Kwing's game Reviews on Newgrounds

[Sarah]

I wasn't able to unlock the phone without a hint, but given that this is relatively short I think it works well. The art is good, the music is good, and the twist is compelling. I could ask for a longer game or more puzzles but for 15 hours I think this is about as much as one could ask for.

[Besieged]

It's slow, but so were a lot of other games (especially tower defense games) of this era. Something I was pleasantly surprised by was the difficulty. At one point I was trying to survive 5 minutes and I had to sell several towers to afford an instant heal so I could tank the last unit which had slipped past my defenses. I think when a strategy game can force nonlinear decisions instead of just slowly optimizing toward maximum efficiency it's doing something right.

Something that DID seem too easy and simple is that building towers optimally around a ballista tower and splitting firepower evenly between all of the paths was something that seemed to inevitably lead to victory, and there wasn't too much to think about once you figured that part out in the first two levels. What ultimately caused me to quit the game wasn't losing, but accidentally selling an important tower midway through level 5 despite otherwise doing well. The slow pace of the game made salvaging that attempt (or restarting) both very painful to consider.

To this point, there were a lot of quality of life improvements that could have made this more enjoyable. For some of the levels where you start with a lot of money, the initial grace period before the first wave just isn't long enough because there are so many towers to place. There should be a confirm option before selling towers. Some way to skip the grace period and bring on the next wave sooner, or to make the gameplay run faster, would have also been nice. Trying to squeeze as many towers as possible into the range of the ballista tower was annoying without a grid system; having placements be tile-based would have made things feel way better. These are all more or less things that Gemcraft did (which was released literally a week after this game.)

[Mouse Avoider 2]

Simple but effective. There's something to appreciate about a game that has a few minutes worth of gameplay and doesn't try to pad it out with way too much content. Having every level feature at least some kind of animation is nice and makes the game feel a bit more alive. The difficulty curve is mostly good, but the second to last level is incredibly frustrating and mostly feels like luck, as there's no effective way to bait the chasing circle away from the finish and it ultimately is a mad dash to the finish.

Some variety with the graphics or music might have been nice, but for a game this short it's not too big of an issue.

[Mouse 1.0]

I was curious to find some of the most played mouse maze games and I have to say that 20 years later, this extremely dated game genre still holds up if it's done correctly.

I really enjoyed the different backgrounds and themes, and the difficult ramps up to a point that's difficult but never absurd, mostly because the levels aren't long enough to make failure too excruciating.

The most frustrating part of this has to be how losing is handled; going to a losing screen and back to the game takes just a few more seconds than it should, having the music restart every time becomes annoying, and I really dislike that some of the animation-dependent levels restart every time, making it frustrating for any level where you have to wait. A last note would be that some of the animations start really suddenly and the jerky motions are difficult in a way that rewards memorization more than dexterity. For many of these I felt more like I just had to fail the necessary number of times to become familiar with the animation, rather than relying on actual skill.

Still, this game is fun in 2025 and it's no surprise it was as successful as it was when it came out.

[Untitled Cat Interactivity]

Having to click through the dialogue on each repeat gets VERY old. I've tried all of the options, and while it sounds like petting the cat could change some invisible variables that make the other options lead to a better ending, having to click through the entire game every time discourages the player from trying every combination. (I tried petting and then going to sleep because the cat was tired and still got the same ending you get if you sleep immediately.)

The brevity of the game also makes the game feel a bit pointless. On one hand it's nice not having as much to click through, but on the other you don't get enough interactivity or story to become more invested. In practice it plays closer to one of the old "choose your animation" games than a true visual novel.

Beyond the gameplay, the art is cute but simple, and the UI looks decently clean.

Given that you still have time to tweak this, I'd highly recommend adding some kind of skip feature that you unlock by clicking through that same dialogue at least once. I'd be happy to help with that if you'd like.

sonicgilberth00 responds:

it was my first time doing interactive story with endings, whats the point.

thanks

i'm fine, but thanks as well

[Don't Shit Your Pants]

I played this back when it came out and thought it was hilarious and stupid at the time. Coming back 15 years later this thing holds up really well. The different endings/achievements are interesting enough to warrant some exploration, but there's a manageable level of content to the point where you aren't overwhelmed by it. Being able to commit suicide or shit before the game even starts are hilarious options. This game succeeds in everything it tries to do.

