This is awesome! So far I think this is one of the best games I've seen in this Ludum Dare. Although it is a bit lacking in its current state, what is currently there is great. It's in depth enough to be interesting, yet simple enough to learn after you've played a bit. I think this is a solid framework for a bigger game with lots of potential. I love games like these and I think you've done an excellent job making one. I'm excited to see if there are any more developments in this, keep up the good work!

I really love this game so far! I completed levels 1, 2, and 4, though I'm not quite sure how to beat level 3. At first, I thought maybe the timing was the issue, so I experimented with pulse formers and buffers, but am still unable to complete it. Do you have an example solution for this level? My current attempt is this:


The output is 1, 0, 1, 0 while the goal is 1, 1, 0, 1, 0 (from watching it step by step, it seems the second 1 is skipped).

Overall, I love the game, I hope you continue working on this!

@stevenjmiller Oh gosh how did I not notice that. There's a bug where the output channel wont accept the same value twice in a row, even when in a new pulse and the data is "fresh". I'll fix this in the post jam version I'm working on. Thanks for bringing this to my attention!

As a real life lancastrian I appreciate this on a spiritual level.

A lot of the time programmer games don't work very well, but this one was well designed and made a lot of sense. The art style was really cohesive and looked great. You did a really great job on this. Nice one.

I like the idea, and there is enough to continue to make a good game out of it, but for now I have no idea how to do 4. (I've finished 1 and 2.)

I understand how to compare and send the data to the output, but i dont get how to get a next number.

I really like the "cheering" from the computer at the end of each puzzle.

Controls are little strange. It seems like you mostly one one hand on the mouse and the other on the arrow keys, but then the tool selection lets you use numbers all the way on the other side of the keyboard.

Some of the modules work with the arrows or wheel, but some only work with the arrows. It would be nice to be able to control the speed through the keyboard. I think both of these could be improved by making the right mouse act the same as the right arrow key, so you can scroll with all modules and use RMB to do things like toggle IO streams. Then you could use 1-5 or Q-T to control speed. If the player only has one button or only has a trackpad to scroll, they can still use the mouse pointer and arrows.

Especially given the theme and that most puzzles will be quite cramped, it would be really useful to be able to move modules around instead of needing to delete and recreate them, even if you needed to force all connections to break to avoid overlaps.

Overall, great proof of concept. Easily spent more time with this than any other game this LD. You definitely start feeling pressed for space by level 4! https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/186656994713665536/482839270151946240/unknown.png

Great concept, I like the Zachtronics game style. I had a lot of trouble understanding how to make a proper pulse, which I think is the key to solve puzzle 4. I still needed to add a useless operation just to keep everything in sync. I couldn't solve Puzzle 3. I think the controls could be simpler, and there need to be a direct visualisation of the operation outputs while running, look at the game "Prime Mover" for example. Anyway, it's a really ambitious game for a ludum, I encourage you to add more levels. I had fun playing the game!

What tool you use to make timelapse? Its really look cool! And can you share with discord ld group? I want scream next time too)

Oof, I confess I'm not a huge fan of these style of games (says the professional programmer). Anyway, while I realize time was short, I found the interface could use a lot of improvements. Parts that I thought were intuitive were clicking on and dropping modules onto the grid. I didn't realize, however, the game had different modes, and that the number keys or scroll wheel will change to each of these. I didn't like that linking modules had to be done in a separate mode. I also had difficulty deleting modules once selected, since there's no visual indicator a module has been selected, and the screen merely displays the properties of the modules, but no instructions to delete it (contrast that to a link). The delete key may not have been working, either.

This brought back so many memories of complex math class and the coding interviews you have to pass to be hired as a Software Engineer.

I've seen simpler versions in Lightbot and Code.org where they are using a robot to teach children how to code.

I've also seen a card game like this where you are playing cards to move a message along lines of code (network) so that it arrives in the correct final spot to score.

I really wish there was a key to reset the level, so if you mess up the puzzle you can start over.

I didn't get to the part where I was running out of space. This feels mostly like a simulation of computer hardware. The graphics and sounds solidly reminded me of the DIY 1980s computer in your garage hobbyist.

