Author: MrBlueSky

Limbus Company: Corrections

A few weeks ago I did a writeup on Limbus Company. You can read it here.

After playing more, I’ve realized there are a few factual things I got wrong in my writeup, and also a few more things I wanted to talk about. So I’ve decided to put those here.

Some Corrections

I had complained about Limbus Company’s energy system, Enkephalin. I thought that if I lost while playing, and had spent energy or modules to attempt a level, I would just lose that energy.

As it turns out, in many cases, the whole amount of energy is refunded if you lose. And in others, even though there is some loss of energy, it’s 5%. So if you spend 20 energy to enter a stage and lose, you get 19 back.

I still don’t like energy systems in games. Energy systems are in my mind, a gaming dark pattern. But Limbus Company’s energy system isn’t as bad as I thought in my initial writeup.

Glorified slot machines, and some other F2P bullshit

I never really mentioned that Limbus Company does have a Gacha system. In abstract, it’s very similar to most Gacha systems. You spend premium currency, which you can buy with real money, or earn small amounts of per day. In exchange, you get random characters.

Mechanically, though, it’s actually somewhat unusual. For starters, the game starts the players with 13 characters, and each extra “character” you get is just an alternate personality for one of those 13. There haven’t been any times when I’ve gone, “Wow, I need a character who can do X, I guess I need to spend the Gacha.”

The game also has a system for upgrading characters that boils down to: the default free characters get stronger easier, while premium characters are resource sinks.

Again, I don’t like Gacha systems. But there was never a point playing Limbus Company that made me think “I could beat this if I just spent money.” It’s a better system. Admittedly, it’s better in the same way that being stung by one wasp is better than being stung by five.

Going back to actual gameplay: Limbus Company does have a solid combat system, but it’s incredibly poorly explained and displayed, and the more I play, the more convinced I am that the tutorial was some sort of joke.

So yeah, Limbus Company. An interesting F2P game with generally reasonable systems by F2P standards, and absolutely stunning lack of meaningful tutorials.

Grotto Beasts

Grotto Beasts is an entertaining TCG with a really clever resource system that I haven’t seen used before. It’s good fun. But at the end of this writeup, I’m not going to recommend buying it. I absolutely recommend playing it! Just… not spending money on it. But we’ll get to that.

The most unique part of Grotto Beasts to me is the resource system. It’s very interesting and not particularly complex, but it is very different from anything I’ve seen in a TCG, so I want to go over it in detail first.

Grotto Beasts’ Resource System

Every card card in the game has a cost. To “play” a card, you have to pay its cost, which you do by placing cards facedown into a zone called the summoning pool. The summoning pool cannot be rearranged, and is not a discard pile/graveyard.

Here’s the neat part: whenever an opponent plays a card, you draw cards equal to the cost of that card from your summoning pool. If you didn’t have enough cards in your pool, you continue drawing from your deck..

In addition, except for the first card you play each turn, you cannot play cards if your opponent’s summoning pool is empty.

I found that in the games I played, this led to a bunch of really interesting decisions about what cards to use to pay various costs, and how to order them into the summoning pool. A heavy cost card might be useless now, but placing it at the very bottom makes it hard to get back. Likewise, it gives the game a sort of tempo pace. Dropping a high cost card into your opponent lets them draw a fair number of cards back, and can give them the answers they need to deal with it.

The Rest of the Systems

The rest of Grotto Beasts’ systems are functional and fun, if not as fascinating. Combat is similar to Magic, where all attackers attack at once. Unlike Magic, attack values are summed, and then defense values are summed. Each player chooses how to allocate damage across the enemy line. Cards only have one stat for combat, Power, so it’s fairly easy to keep track of what’s what.

Damage that isn’t blocked goes through, and when it does, the player who did the damage banishes cards off the top of their deck into a score pile, somewhat akin to Pokemon’s prize card system. These cards can’t be looked at, and the first player to get 10 prizes wins. There are also cards that can generate prizes with their effects.

The Good, the Bad, and the Jerma

The Good

For all intents and purposes, this card game was created as Twitch streamer merch. That said, the game itself is strong, generally fun to play, and has interesting and unique systems. I have no real complaints about the mechanical structure of the game, and it’s much better quality then what I would expect for a tie-in product. God we live in a weird world.

