Despite the negative comments, I like this. Not for myself, could not stand it myself, but for some special needs kids, this kind of pattern matching would be ideal. I can think of several who would just sit and do this, then feel proud and accomplished at the end.
Where to start on this, erm, submission. Firstly "Girls all like dolls" taken from the description. Stereotypical much? Secondly, the dress-up game itself. The shoes do not match the tops, and if you wear any clothes whatsoever, the accessories do not show up. Um, something's very wrong, in both your attitudes, and your game design.
Nothing really that others have not said before: For a program that is based off of hand-drawings, it expects pixel perfect and angle perfect precision akin to what you would expect from a CAD program. This is why for the majority of people, it simply is not fun.
Addendum: Its not so much an issue on the first four levels, admittedly. However, by level five, when the size of everything except your piece, shrinks, this corner collision issue does become a great problem. You have to constantly remind yourself that everything is really square, and if the invisible part of your piece collides with the invisible part of a saw, you will die. If you can fix this one issue, this is a great game.
Collision detection between your piece and the obstacles is too strong on the corners. I suspect you are using a square bounding box for collision detection, based on this. Perhaps a circular box would be better?
I was unable to figure out how to get any bastion to fire. Do they actually fire? Or is their purpose just to be hit by the rocks, as a VERY expensive mine? Either way, its not an intuitive interface at all
Your number is to be four different numbers from 1-9. Why then, does even the input box, only display three numbers, with the fourth disappearing from view? If I have said it once, I have said it a thousand times, design your game before you start to code.
Its an atlas, not a game. Also, once you have zoomed in on a continent there's not actually a way to zoom back out. It does not belong on Kong as it is not a game, but if you work a lot harder at it, you may have a concept worth pitching to schools - with more and higher resolution images.
Clueless is a COMMERCIAL game that only launched to the public on the 21st of March. $7.99 a copy (stolen somewhat for Kong) http://www.bigfishgames.com/download-games/5049/clueless/index.html
This takes me back. Played Qbert on tape when it first came out. You've made a clone, but in your own style. I don't believe I have seen another clone of this wondrous oldie. Well done :)
Um, well, er, well, this was...interesting. I think I wound up with five copies of Jesus in play at the end there, and all I can really say is, more bugs than game, it shows promise in concept, but needs a rewrite. Desperately.
I almost agree with dee4life. The crates are badly placed. I managed it, but only after protracted wiggling back and forth. Otherwise, an interesting concept.
A very nice concept. There is a collision detection flaw in the blades, whereby the sharp edge does not cut you, the back of the blade does. If you could fix that, it is very well put together.
shredder, I am pretty sure that most people here are familiar with the design process before you create a game, and especially before you create a UI. Regardless of whether the individuals code in flash, C, VB, php or whatever, the bit that comes before the coding even starts, is key to the success of the program. Luckylou here, has clearly skipped that phase as many amateurs do, and dived into coding with no thought, planning, or indeed plan whatsoever. Thus the game gets bad reviews, as it should.
Is this the 'week of theft' or something, please? If you are going to try and pass a game off as your own, why pick one from a well-known studio? For that matter, why steal at all?