Comments on: Dapple’s Identity Crisis http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/ The trials and joys of indie games development Sat, 28 Jan 2012 19:32:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Paul http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-29469 Paul Sun, 21 Mar 2010 03:41:29 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-29469 Just tried out the lite version to see what the fuss (in these comments) is about. Honestly, I think understanding your *tutorial* is more difficult than understanding your game. Maybe rethink the tutorial itself? Show lots of "match" examples? Just tried out the lite version to see what the fuss (in these comments) is about.

Honestly, I think understanding your *tutorial* is more difficult than understanding your game.

Maybe rethink the tutorial itself? Show lots of “match” examples?

]]> By: John W http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-5232 John W Wed, 01 Jul 2009 12:56:58 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-5232 Owen, I haven't played your game, but here's a thought about how to make it easier to learn: You could have an AI mode that runs in the early levels that detects when a player is "not grokking" the game and "pops up" with a hint or two. Sort of like an experienced player watching over your shoulder. Owen, I haven’t played your game, but here’s a thought about how to make it easier to learn: You could have an AI mode that runs in the early levels that detects when a player is “not grokking” the game and “pops up” with a hint or two. Sort of like an experienced player watching over your shoulder.

]]> By: Joe http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-3366 Joe Sat, 16 May 2009 03:51:50 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-3366 Wanted to say thanks for all the great info on this blog. As gratitude I wanted to offer suggestions I think might help you. Seems like a lot of people have posted and I don't really have time to read all the posts so appologies if these ideas had already been sugested. Subset Mode - I think that is one option but what I would suggest is rather than only use 3 colors for the who game, you would just have colors start showing up as the game progressed. For instance, in the begining there are two colors on the board and two colors for your paint brush. After so many points a third color is "un-locked" (people love to un-lock stuff). This continues and as the player gets a higher and higher score more colors are introduced. Similar to increasing the speed on tetris the player is forced to master more colors later in the game if they really want to get that top score. Also, you could have bench marks. For instance, once you unlock the third color you can then "continue" from that location. Again similar to tetris when you could start on higher speeds rather than start at the begining if you really just want to get into the difficult part of that game first rather then take all the time to progress to those additional colors. What you could also do is even though you can jump start the game by "continuing", if you wanted the most points you would need to start from the beginning. If you were to start on level 1 and die in level 5 you would have more points at the end of level 5 then if you had jumped to level 2 and died on level 5. The cheat sheet is nice but its a distraction to have to bring it up each time. I would suggest modifying the color palate at the bottom to show something like Red Yellow Blue in a triangle... and secondary colors on a triangle orange Purple Green You would want to overlay those to get Red Orange Purple Yellow Blue Green Thats supposed to look more like a star of David (I think thats what you call it) What you have is very similar but its off center. Anyways, This is what you can do, I was looking at your color chart and you have the promary colors mixing correctly to the secondary colors but what I didn't understand is why when you mix a primary with a secondary you get the primary color. Why not have colors "subtract" and "add"? You mix Red and Blue you get Purple... they are additive. You mix Red with Purple and you get Blue... they are subtract-ive (I'm sure there's a better word for that) You can also entertain the idea of having colors not mix at all... brown is a nasty color, perhaps you could have a penalty for making brown? Or is that too tough? On the color "star" you could the color on the brush show up glowing with lines connecting the possibilities... the color of the line would be the resulting color of the mix. Disable that feature for a score bonus. You can also look into letting people select a character to play as. Characters could then have special "powers" they can use once it is charged up. The special power could be initiated with a special swipe on the screen, like a triangle or circle - just make the gesture different for different characters so that it adds another dimension. People love "powers" look at that break ball game people always play because it drops "power's" every time you break a block. Oh and I know people gave you a hard time about the 4.99 and you did lower it to 2.99 stating that you will not go any lower. Personally I think that you are still hurting yourself because the number one match 3 game out there is going for 2.99 and its easy to just subsitute... people will tend to gravitate to Bejeweled. Go for 0.99 because as a new company you gotta build a fan base before charging the same price has well established companies. Its up to you what to charge but I think that if you get a lot of people playing this game you will get more people playing your next game. I think you have a great game here and I think you can still turn it into a 1,000,000 downloads. Wanted to say thanks for all the great info on this blog. As gratitude I wanted to offer suggestions I think might help you.

