There was an introduction. There were 2 links to the deck description and the rules of the game. Was there something you didn't understand in the animation of the game? Also did you click the rules and deck description and read about wild cards? The rules say Black, Blob and Question mark are wilds, but to get credit for the match, you must make the cards match. If something was unclear, let me know, and I'll correct it. Was the rules description at fault, or couldn't you tell what was going on in the animation? This helps me to know what's wrong so I can correct it. I want a successful game. Help me. You might like it better if you understand it, and I want to help people understand it. If you understand that drawing cards is bad, then the graphics are (I think) self explanatory. There are 4 animation sets, you or CPU discards, by placing card in center and goes back empty handed for a double topper, the standard good play. The "great" play of one playing a triple topper where you discard, then the computer draws two, (or computer discards and you or other CPU draws 2). A single topper when you or CPU discard then immediately draw 1. Finally there is a null play where an empty hand draws 1 card. I tried to make some user friendly graphics and features, like being able to see the previous card for 3 seconds, so you have another indicator of whether the CPU has a single, double, triple, or no topper. I've recently ugraded from Java games. I was told by a certain other Flashcaster that if I kept the game true to the rules and include some slightly better animation than the Java version (like a green table and some animation that more clearly shows the flow of the game, They said my game is just a card game, not the game equivalent of War and Peace. Graphics only have to be clear enough to describe the action) But they said if I did those things and keep the rules, i have a 95% chance of making at least $1000 on their websites. I asked if they wanted an exclusive, and they said they said only if I made more money by making it an exclusive to them. If it meant shopping it to other Flashcaster, then so be it. By the way, they are currently promoting their own games, and gave me permission to open it up to other Flashcasters. They will review it in 1-2 weeks and if they like it, will give me the code to work with their Raffle and Ad system (Gives you a hint of who I'm talking about.) Maybe my game is more at home at their culture of games at this other company than Newgrounds. Maybe my description isn't clear. If you've got some suggestions as to how to make the directions clearer, email me on the link to Brian Ciesicki on the deck info page.

By the way a 2 Star game is in the pretty good for a game that is higher on concept than presentation, a card game, only one of which is a 4 star game, and not a traditional card game (there's bound to be blowback by playing card purists for not using "regular" cards), and considering you can vote anywhere from zero to 5 stars. DJ Teddy gave it a right down the middle grade. Maybe "a 3d card game" can be misinterpreted as 3d-graphics, and not a new 3d-card style. DJ Teddy, just wondering what you and others think about this. One suggestion is to allow 2 or 3 word phrase keywords. Maybe a tag of "non-standard cards" would attract more of the right people than 3d and cards as 2 separate keywords.