Ed Note: As far as I can tell based on the rulebooks, while a wide number of people contributed to this project, only one person is specifically credited with the game’s design: J. Evan Raitt.

One big thing that I really appreciate about the design is that outside of a single six sided die, it doesn’t require any external components or trackers for things like health, counters, or life. It also doesn’t have a complex zone setup system. I mention this mostly because it’s one of my pet peeves with Nostalgix.

The Bad

But while I don’t have complaints about the game’s design structure, I do have two incredibly large bones to pick with some of the specific designs. First, the starter decks. There are two starters decks, and they felt extremely unevenly matched.

One is called Super Luck, and it’s mechanically themed around coin flips and luck. It offers cards that increase the payoffs of winning coin flips, with some ability manipulate those flips. It has a consistent identity and strategy.

The other is called Lot O’ Grottos. It feels much weaker for a variety of reasons. First, the grottos themselves are primarily a defensive tool for the deck, and some provide search and discard pile recursing. But the deck’s stat lines on its creatures are incredibly low. One of the “tricks” the decks has is a 4 drop card that lets you sacrifice creatures at the start of a turn to get a card that costs one more. Except while the deck has two copies of a card that costs 6, it has no card that costs 5, and only two cards that cost 4. That means it’s a card that turns 1 drops into two drops, which aren’t much stronger.

In addition, the Super Luck deck gets a card named Festive Mimic. It’s a 3 cost, 2 power card that has an effect that triggers when it’s played. Its effect is “Roll a die, then draw that many cards.”

Grottos gets a card named Bobbin. It’s 3 cost, 2 power card, that has an effect that triggers when played. Its effect is “Draw a card.”

This isn’t the greatest sin I’ve ever seen committed. I’m more sympathetic to a card game that prints a version of Swords to Plowshares than I am to one that prints the Power Nine (Looking at you, MetaZoo)

However, these are problems with the design of specific cards, not the core mechanics. I haven’t written about this specifically here, but the initial sets of Magic were kind of janky, and the initial sets of the Pokémon TCG led to a dumpster fire meta. A set TCG with some bad initial set design does not make a bad game.

The Jerma

Indie card games are my kryptonite. I will play one demo game of something I’ve never heard of before, and that will be enough to sell me on it. Show me something even mildly exciting, and I will be forking over cash for a booster box.

So why don’t I recommend Grotto Beasts? Ultimately, pricing and production quality.

The cost of cardboard is too damn high.

Grotto Beasts’ boosters are $10 a pop, while the 2P starter set is $80. The starter set contains 2 decks, and 2 boosters, making each deck come out to $30 for 40 cards. For comparison, the Pokémon starter sets retail at aprox $15-20 a deck, with the higher end comp/premium products going for $30.

These prices are high, which is unfortunate and might be tolerable except for one final thing: production quality.

The physical cards are kind of crap. After just three games, the cards themselves were showing scratches and scuffs on the edges. In addition to this, one of the cards I opened in the boosters was straight up missing any sort of finish on the front of the card.

I spent part of this weekend running a pre-release for the new Pokémon set with the same friend I played Grotto Beasts with. And we both agreed that the print quality of Grotto Beasts is much lower quality than current Pokémon cards.

In Conclusion

I absolutely recommend playing Grotto Beasts if you get a chance. While the game has a few mechanical issues, they’re nothing worse than the very first set of any other TCG.

But the sky-high pricing and miserable production quality of the product means I just can’t recommend it, and I don’t plan on buying it, especially with the issue of the starter decks being incredibly unevenly matched.

If you love Jerma, and want to support the project, more out of the sort of tradeoff that we as humans make when we buy content creator merch, you can find the game here.

I, however, am NOT going to go to this website here with a list of all the Grotto Beasts cards and download the images. Then I am NOT going to put them into a big sheet, and I am NOT going to find a way to print them as make my own bootleg set of of the cards to play with.

I am absolutely NOT going to that. Because that would be wrong, and there are no situations where you should just steal a copy of something really expensive or out of print.

Limbus Company

Limbus Company is very weird, and just a bit nuts.