Seems like a lot of people have posted and I don’t really have time to read all the posts so appologies if these ideas had already been sugested.

Subset Mode – I think that is one option but what I would suggest is rather than only use 3 colors for the who game, you would just have colors start showing up as the game progressed. For instance, in the begining there are two colors on the board and two colors for your paint brush. After so many points a third color is “un-locked” (people love to un-lock stuff). This continues and as the player gets a higher and higher score more colors are introduced. Similar to increasing the speed on tetris the player is forced to master more colors later in the game if they really want to get that top score.

Also, you could have bench marks. For instance, once you unlock the third color you can then “continue” from that location. Again similar to tetris when you could start on higher speeds rather than start at the begining if you really just want to get into the difficult part of that game first rather then take all the time to progress to those additional colors.

What you could also do is even though you can jump start the game by “continuing”, if you wanted the most points you would need to start from the beginning. If you were to start on level 1 and die in level 5 you would have more points at the end of level 5 then if you had jumped to level 2 and died on level 5.

The cheat sheet is nice but its a distraction to have to bring it up each time. I would suggest modifying the color palate at the bottom to show something like

Red

Yellow Blue

in a triangle… and secondary colors on a triangle

orange Purple

Green

You would want to overlay those to get

Red
Orange Purple

Yellow Blue

Green

Thats supposed to look more like a star of David (I think thats what you call it)

What you have is very similar but its off center. Anyways, This is what you can do, I was looking at your color chart and you have the promary colors mixing correctly to the secondary colors but what I didn’t understand is why when you mix a primary with a secondary you get the primary color. Why not have colors “subtract” and “add”?

You mix Red and Blue you get Purple… they are additive. You mix Red with Purple and you get Blue… they are subtract-ive (I’m sure there’s a better word for that)

You can also entertain the idea of having colors not mix at all… brown is a nasty color, perhaps you could have a penalty for making brown? Or is that too tough?

On the color “star” you could the color on the brush show up glowing with lines connecting the possibilities… the color of the line would be the resulting color of the mix. Disable that feature for a score bonus.

You can also look into letting people select a character to play as. Characters could then have special “powers” they can use once it is charged up. The special power could be initiated with a special swipe on the screen, like a triangle or circle – just make the gesture different for different characters so that it adds another dimension.

People love “powers” look at that break ball game people always play because it drops “power’s” every time you break a block.

Oh and I know people gave you a hard time about the 4.99 and you did lower it to 2.99 stating that you will not go any lower. Personally I think that you are still hurting yourself because the number one match 3 game out there is going for 2.99 and its easy to just subsitute… people will tend to gravitate to Bejeweled. Go for 0.99 because as a new company you gotta build a fan base before charging the same price has well established companies. Its up to you what to charge but I think that if you get a lot of people playing this game you will get more people playing your next game.

I think you have a great game here and I think you can still turn it into a 1,000,000 downloads.

]]> By: Streaming Colour Studios » Blog Archive » The Numbers Post: Part 2 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2587 Streaming Colour Studios » Blog Archive » The Numbers Post: Part 2 Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:12:48 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2587 [...] recently wrote an analysis of, what I called, “Dapple’s Identity Crisis“, in which I talk about some of the design lessons I’ve learned from [...] [...] recently wrote an analysis of, what I called, “Dapple’s Identity Crisis“, in which I talk about some of the design lessons I’ve learned from [...]