@team-on I use **Chronolapse** to do the initial capture, and it'll make like 8000 or so frames, and then I use a tool called **Bulk Rename Utility** to rename them all by date to something like f0001.png, f0002.png ... f8382.png so they're all in sequence (chronolapse uses a weird timestamp filename that ffmpeg doesn't like) and then I use something along the lines of `ffmpeg -framerate 24 -i f%04d.png output.mp4` and then from there you can edit it and add music and whatever.

@omiya-games I agree with you completely, I was really pressed for time and ended up neglecting a lot of UI stuff in favour of making sure the game a bit more content, but I've got more time now so I'm fixing these issues.

_ Sorry, this is a way too long comment that overanalyzes parts of your game in various daft ways, but I saw a Zachlike with a rainbow-ish logo recommended on the itch.io picks and I just couldn't stay away. It's a bit unwieldy and my attempts at editing somehow only made it worse, so ... enjoy! :-) _

Trying to build what amounts to a full and fully featured Zachlike experience when you've already worked on and abandoned your first idea can't have been easy.
That even got it in some sort of working order, with graphics and audio as good and coherent as these is even more impressive!
There are so many little bits that are good, like the little light on top of the 'Lancaster', or the subtle effect of the 'typed' screen, the totally in-mood SFX, the way it asks you which thing you want to edit when there's multiple you could've meant (even though the only time it's needed is if you want to rewire your solution)... oh, and the notes that where stuck on with tape :-)

Unfortunately, it seems that these great ideas/ambitions/efforts end up being paid with in usability and tutorialization (and music, but I found the lack not very serious, given the genre), and in my opinion at least, some of the game mechanics (as opposed to the overall idea).

For some reason I've got the hardest time wrapping my head around the IO flags module. Some part of my brain just finds it really unintuitive... 'spooky action at a distance!' :-p
(As in, you're at this supposedly basic level, where you have to do nearly everything manually, and yet this IO chip just cycles the inputs/outputs without connecting to those?)
I think it's mostly my mistake though... I ended up skimming the intro, instead of going over it properly, then doing the fist level in a way that solved it, but completely misunderstood how the IO worked, getting through the second level with a similar flawed technique, then hitting a snag with the third level, reading the comments and seeing there was a problem with it, then trying to solve level 4, still with my flawed understanding.
But then there's also that you get the first read/write without the IO-flags mod.

Some smaller issues, some of which may also be me being somewhat daft:

- Condition check: Is there a way to select which input is the flag and which the condition? I haven't found it...
- Took a while to find the 'delete' key (I don't think it's mentioned anywhere).
- Backspace is back to menu is also not mentioned anywhere. (Props for making the help/level-intro {re/dis}appear on command though!)
- The 'arrow forward' key to mark checkboxes in the IO-flags (while enter _does_ work in the Math Module) is a little unintiutive as well (and also not really mentioned?)
- Probably also on me, but it took me _ages_ to find that you could _scroll_ through the menu's (I think you _did_ mention this somewhere...)
Well, _nearly_ all menu's... some still have keyboard only commands, like the ones in the combinator/logic modules.
- The different 'modes' felt a bit clunky, since _almost_ all actions could be done without the modes.

@remco Thank you so much for this feedback, I really appreciate how much you put into it and I wish I could give it more than one heart. I was worried that the IO module wasn't explained enough and it was sort of vague to begin with, I couldn't figure out a more elegant solution of how to pull the next item from the input queue without them just streaming at you faster than you can handle or before you're ready. I do plan to fix all of the interface issues and give a better tutorial with more intervals for introducing features and such where I can have parts of the solution already on the board and have the player fill in the blanks. As for the condition check, I don't remember whether or not this was explained in the tutorial, but when you're finishing a connection, you can scroll the mouse wheel to determine which input you are selecting to connect to. If you don't manually select an input, it'll just pick the next open connection so the order you do the connections will define which gets what. I honestly want to replace the 3 modes with just double click for edit, click drag for connect and remove build mode entirely because its not used for anything.

@flatgub I'm just glad the feedback was readable in a way that makes sense :-)