Authors Note: I’ve played more Limbus Company since this writeup, and I’ve realized a few things I said were incorrect. You can read those corrections here. I’m leaving this writeup as is though, in order to preserve my initial understanding and perspective.

It would make sense that after 10 hours of Limbus Company, I would have a strong feeling on whether or not to recommend it. Thing is, I really don’t.

Limbus Company is fascinating. It’s unlike any other RPG I’ve played, and it’s tonally different than any other F2P game I’ve played. But its F2P mechanics, poor tutorials, and awful information display make it a very tough sell.

Side Note: I saw someone mention that you need to be a rocket scientist to understand this game. I asked my friend who worked at NASA to try it, and they completely bounced off it.

Limbus Company is a game from Project Moon, a Korean indie game studio. Project Moon’s other games include Lobotomy Corporation and Library of Ruina.

All three games share the same world and story. I mention this because I will be talking about Limbus Company’s story, and that means general spoilers for the other two games. Sort of.

It’s a bit hard to explain. Much like the rest of Limbus Company!

Story and Art

Limbus Company has a strong visual style. I’ve always really liked 2D images in 3D environments as a design choice, and it’s done very well here. The story is unusual, and tonally a bit wonky.

The 13 incredibly poorly adjusted and mildly sympathetic whackjobs the player has to lead.

For reference, the game opens with the player character cutting off their own head and replacing it with a clock. The individual story arcs run the gamut from “Haha, weird,” to “What the ever loving fuck.”

Notable moments in the first category include a casino run by people in Mariachi outfits who fight with maracas.

Notable moments in the second category include a sympathetic NPC being gutted and worn like a flesh-suit. By a giant apple.

Anyway, game mechanics. Let’s talk about game mechanics.

How Limbus Company Works (I Think)

I want to know who plays this shit on a phone.

I’m going to try to explain how Limbus Company works. If you don’t care, you skip this bit. The extra knowledge is useful for deciding if you’d like the game, but not necessary for me to explain my problems with the game, which I’ll get to in a bit.

Limbus Company is a combat game. The player controls a group of characters (sinners) in fights against enemies and abnormalities. On a given turn, the player chooses from two available cards and builds a chain of cards across the characters they control.

Cards have: Power, Coins, Damage, Attacks, Damage Type, Sin Type, and Count. Power determines who wins Clashes, but only after Clashes are resolved by flipping the Coins. There’s a secondary value that determines the increase to power based on the number of coin flips that land heads during a clash or one-sided attack phase.

Damage is the amount of damage inflicted. I think. Honestly not sure. Attacks are the number of attacks to be inflicted on the use of a card, or that will be used for resolution of Clash during a Clash. However, it’s important to note that Sanity has an impact on Coin flip resolution, increasing or decreasing the rate at which you flip heads. This makes the Coin Flip not actually a coin flip.

Damage Type is the type of damage inflicted. There are three types, which are modified by enemy resistance, but also change if the enemy is staggered or panic based on their sanity. Abnormalities though, don’t have sanity, and cannot be panicked.

Sin type determines resonance and absolute resonance. In addition, resolving an attack of a given sin type grants Sin that can be used to activate Ego.

Count determines how many copies of a card are in a sinners deck.

If this doesn’t make sense to you, good. Because I’ve played 10 hours of this game, and I don’t get it.

Anyway, combat! Combat is against either abnormalities or everyone else. In fights against abnormalities, individual abnormalities and body parts of the abnormality can be targeted, but in general fights, characters pick targets on their own.

Game Modes

Limbus Company has multiple game modes. I’ve only unlocked a few of them, but most are just “do combat, get different resources.” However, there is one mode that’s very different, and that’s the game’s mirror dungeons.

Yes, it’s a simulation run. I’m not wasting energy to get a screenshot.

Mirror Dungeons are semi-randomly generated path of various encounters, similar to a “run” in Slay the Spire or Inscryption. The characters are reset to start at level 10, and after winning a fight, there’s a reward of either a random item in the vein of Slay the Spires artifacts, or the ability to level one of the current party members up.

Personally though, I’ve found that Mirror Dungeons got stale fairly quickly. Because there’s no reward for experimenting, and Limbus Company is F2P, I usually just ran more or less the same team, and picked safe options.