]]> By: Patrick http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2508 Patrick Tue, 21 Apr 2009 19:03:26 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2508 I haven't played the game (wanted to finish reading this post before going to check it out) but I still have to comment. I read a review of the game a while back, and it looked cool. But there wasn't a Lite version at the time and $5 is tough considering the crowded market (it's on sale now but not when I read the review - had it been $3 at review time I would have been more interested in it). I'm not implying the game isn't worth $5, but you know... it's the App Store. $5 can buy a lot of time killers. As I was reading this post I was thinking, what's so hard about matching colors? Then I got to the part about offering a subset of colors and said, WHAT?! I had ASSUMED you would start with a small palette and add colors as you progress. Instead, you're offering the ENTIRE palette from the start?! Without even playing the game I'm sure this is the number one problem. Like others have said, fix this and the game will be infinitely more enjoyable to new players. Let me learn the mechanics of the game before asking me to memorize a bunch of color combinations. Teach me a little at a time and let me build on what I've learned. Then as I'm progressing, I get a feeling of accomplishment beyond just a higher score. As for the "casual look/hardcore play" dynamic, why not offer a second skin as an option, and make the "hardcore" version look grown up, and make the cartoony version easier. Change the name at the same time to Dapple Deluxe or something that sounds grown up, and offer both game options at start up. Anyways, great posts and thanks for being so candid with your App Store experience. I haven’t played the game (wanted to finish reading this post before going to check it out) but I still have to comment.

I read a review of the game a while back, and it looked cool. But there wasn’t a Lite version at the time and $5 is tough considering the crowded market (it’s on sale now but not when I read the review – had it been $3 at review time I would have been more interested in it). I’m not implying the game isn’t worth $5, but you know… it’s the App Store. $5 can buy a lot of time killers.

As I was reading this post I was thinking, what’s so hard about matching colors? Then I got to the part about offering a subset of colors and said, WHAT?!

I had ASSUMED you would start with a small palette and add colors as you progress. Instead, you’re offering the ENTIRE palette from the start?! Without even playing the game I’m sure this is the number one problem. Like others have said, fix this and the game will be infinitely more enjoyable to new players.

Let me learn the mechanics of the game before asking me to memorize a bunch of color combinations. Teach me a little at a time and let me build on what I’ve learned. Then as I’m progressing, I get a feeling of accomplishment beyond just a higher score.

As for the “casual look/hardcore play” dynamic, why not offer a second skin as an option, and make the “hardcore” version look grown up, and make the cartoony version easier. Change the name at the same time to Dapple Deluxe or something that sounds grown up, and offer both game options at start up.

Anyways, great posts and thanks for being so candid with your App Store experience.

]]> By: Tony Bergelt http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2284 Tony Bergelt Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:13:11 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2284 I prefer colour blind mode because the differentiation in the shapes helps me understand how to blend the colours. Although that may because I am colour blind... I think the hints the different shapes give you would be helpful for non-colour blind users. I prefer colour blind mode because the differentiation in the shapes helps me understand how to blend the colours. Although that may because I am colour blind… I think the hints the different shapes give you would be helpful for non-colour blind users.

]]> By: Doug http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2277 Doug Sat, 11 Apr 2009 14:30:11 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2277 I have to agree with YYs last comment. I've found myself in this rut as well. I could perfect and refine my application over and over, but it's really not gonna affect my sales (except that re-releasing does give you that few days on the sort by date list and your sales will spike). I'm moving onto the next project and letting the current one do what it may. To RichC... in my case the Lite version made all the difference in the world. It moved into the top 100 entertainment free apps and brought along the pay version for the ride (#36 on free and #61 on pay). There seems to me a momentum thing there. Once you get in the top 50 (first 2 pages) you seem to kinda hover around there. I observed that making it into the top 20 in your category, puts you in the top 100 in the overall app list (so #20 in entertainment becomes like #99 or #100 in top 100). I am anxious to here Owen's results. I have to agree with YYs last comment. I’ve found myself in this rut as well. I could perfect and refine my application over and over, but it’s really not gonna affect my sales (except that re-releasing does give you that few days on the sort by date list and your sales will spike). I’m moving onto the next project and letting the current one do what it may.

