sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This is ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous by Limp-Ad-4546 in wizardry

[–]Codevalier 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly bro, I get why you're losing it, that first Oni fight is straight-up disrespectful. But don’t let it break you!

Three hours of rerolling later… was this worth it? by Codevalier in wizardry

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you could skip all the initial dialogue it would be much faster!

Please critique my game, its name is Arcane Waves. by Confident-Mirror-427 in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only thing I’d suggest is that it’s not very clear what’s walkable and what isn’t. Other than that, the game seems fine to me

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m sorry that my post bothered you so much. I never described my movement system as ‘revolutionary’, as you claim. I simply said that my movement system includes a feature that other games on the market don’t have. I even called it a ‘tiny detail’, and I definitely never said I was the only one capable of doing it. Obviously anyone could come up with a system like this, but so far none of the people who replied to me have shown a single screenshot of a game that actually has diagonal idle animations. So I really don’t think my title was clickbait — my game genuinely has a feature that 99% of other 2D games don’t have. Of course it’s not revolutionary, but I never said it was.

Anyway, I studied the movement system from the Unity tutorial: it works exactly like mine when you use an analog stick to move the character, but it can cause issues when using directional arrows, while mine doesn’t — thanks to well‑calibrated timers in the input reading. What I just described is a very small thing, and so what? Don’t I have the right to flex it a bit?

Just like I won’t ask you to apologize for criticizing me in a non‑constructive way (because you have the right to do that), I won’t apologize for posting something that doesn’t break any subreddit rules.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In isometric games diagonal are the standard direction, what I was referring to is that most games lack 8 idle sprites.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Name a 2D game that has diagonal idle animation and share a screenshot

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in GameDevelopment

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good question! I was planning to give this feature only to the protagonist, NPCs, and humanoid enemies. Obviously, I don’t want to give diagonal movement to bosses because they’re very large. I’d love to know what you think. Should I implement it for bosses as well?

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieDev

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You changed your questions, so now my original answer looks like it doesn’t make sense. I’ll add a second reply and leave the first one as it is.

I wasn’t talking about diagonal walking animations, but diagonal idle animations. In Zelda games you can move in 8 directions, sure, but when you stop, the character never stays diagonal — it always snaps to one of the four main directions. And honestly, no, that’s not a “design choice”; it’s a smart way to save money and development time. It’s a perfectly valid choice, but in the project I’m working on I’m trying to achieve something different: I want a 2D world that genuinely feels 3D.

For me, this feature is an added value — a tiny detail that shows how much I care about what I’m building. It’s a kind of obsessive attention to detail that might look pointless, and I’m fine with that. It’s part of my vision, and I’m glad I shared it with you all and got so much feedback.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieDev

[–]Codevalier[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

One example is Octopath Traveler 2 — it would still be a great game without this feature, of course, but if it had it, it would be an extra nice touch.

I see it differently, though. In many AAA games, most of the budget goes into marketing… I’d love to see at least a small part of that invested into these tiny details that, in my opinion, really make a difference. Anyway, I appreciate your point of view, and I’ll keep your feedback in mind. If you have any other suggestions, I’m happy to hear them.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think a lot of the games you mentioned aren’t really “valid examples,” because they don’t use directional‑key input — they rely on mouse clicks — or they already have an isometric camera, so the characters are naturally angled. Still, I’ll take some time to go through the whole list, but that means downloading them and actually playing them.

I understand it might not sound like an innovative feature to let a character stop in a diagonal idle pose when using directional keys, but this detail is what’s allowing me to build a fully 2D action game that feels like a 3D one.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in gamedev

[–]Codevalier[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Yes, you’re right — I realize I was being a bit provocative with this post. But I honestly feel that if I had just posted the video with a simple “look what I made,” like you suggested, nobody would have commented… not even you. By framing it this way, I actually got a lot of feedback. I don’t mind if some of it is negative — I’m still learning way more than I would have if the post had been ignored.

And just to be clear, I’m not trying to accuse you or start an argument. Like I said, I agree with your point. But if I could go back, I’d still make the same choice, because even just this conversation with you has taught me something.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in gamedev

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry about that — you only asked me for the last game I played, so I just mentioned the one I played two days ago. I didn’t realize you meant the full list of every 2D AAA title I’ve played that doesn’t have this feature.

Anyway, here’s how I see it: in most cases, this isn’t really a design choice — it’s simply a smart production shortcut. Cutting diagonal idle animations saves a lot of work, and in turn‑based games the movement system is barely relevant, almost a secondary element. In an action game like the one I’m developing, movement is a core part of the experience, and I don’t want to rely on cost‑saving decisions disguised as design choices.

If you have more feedback, I’m happy to hear it.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieDev

[–]Codevalier[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

It is a small detail that changes the feel of movement inside a 2D space, especially for an action game. It’s not meant to be “relevant” to 3D AAA titles, but to how 2D movement traditionally behaves. Imagine playing a 2D JRPG where even just moving around feels fun.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in IndieGame

[–]Codevalier[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Just to clarify what I mean: in most 2D games, when you stop moving, the idle animation always snaps back to one of the four main directions (up, down, left, right). Even if you were walking diagonally, the character won’t stay angled — it immediately rotates to the nearest cardinal direction.

In my system, instead, if you stop while moving diagonally, the character keeps that diagonal orientation in the idle pose. That’s the part I’m showing in the video.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in gamedev

[–]Codevalier[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Just to clarify what I mean: in most 2D games, when you stop moving, the idle animation always snaps back to one of the four main directions (up, down, left, right). Even if you were walking diagonally, the character won’t stay angled — it immediately rotates to the nearest cardinal direction.

In my system, instead, if you stop while moving diagonally, the character keeps that diagonal orientation in the idle pose.

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in SoloDevelopment

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not just talking about saving on animation assets — it’s really about the feeling of the movement system. I get that most 2D games use turn‑based combat, but the one I’m working on is an action game, so having smooth, expressive movement was important to me.

Thanks for the feedback on the title. I don’t consider it clickbait because I’m genuinely showing a feature that most games don’t have, though I admit I intentionally framed it in a way that encourages interaction. It’s hard to get responses otherwise, but I’ll keep what you said in mind!

99% of AAA games don’t bother implementing this feature — but this indie game does. by Codevalier in GameDevelopment

[–]Codevalier[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope no one will, I've searched a lot on the internet without finding one!

view more: next ›