Story mode has something similar. While 90% of the story is a set of single linear combat encounters, the mission of each story chapter is a large non-randomized dungeon. These have been some of the more interesting parts of the game for me so far, and feel more like playing an actual video game than a free to play game with a gacha system.

The Collision of Money and Mechanics

There are two large pain points I have with Limbus Company. The first is that the game did not spend enough time and detail explaining the aforementioned combat systems, and doesn’t display in-game information in an easily accessible way. The tutorial is brief, and while not unhelpful, is overwhelming. I had another friend download and try the game to confirm that it wasn’t just me being stupid, and they had a similar level of drowning in information.

While bad onboarding and scaffolding can be a problem with games, it’s not one that necessarily turns me off. As perusing this blog for any length of time will make quite clear, I am willing to play games with janky or unexplained systems. I will play games that are horribly broken. I will play games that are in a language I can’t speak or read.

But learning a game’s systems by experiencing them requires me to actually be able to play the game. Limbus Company is F2P play, which means it has an energy point system. As with every energy point system ever, it boils down to the following core loop:

  1. Spend Energy to enter levels
  2. Get more Energy over time, or by spending real money.
  3. There is no three.

I mentioned in my Arknights writeup a while back how much I liked that the game had a parallel energy system that gave free tries at clearing levels without any rewards.

A system like that is exactly what I want in Limbus Company. Something that lets me play the game, experiment with builds and try to figure out the incredibly obtuse systems that make up combat without “wasting” my energy on fights I can’t clear.

Right now, I felt discouraged from actually experimenting with the game’s mechanics, unless I hit a wall and had no other way forward.

Conclusion

Limbus Company has a compelling, if occasionally frustrating, story and solid art. The mechanics are interesting, and I wish I understood them better, or that they were easier to learn by playing.

If you’re looking for a F2P game, you could certainly do worse then Limbus Company. But enjoying it requires a high level of patience and tolerance for what initially feels like esoteric bullshit.

Limbus Company can be played for free on Steam, and also on phones. I suggest you avoid playing it on your phone unless you have an electron tunneling microscope so that you can actually read the text.

Catch the Fox

Disclosure: I received a key for free on Lurkit.

Let it never be said that I’m a hack reviewer. Developers, if you give me a key to your game, rest assured I will play the entire thing before I review it. Even if that means I spend 93 minutes of my life on a generic repeatable task in an Unreal 5 demo map.

Don’t conflate that with me saying nice things about your game though. Instead, I’ve decided to title this review “Constructive Criticism.”

For the people reading this review who aren’t the developers of Catch the Fox, here’s a brief overview of the game. The player is placed into a large level populated by shrubberies, foxes, and powerups. The goal is to get close enough to touch the foxes. After touching enough foxes, the next level is unlocked. When you touch a fox, its fur gets redder, and then it moves faster.

Movement

The core of Catch the Fox’s gameplay is movement. It’s really the only thing you can do. Getting airborne gives you a speed boost on returning to the ground. This allows the player to skate merrily along. Or at least it would, if it wasn’t for a few issues.

The foxes you need to touch have a hitbox for collisions that’s only slightly smaller then the hitbox for “touching” them. And when you collide with them, you instantly lose all momentum. This absolutely kills any sense of pacing or chaining together multiple tags.

It’s like if every time I stomped a goomba, I had to fill out a death certificate, and inform their next of kin before moving on. In addition, the player’s jump is miserable, capable of clearing a small subset of environmental obstacles and absolutely nothing else. It’s not high enough to jump over foxes, or up to any interesting areas.

Environments and Level Design

Speaking of environmental obstacles, let’s talk about the levels. I have two problems with them. The levels themselves are not laid out in such as a way as to actually encourage use of the movement mechanics. One level, Fractal, while quite pretty, has literally no capacity to gain speed or momentum, and might as well be flat once you reach the bottom layer.

Visually appealing? Yes. Mechanically appealing? Absolutely not.

Secondly, the other levels have been populated with a frankly ridiculous amount of what I’d politely call “environmental chaff.” The game is about touching foxes, not trying to touch foxes and slamming my wooden head into a tree every five inches.

