignore the other point I tried to make in my last post: if you're gonna keep the physics, you should change the level design to make that section less annoying.
Think of it this way: how often do Mario 3 and Super Metroid make the player jump on multiple single-tile-wide platforms in a row, if ever? How much time does it take for the player to reach those segments from starting a new game (without sequence-breaking)? How long are the segments themselves? What total percentage of the game do these segments make up? Are these segments mandatory, or is there an obvious branching path the player can take instead? How do your answers compare when the same questions are applied to your game?
To be fair, there IS an old-school game franchise that has single-tile-wide platforms early on like your game does, but that franchise is Mega Man: a series where your momentum dies completely upon letting go of forward in midair--the very thing you're trying to avoid (so you should avoid the early single-tile-wide platforms, too).
I understand why you made the game like this--no need for more insight--but do you understand why having so many single-tile-wide platforms in a momentum-platformer isn't a good idea? Do you understand why your inspirations rarely did this and never did it so early?