To RichC… in my case the Lite version made all the difference in the world. It moved into the top 100 entertainment free apps and brought along the pay version for the ride (#36 on free and #61 on pay). There seems to me a momentum thing there. Once you get in the top 50 (first 2 pages) you seem to kinda hover around there. I observed that making it into the top 20 in your category, puts you in the top 100 in the overall app list (so #20 in entertainment becomes like #99 or #100 in top 100).

I am anxious to here Owen’s results.

]]> By: DadGuy http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2275 DadGuy Sat, 11 Apr 2009 13:05:12 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2275 Hey Owen. I don't have the full version, but I do have the lite version. It's an interesting premise you have going. I think you are correct, it is partly a learning curve issue. As others have mentioned, you could build that more into the game some. I like the idea of having less colors to start with. You could also populate the board a bit more friendly at lvl 1 than later on, it seems like about 1/3 to 1/2 of the board doesn't change much in any given game. (Maybe I'm just that bad.... =) ) Certain combinations of paint splotches on the board are pretty much immovable from the start due to the adjoining squares. One thing that wasn't immediately intuitive to me was the paintbrush. I assumed I could change the color of paint that was on it rather than changing the paint on the board with the pre-filled paintbrush. Have you tried allowing the user to change the paint color on the brush? First thing that comes to mind here would be having a rotating color choice of 3 colors on the bottom. You could have this rotate each turn or as the user uses one color randomly fill it in with another. It might be worth exploring. Right now as a player I don't feel like I have much control of the game, I'm simply walking through a set of possibilities that narrows too quickly over the course of a game. Have you thought of using the accelerometer to let things fall "down" regardless of which way the device is turned? That could add an interesting strategic aspect to the gameplay. I was also confused about the game over conditions. I am assuming that it is game over once I get a color that I cannot use directly to get a match? Maybe I missed the help on that but I didn't see that explained anywhere. If this is the case you might consider having the colors randomize in a visually appealing way instead of a too-quick game over. Sometimes I felt like I was just getting the hang of things and got interrupted by the end of the game. It definitely feels a bit "off" to me from a user standpoint. I think your theme is good, if a little misleading. it gives the wrong impression of what you can and can't do. Some definite potential there and what you have isn't bad. Looking forward to what you do with this going forward! Hey Owen.
I don’t have the full version, but I do have the lite version. It’s an interesting premise you have going. I think you are correct, it is partly a learning curve issue. As others have mentioned, you could build that more into the game some. I like the idea of having less colors to start with. You could also populate the board a bit more friendly at lvl 1 than later on, it seems like about 1/3 to 1/2 of the board doesn’t change much in any given game. (Maybe I’m just that bad…. =) ) Certain combinations of paint splotches on the board are pretty much immovable from the start due to the adjoining squares.

One thing that wasn’t immediately intuitive to me was the paintbrush. I assumed I could change the color of paint that was on it rather than changing the paint on the board with the pre-filled paintbrush. Have you tried allowing the user to change the paint color on the brush? First thing that comes to mind here would be having a rotating color choice of 3 colors on the bottom. You could have this rotate each turn or as the user uses one color randomly fill it in with another. It might be worth exploring. Right now as a player I don’t feel like I have much control of the game, I’m simply walking through a set of possibilities that narrows too quickly over the course of a game.

Have you thought of using the accelerometer to let things fall “down” regardless of which way the device is turned? That could add an interesting strategic aspect to the gameplay.

I was also confused about the game over conditions. I am assuming that it is game over once I get a color that I cannot use directly to get a match? Maybe I missed the help on that but I didn’t see that explained anywhere. If this is the case you might consider having the colors randomize in a visually appealing way instead of a too-quick game over. Sometimes I felt like I was just getting the hang of things and got interrupted by the end of the game.

It definitely feels a bit “off” to me from a user standpoint. I think your theme is good, if a little misleading. it gives the wrong impression of what you can and can’t do. Some definite potential there and what you have isn’t bad.

Looking forward to what you do with this going forward!

