21–30 of 193 posts
If you've never seen this kind of thing before, the canonical PC example is The Powder Toy, which is so amazing I wish there a 3D Minecraft-like version. But it's really CPU-heavy even in 2d.
Drop oil on lava. The effect is worth it.
Is it really a "game" if there's no goal or "win" condition? Or is it a "webtoy" or "simulation" (or... "sandbox". Think it's a sandbox).
The article also discussed some weird things that existed outside of the definition that the article arrived at, such as ClickerHeros and similar "grinding" "games".
(I wish I could find a link to it. Perhaps someone else here remembers and can find it…)
Make a lake of oil, set it aflame and then pour water on it. A small amount of water causes the burning oil to flare and spread. A large amount of water extinguishes the fire. Very cool!
erase the thingy to the right, and the planets on the left grow upwards again.
Drop oil on lava. The effect is worth it.
This feels wayyy smoother than I remember this game being.
Is it really a "game" if there's no goal or "win" condition? Or is it a "webtoy" or "simulation" (or... "sandbox". Think it's a sandbox).
It is unfortunate that you're downvoted. At one point, there was an article on HN discussing games, including what made a "game" a "game" — and one of the article's requirements was that there must exist some risk of losing. Otherwise, you're just messing around or following predefined steps towards an end, but there is no challenge. Not that that can't entertain , but plenty of things entertain that aren't games. (E…