[Project Ruffy]

I had no idea you were still working on this, but coming back to it now, it looks pretty good! The score system and presence of an actual objective make this pretty enjoyable. I really like the variety of hazards in the game as well.

Some things of note:
- Explaining the controls in the game would probably work better than clicking through a text explanation of all of it. Explain a mechanic, then force the player to demonstrate understanding of that mechanic to pass an obstacle and move on. I'm pretty sure you're using FeindishDemon's platform engine which is ironic as his tutorial actually begins this way.
- In terms of player experience, the zoomed in camera and slow movement speed make the whole game feel a little sluggish. Being able to run through the level faster would have definitely made for a more enjoyable experience.
- The game doesn't seem to distinguish between pressing a button and holding it. This means you can double jump by holding the jump button instead of tapping it twice, and you have to hold the D button rather than pressing repeatedly to execute an attack combo. From a player feedback perspective, it feels a bit better if you can make each button press correlate with a discrete action rather than holding.
- There's nothing to attack. Enemy AI is hard to code but having some destructible walls would be a nice easy way to utilize the work you've already done in coding and animating the attacks.
- Hazards drain health gradually instead of taking a one-time chunk of health from the player and knocking them back with some invincibility frames. A single instance of damage with a knockback and damage animation/sound gives better player feedback and makes it clearer when they've messed up.
- Hitboxes need fixing. It looks like the actual sprite of the buzzsaws is the hitbox itself, which means that you can hit invisible corners on the buzzsaw (the part between the circle and corners here -> [O]) and take damage from it. Creating invisible hitbox sprites inside your Movie Clip to better represent what needs to collide will help this feel more fair and natural.
- Coins are placed in pretty arbitrary positions; collecting them doesn't add much to the game so much as it just slows you down. I would recommend putting some behind optional hazards so that there's a risk/reward component to your score. Similarly, some kind of timer might raise the skill ceiling of the game and improve replay value.
- Lack of background and texture for the platforms make this look a lot less polished than it is. A simple parallax background and even just some chicken scratches and bevel filter on the platforms would make the game look like a complete project.

If you're open to it, I'd be happy to help you fix most of this stuff. I know I've written a lot here, but with the right guidance it shouldn't take more than a week to fix them.

MebroukTheCat responds:

Well, to be honest... Most of the programming codes were copied from a YouTube video uploaded by jemaster800:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AG_BUSfDc4

It's like I drew the Mona Lisa with a crayon and here's why:

The advantage: It can work.

The disadvantage: It's not perfect.

[Sift Renegade]

It's okay.

The animation looks great, but the gameplay is overall lacking. The shootouts, driving, and side-scrolling action all control well, but each is missing something in terms of balance and difficulty. It's easy to stun lock enemies and to place the cursor exactly where you need it for the cover shooter parts. The motorcycle sequences are the only parts that are difficult, and that's mostly due to lack of checkpoints and spastic controls.

The writing and voice acting are obvious weak points.

[Sift With Shorty]

Different isn't always bad but I think there's definitely something missing here. Virtually every level is the same, with enemies only really having two different heights at which they need to be shot, except for the lats level where hitting the vehicle itself is sufficient and you can just find a rhythm of how fast to fire while holding the up key. Reloading with the space and mouse is extremely awkward but could have been fine if the controls were WASD instead of the arrow keys. An okay concept but it needs serious QoL improvements.

[Vinnie's Shooting Yard]

Good presentation between the graphics, animation, and sound design, but a bit lacking in content. It only took a few tries for me to score perfectly, and a big part of that is the camera panning over to suggest where the targets will spawn. A fixed camera might look a bit less polished but would lead to a better player experience. Some better difficulty settings (such as more target positions, smaller targets, and smaller reaction times) would also be useful, and some moving targets would make this a bit more interesting since it would require timing instead of just reacting as quickly as possible.