]]> By: Bill DeVoe http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2168 Bill DeVoe Wed, 08 Apr 2009 21:41:02 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2168 Hi Owen. Thanks for writing this up. It's probably one of the major hurdles that any game developer faces (if they're not just making a clone of an existing archetype). I think that your commenters have hit the nail on the head - make the first several levels a very small subset of the game so they can get familiar with things. If you change the brush color, don't for the first bit. Let the user get comfortable with what they have. Introduce new concepts slowly. Bejeweled did this well - the basic flow was established and then they introduced new concepts. Chuzzle did the same thing - it introduced Lock chuzzles around level 10 that prevented you from being able to move some pieces. Players became more immersed in the game and new rules could throw them for a loop, but they were introduced slowly. Slow game play introduction is, imo, the way to go - tutorials, especially if they're text screens, are not helpful. Two games that I've played - iMob and iMafia - both have PAGES of help text. All of which is out-of-date and complicated. I have yet to determine the best way to manage this for the game I'm writing, but I have an idea that I think will work. This is one of those things that comes with experience and understanding your user base. I think that your next update to Dapple can integrate these theories into something quite usable. And possibly convert more of those trials into purchases. Good luck! Hi Owen. Thanks for writing this up. It’s probably one of the major hurdles that any game developer faces (if they’re not just making a clone of an existing archetype). I think that your commenters have hit the nail on the head – make the first several levels a very small subset of the game so they can get familiar with things. If you change the brush color, don’t for the first bit. Let the user get comfortable with what they have. Introduce new concepts slowly. Bejeweled did this well – the basic flow was established and then they introduced new concepts. Chuzzle did the same thing – it introduced Lock chuzzles around level 10 that prevented you from being able to move some pieces. Players became more immersed in the game and new rules could throw them for a loop, but they were introduced slowly.
Slow game play introduction is, imo, the way to go – tutorials, especially if they’re text screens, are not helpful. Two games that I’ve played – iMob and iMafia – both have PAGES of help text. All of which is out-of-date and complicated. I have yet to determine the best way to manage this for the game I’m writing, but I have an idea that I think will work.
This is one of those things that comes with experience and understanding your user base. I think that your next update to Dapple can integrate these theories into something quite usable. And possibly convert more of those trials into purchases.
Good luck!

]]> By: Rich C http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/04/07/dapples-identity-crisis/comment-page-1/#comment-2156 Rich C Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:55:21 +0000 http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/?p=546#comment-2156 Being a fellow iPhone developer I was wondering how your lite version was working out for sales and if you were seeing any better traction. Judging from your post, not as much as you were hoping for. Still any update on your sales would be interesting to the me and probably the other iPhone developers looking for ways to increase app sales. Just an idea on your game. Could you maybe change the piece sizes and limit the color selection at the entry level and then as the user progresses the pieces grow smaller and you add additional colors. Some way for users to win quickly... kind of like a training mode and bring them up the learning curve before they have to start solving more complex puzzles. Looking at just the screen shots the game looks complicated, maybe with larger pieces it might look less complex.... Progress could be dictated by the amount of time it takes the user to solve the puzzle. The less time to solve means the user is getting better and learning the game, the more complex the game gets. If the user takes a longer time, the user might stay at the same level until they start to solve puzzles under a certain amount of time. Maybe this is way too complex! ;-)) Thanks for sharing your thoughts and data. Being a fellow iPhone developer I was wondering how your lite version was working out for sales and if you were seeing any better traction. Judging from your post, not as much as you were hoping for. Still any update on your sales would be interesting to the me and probably the other iPhone developers looking for ways to increase app sales.

Just an idea on your game. Could you maybe change the piece sizes and limit the color selection at the entry level and then as the user progresses the pieces grow smaller and you add additional colors. Some way for users to win quickly… kind of like a training mode and bring them up the learning curve before they have to start solving more complex puzzles.

Looking at just the screen shots the game looks complicated, maybe with larger pieces it might look less complex…. Progress could be dictated by the amount of time it takes the user to solve the puzzle. The less time to solve means the user is getting better and learning the game, the more complex the game gets. If the user takes a longer time, the user might stay at the same level until they start to solve puzzles under a certain amount of time. Maybe this is way too complex! ;-) )

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and data.

]]>