The strongest level had none of these at all. It’s a great big ocean of sand-dunes that form curving pits. This layout actually lets you leap around and gain speed. This level isn’t the most visually diverse, but that doesn’t matter, because this is a video game. It’s about the game mechanics, not the visuals.

Performance and Bugs

The game was actually fairly bug free, though I did once encounter invisible foxes that couldn’t be tagged. It was on the spooky level, so maybe it’s supposed to be like that? Still frustrating and annoying though.

Performance is frankly terrible. I’m running on a 1080, on low graphics, windowed, and I got like 30 FPS. Maybe it’s my setup, but given how much my frame rate goes up when I’m looking at the ground, or not looking at trees, I don’t think that’s the case here. For a fast paced game based around movement, that’s not acceptable.

The strongest level in the game. Is it because it’s not cluttered with trash? Quite possibly!

And while we’re on the subject of graphics: motion blur sucks. No one likes motion blur. Maybe smearing makes things look neat, but in a game, I want to actually be able to see stuff.

Conclusion – For the Devs

You’ve made a movement based game where every aspect of the gameplay plays counter to that. Your level design doesn’t play with the surf and speed gain systems you’ve developed. All clutter and environmental garbage appears to tank the frame rate. Your primary mechanic of tagging plays counter to that movement.

I liked the music, and there is a bit of zen feel to the game on levels like Ocean Outpost when I could get a flow going.

Conclusion – For Everyone Else

Catch the Fox is not currently worth buying. The most interesting thing I got out of playing it was doing this writeup, and reflecting on the interplay between level design and traversal mechanics. It’s actually something I’ve been thinking about a fair bit since the terrible game I made for Ludum Dare 53.

If for some reason you read all of this, and still want to buy it, Catch the Fox is $3 on Steam.

PS: All the screenshots in this review are from the Steam page. I’m not hugely interested in playing more of this game in its current state just for image captures.

Ludum Dare 53 – Retrospective

Ludum Dare 53

Ludum Dare 53 was this weekend, and I participated for the first time. For those who haven’t heard of Ludum Dare, it’s a game jam where participants can work with a team to make a game from scratch in a limited period of time. You can read more about it on the site, but I mostly want to talk about my experience, and some lessons learned.

First up though, let’s talk about the game I worked on. This event’s theme was “Delivery.” So I worked with my friends to create Demon Lord’s Catboy Pizza Delivery Service. Here’s a link to a playable version on itch.io.

My contributions were in three main areas, and those are the ones I’ll be focusing on for this retrospective.

Art

I did the art for the monsters you deliver pizza to, and also the hub zone, and the enemies. These were a lot of fun to draw. But we used a default tile set, and my art sticks out and doesn’t quite mesh with it. That said, they did get some positive feedback, so I’m glad people enjoyed looking at them.

I think there are two key things to recognize here. First off, I didn’t have a workflow set up to build pixel art, which meant my stuff didn’t match our pixel art tileset. Honestly, have no experience in pixel art at all.

Second, I want to keep improving my art to match themes and tones. I want to improve my abilities around color and palettes. I don’t have any plans of becoming a professional artist in the immediate future, so this will likely remain a hobby, but I want to provide stronger and more consistent art for the next time I do one of these with friends.

I also want to create more compelling and entertaining splash screens and covers, because I think that would drive more engagement. Right now our main screen and splash is fairly dull. It’s a small thing, but I think it’s important for getting more plays and feedback.

Background Swapping

The only system I wrote any large amount of code for was the background handling. My code dynamically swaps the background art based on hitting flags in the environment.

It was also an excellent demonstration to me that I haven’t written any code for a long time. My professional job is technical, but mostly demands a very specific non-code knowledge, along with a broad smattering of other technical knowledge. (Database structures, query languages, various endpoints)

Point being, if I need to actually design systems, I freeze up a bit. For the next jam, I think I need to prepare by writing more code and practicing in Godot prior to the event to have the knowledge base to contribute more effectively.

That said, I am happy that I just asked my friends how to do things instead of sitting and suffering and reading docs for hours. So at least my ability to prioritize in tight deadlines has improved slightly.

