Play game
Destroy Those Toys Co.'s itch.io pageResults
| Criteria | Rank | Score* | Raw Score |
| How well does the game fit the themes? | #12 | 2.818 | 2.818 |
| Visuals | #12 | 2.727 | 2.727 |
| How do you rate the game overall (you can consider fun, dev time, etc.)? | #13 | 2.545 | 2.545 |
| Audio | #13 | 2.455 | 2.455 |
| Gameplay | #16 | 2.273 | 2.273 |
Ranked from 11 ratings. Score is adjusted from raw score by the median number of ratings per game in the jam.
How long was your dev time?
3 hours approx.
Leave a comment
Log in with itch.io to leave a comment.


Comments
It was alright; nice for the time limit, but not personally my thing. I struggled with the scrolling speed, so accessibility settings on that front would have been appreciated, but I know you can't do everything in three hours. If you ever make edits to this outside of the jam, I will definitely give it another look!
The gameplay confused me for a second but I can get behind this, you should have added a punishment for destroying the wrong toy.
I think it fits the theme pretty well, since I just started hammering down the red button & getting a score of 301 with that tactic.
If it was intended to create a repetitive labour-environment, you did great. But the score-system & audio (which you used really good) are not enough for me to feel rewarded for such a task.. I feel this could be a good starting-point for a game. Like a Level 1. I see 2 ways where this game could be going from there:
It could become a reaction-based game, for which you would need to implement more complex tasks & maybe work on a better reward-system. Also you would need to shorten the time-limit since focusing that long is hard.
Or it could become a clicker, in which case you would need to implement stuff that you can buy for points... which than auto-generates more points, for which you can buy new stuff and so on.
not a fan :/
its too repetitive and there doesn't seem to be a point to anything you do - and i don't get what it has to do with the theme. its an unique idea, though