How long is this supposed to load?
I've been sitting here for about 7 minutes getting slapped in the face by the Gimme5games.com logo.
If the physics are as good as you say they are I can understand that :)
Is there an estimated time of completion or do I have to give the hand some skin?
That's a problem on your end, I'm afraid, the appearance of the gimme5 logo means that loading is complete, and if it stays there, your flash player has frozen. Try updating your flash player, and if that still doesn't work, either download the game to your desktop, or play it in a different browser.
....
I'm sorry but I don't see the point in this game, at all!!!
It's kinda boring and the idea is stupid....
But thats just my opinion so keep trying!!!
You're kinda outspoken, so I can't really take what you say onboard, but thanks for the review.
Not particularly my type of game but still good
Ok, a little bit of my two cents for other reviewers who claim this is just like Tower of Goo. I just got finished playing Tower of Goo and there are several differences:
1. It definitely wasn't made in flash as the author of this game has stated. This means that even if the concept was stolen (which I don't think it was) he would still have to write completely new code making this still HIS game.
2. The interface is difference. In Tower of Goo you click and drag to make triangles. Also the structure can fall and you can continue building. In this game however, you have to manually create the triangles and one fall and its game over. While this may not seem like a big change, it is.
There are other differences, but enough of that. Personally I didn't find the game too terribly fun. I mean, I can definitely appreciate the physics behind it but I just didn't find it as something I could play for too long. After reading a couple reviews, I noticed someone saying something about a mission mode and stuff like that. I think that would add some goal to the game other than just make it as high as you can. That might increase interest and keep people playing.
Even if I didn't particularly like this game, I do see the talent you have in making physics-based games and would highly recommend you continue learning about and making more games. And don't just stick with flash games, try your hand at some 3D with other languages and graphic APIs. I really think you'll do well in them.
Nice review (:
Mission or goal based gameplay is likely for the sequel.
I do plan on moving to C based games (well C++ actually, I can't live without classes) at some point, but at the moment, flash is more practical and profitable for me.
"Not bad, but in need of improvement"
I cant see the incredible parallels between this and tower of goo people keep talking about. Small fundamental differences make a huge difference on the end product. They are both tower builders, but have a lot of different functionality.
My issue is the "flex" or "stretch" in the girders. I realize making them all stiffer will require more number crunching and thusly CPU power, but as is its just lacking - no material used in construction anywhere has either a coefficient of expansion or a k constant anywhere near as high as whats seen here.
If all the materials had the same "stretch" per unit of length, creating a tower with more advanced nodes would add strength, just like bracing does. Making more diagonal braces would distribute the given force and distribute it across mode points, reducing the overall flex of the tower. As it is, the same force is increased - building a simple triangle acts just as strong as one thats been bolstered in 5 different directions.
Also, the comment of "girders on the pylons are 5 times stronger" - that also should never happen. Steel beams attached to the ground are no stronger than those in the air. Why have them be special? And more importantly, as something like that is critical to performance - why not mention that somewhere in the intro or rules?
Again, it is a good effort as something to goof around with for a few minutes, but the number crunching behind the system is pretty crude - household materials like popsicle sticks or drinking straws would offer better structural performance to the "girders" used here.
Um, did you not read the text you clicked to play? It reads "PLAY THIS GAME!". Game. It's not supposed to be realistic, coefficients of expansion and k constants were not even considered - in fact, the pylons aren't real. Only the bolts are! The pylons stretch because they're just a representation of the theoretical spring that holds the bolts together!
Why make the pylons connected the bottom five times stronger? Because that makes it more fun and allows for further expansion, jackass.
Now you tell me, honestly, would you really like to see a perfectly accurate building simulation built in flash, which, due to the interpretive nature of the flash player and the fact that graphics and calculations are both shared by the cpu, would run at about five frames per second once you have more than three pylons on the screen, or would you like to play a game?
By all means, though, go and play with popsticks and drinking straws if that's what you prefer.
Tower of Goo rip-off
Sorry, it's a rip-off of the independent game 'Tower of Goo'...
Nothing new...
Please refer to the FAQ and feel free to
A) use your brain
B) not review my submissions
C) don't apologise for being an idiot. I understand. It's how you are.