Before the Ludum Dare traffic gets going too strong, I want to at least try to talk about something I've been noticing more the last few times I've participated in Ludum Dare.
Specifically: It is my opinion that the current karma system is worse for incentivizing detailed feedback than the older, only ratings count karma system.
So first, let me lay out where I'm coming from. I know there are a lot of ways to get your game played during Ludum Dare. A lot of people like submitting their games to streamers, for example. However, I really like the coolness / karma system. It makes a lot of sense to me that playing other people's games rewards you with visibility. And, I like playing other people's games. So I'm not looking for recommendations on how to get my game played here. I will manage just fine, I'm sure. I am specifically discussing: is the coolness system doing it's job correctly? Or is there something wrong?
So. Here is why I think the current system is worse at incentivizing good feedback than the old one: Leaving detailed feedback on a game is a huge time sink. I know that a lot of people don't spend that long on Ludum Dare games, but I will easily spend half on hour playing a game and then even longer writing feedback for it. I often go back and replay parts of the game, as well, if there's something I need to clarify more in the feedback I'm writing.
So, obviously, when I spend all this time working on feedback, I am hoping to at least get a little bit of credit in the karma system. But it's actually pretty random. Some newer users simply don't really know that they're supposed to put hearts on comments with helpful feedback. Or, maybe a user has already gotten 30 ratings, and stops checking the website after that. Or many other reasons.
The end result is this: I have to very carefully pick which games to rate. I never rate a game if the author isn't hearting comments. I try very hard, actually, to find games where the author seems to have hearted a comment within, say, the past few hours.
But compare this to somebody who is not leaving detailed feedback. If I were to simply post "Nice game!" or something along those lines on every game I played, well--it would be much less of a time sink. I could easily crank through lots and lots of games. And I would probably end up with more hearts! That's because people tend to either heart every comment on their game or none of them. So I would be subjected to the same random chance as the detailed reviewer, but I would be better off, simply by virtue of having left more comments that each have some chance to be hearted.
So, this analysis leaves me with the following conclusion: effort put into comments is inversely proportional to ease of obtaining karma. For example, there are lots of people who leave good feedback but spend much less time on each game than I do. But even though they have an easier time of obtaining karma than I do, they still have a harder time than those who can crank out a short and mostly uninteresting comment in a few seconds.
And of course, the purpose of the new karma system was intended to be the opposite. The point was supposed to be that detailed feedback was better for obtaining karma. But as far as I can tell, it really is not working correctly.
And this is why the old system worked better: detailed feedback wasn't punished with increased difficulty in obtaining karma / coolness. Everybody was rewarded the same, which was, in my opinion, actually better than the current system. In particular, with the old system, I could spend lots of time rating a game and I wouldn't have to be worried that it would be totally wasted--that nobody would ever put a heart on my comment.
Now maybe I shouldn't be thinking of this so transactionally. But I think it's really just a matter of pragmatism--I really do spend a long time rating games, and I would like to keep doing that. I don't want to have to put in additional work, e.g. submitting my games to streamers, just to get 20 plays. And I would like to be able to rate games by people who might be newer or who aren't checking the site daily, without having to deal with the huge opportunity cost of spending that time rating a game that would actually result in more karma.
Okay, so there you have it. That's my analysis of this system. But I would like to know if anybody has any other thoughts or different experiences. Maybe spending less time on games but still writing detailed feedback is actually a comfortable experience. I'm very interested in everybody's thoughts. :smile:
So, finally (after two months) I have found the time to work on a post-jam version of this game. I have been in a bit of a rut, with my gamedev hobby, so I have decided to make this game a full release for once, and not pick any other projects, before this one is fully finished.
I tried drawing what the skeletons looked like before they were all bones. (In this particular world, living skeletons were once living humans...) I don't know if this is exactly how they look, but something like this.
The 'friend' in this image is someone who helped transport the two wizards. I think she exists in the world even though you never see her in-game.
Poor Mr. Boggles.
The suspects!
Who lives here?
Looking for clues.
I've added an inventory system and we're fleshing out a new unit type - The fire ant. This one burns enemies which leaves them defenceless. All attacks do extra damage while a unit is burned. 