Level and World Design

I built out the world and level that’s present in the final game, as well as handled most of the enemy placement. There are two groups of lessons here for me: first the ones related to Godot itself, and second the ones related to just better game design practice.

First, Godot as a tool: we decided early on to do a single large world with multiple objectives. In retrospect, this may have been a mistake. Because of how Godot handles scene objects, this meant that having two people with branched copies of our full_world scene would need to resolve merge conflicts, and only one person in our team had the background knowledge of Godot to handle that.

The end result was a scramble of rebasing and not touching that scene to avoid those conflicts, and it sort of rushed things a bit near the end.

The second is the world design itself. I think there’s a lot of room for improvement in the world design, on multiple points. First up, navigation and linearity. DLCBPDS had a large open world, and the player starts right in the middle of it. The player is asked to select a quadrant of the world map, and then travel to a goal within that quadrant. The thing is, in order to keep people from getting too lost, each of the quadrants is separate from the others.

However, in playtests, I routinely saw players go into the wrong zone almost immediately, after which they would have to backtrack the entire way when they realized what happened. Or more often, after I told them.

Simply put, this was a bad design pattern on my part. It made it too easy to get lost, punished getting lost with a painful backtrack. If I was to build this again, I’d want to focus on a linear path, or adding more in-world indicators to really hammer home where the player is supposed to go.

The bigger issue, and the one I need to think about a bit more is level design in games in general. I came into this jam with an intention to make things “Fun.” While I do think the game succeeded in being fun, I’m not sure the fun arose from the world the player navigated. There are some sections people enjoyed, specifically the areas I have mentally labeled “Pit” and “Tower.” But this wasn’t the result of careful design on my part, and more due to trial and error of design. I threw a bunch of different patterns at the wall and saw what stuck.

There were four patterns I threw at the wall, and I want to talk about them briefly. Pit was a large hole that you climb down. Tower was a large hole you climb up. Dungeon was a series of caves with some enemies, and Outskirts was a large empty void I filled with rectangles.

Tower and Pit were the most popular from what I saw, and I think in that order. And that’s because they’re the areas where using the game’s core movement mechanics are the most enjoyable. These areas let the player use the grappling hook to pull themself up, use dash jumps and dodge around outcroppings as they plummet.

But I’d like it if I could make every area that enjoyable. For the next game jam, I think that means I need to study our intended core mechanics better prior to just building things, find the fun moments, and elaborate on them. At the same time, I’d also like to have a more exact understanding of those mechanics, for example exact jump height, exact dash distance. That sort of thing.

Other Bits

I have some other thoughts that aren’t specific to me, but I think are worth noting, and considering for next time.

Our file structure was kind of a mess. Agreeing beforehand on a general unified structure for objects would be a good idea, including things like locations for art assets.

Our coordination has room for improvement. There was a point early on where two people spent time working on the same thing, and someone’s work got thrown out. This was both a waste of time, and also felt shitty.

Repo structure. We tried to do a single main repo, with each person having a fork. This got abandoned almost immediately. I think a single repo that everyone pushes branches and requests to is the way to go for this project. Not as some sort of statement on version control, but because at least a few of us (me) are too incompetent with Git for much else to be worth it.

Builds. Our final build had issues, including crashing on scene changes in certain versions for no clear reason. We needed to build earlier, identify these sorts of things earlier, and either mitigate or be aware of them before there were only two hours left to turn in.

Controls and tutorials. If literally nothing else, we needed to include a tutorial level of some sort. Plastering the controls on every screen we could AND the pause menu wasn’t enough. It was really stupid of me to think that people would just naturally experiment and find the controls.

Conclusion

For a first time jam, I’m actually super proud. We made something, it has at least some fun moments. I wish my contribution was a bit higher effort, but I’m glad it was there at all to be honest. That said, there’s a lot of room for improvement and learning.

I’d also like to thank the folks I worked with for putting up with me and inviting me. It was really fun working with them. Kalloc and Slabity don’t have things I can shill. But Meptl has done some cool stuff, so I’m going to link that here.

So if you’d like to see some neat stuff, maybe check their projects out.

More game reviews at some point in the future, I promise. But most of my weekend was spent making games instead of playing them.