My favorite 2048 clone by far is https://ashervollmer.github.io/2048/128.html, which is just a 3x3 2048 that only spawns 2. I like it because it is possible to achieve total victory, a perfect game fills the board with a a final score of 7172.
Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
61–70 of 233 posts
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#62Thank you for the entertainment 2048 gave me years ago, hope your new version has the reach you want!
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#632048 is fantastic, and going full time on your project is a huge milestone. Congrats!
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#64There are a lot of comments mentioning Threes! and holding it up as superior. I play a lot of games, and I greatly prefer Threes myself -- but I also remember very well when 2048 came out; I was in college, and 75% or more of my dorm had no interest in Threes and preferred playing and remixing 2048. Threes is very stressful and intense, while 2048 goes straight for your brain's pleasure centers, like many other mobil…
There is nothing wrong with pointing out the origins of ideas and concepts, especially on a site like Hacker News. 2048 was much more popular than Threes, often to the point where many people are unaware of Threes at all, so I think it’s important in these kinds of forums to make sure people know where the game idea came from, and that the originators get credit.
This manifestation of the threes trope below everything 2048 related reminds me of a comment I recently read below a Stephen Wolfram related post:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41406645
All: please don't repeat the usual Wolfram trope. (If you don't know what I mean by that, a decade's worth of explanation can be found via https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que....) The issue is not that it's wrong, it's that it's extremely repetitive and we want fresh discussion on HN, preferably about the specific content of an article.
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#65I've opened the game without reading the post. When I've hovered over the crown and saw the prime stuff I thought it was some kinda' joke or parody. Turns out it isn't. Which I think is even funnier in some meta/state-of-the-things-today way. As there's nothing left but laugh at the absurdity of our reality.
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#66I made a version with llamas at some point, as a valentine's card. (Source code is yours, I just swapped the images!)
# of llamas = log2(original number)
https://people.csail.mit.edu/ebakke/twothousandandfortyppaca...
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#6720k run on the first try, enough for next 10 years https://cdn.jpg.wtf/futurico/8d/36/1729783571-8d36e171f9deb9...
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#68This feels so much snappier than the original. I don't know if I'd use the powerups, because usually I play 2048 mindlessly and when I don't really want to think too much, but I might find myself pleasantly surprised in the future.
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#69You know how the distribution of 2-value vs 4-value for new tiles is a weighted random function? And sometimes you get an unlikely 4 that really screw you over? Have you thought about adding a mode which always creates the worst option of the 2? You could call it “God does play dice with the universe. They're loaded and he hates you.”
Like HATETRIS: https://qntm.org/files/hatetris/hatetris.html
Re: Show HN: 2048 turned 10 this year, I built an updated version to celebrate
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
An opinion was stated. An opinion that will no doubt be agreed with by many, me for one. But absolutely no claim was made that it is correct for all people. Or even most people.
To answer your sort-of question:
> Ok? But lots of people do want that “middle ground” game…
Those lots of people can play threes, or other games that exist in such a middle ground.
Not every game needs to support every play style, nor does every person need to like every game.
Or to be facetious and answer you in your own style:
> Ok? But lots of people do want that “middle ground” game…
OK? But lots of people don't want the “middle ground” game, especially people who like more complex games on desktop/console and only simpler time-fillers on mobile.
Or even more so:
> Ok? But lots of people do want that “middle ground” game…
Yes… and?