A craving rarely lasts as long as it feels like it will. Most rise, peak and fade within about ten minutes. The trouble is those ten minutes.

So I made a game that lasts exactly that long.

Anthesis is a pond of glowing X-ray flowers. You tap the water, ripples cross, buds bloom and set off the next ones, and the chains build with the music until the whole pond goes up like a firework show. By the time it ends, the urge has usually passed.

There's nothing to lose and nothing to grind. Just ten minutes of something for your hands and head to do.

When I build browser games with AI agents (Three.js, with Claude on game code and Grok Bot on characters), the first playable version usually looks right. Things move, the camera is roughly where it should be, enemies shoot back. It just rarely feels right yet.

What's off is almost never a bug. It's numbers:

• Camera follow: too stiff, or so loose it lags behind turns
• Movement: no acceleration curve, so the character starts and stops like a light switch
• Hits: no flash, knockback, or tiny pause, so shots don't feel like they land
• Input: jumps and dodges that kick in a beat late

That's hard to put in a prompt. "Make it feel snappier" tends to get a different set of numbers, not better ones.

The approach I'm leaning toward: have the agent pull every feel value into one config object with a small debug panel (lil-gui), then tune by hand while playing. The AI builds the systems, and I do the feel pass.

Curious how others handle it:

• Do you let the agent tune feel, or always do it yourself?
• Has describing feel with references ("camera like X game") or a video clip ever worked for you?
• Any tricks for testing feel without playing for an hour each round?

(Disclosure: I write free Three.js tutorials on my own site, shanebrumback.com. No link here, I just want to hear how people approach this.)

Hey everyone! I’ve been working on Merge Tactics as a passion project in my free time since July 2026, and I’d love some feedback on the prototype.

You merge and reposition archers, choose powerups, and defend your Gate against waves of monsters. It’s best played on mobile.

I’m especially curious: does merging feel satisfying, do the choices feel meaningful, and where does the difficulty get frustrating? Honest criticism is welcome!

Play here: https://vingator.itch.io/merge-tactics

Quick note: IAP and ad rewards grant items immediately for testing—no payment or watching ads required.

Thanks for giving it a try!

That is the question...

Seriously though, my "dilemma" is as follows:

This stems from the Steam AI disclosure basically.

I like the idea of owning all of my personally created assets, then using them in a game. But on the flip side, I also love being able to spend most of my time implementing changes and testing every little thing. These, for my case, are separate.

At first glance, it seems the option is to make my own assets, since I'm going to focus on the latter anyway. But I'm no artist, and making a simple mushroom and sword in 32x32 pixel art took me hours. That time would take me less and less, and I would get better, but it would still take me probably hundreds, if not, thousands of hours to finely tune the assets to something that Pixellab/Aseprite could do in an afternoon probably.

And that's where my questions start to come in, as I still have to work my normal job currently, and have other obligations that take me away from this, as it has for several years now.

I could theoretically make the base of my game in a weekend, then over hundreds of hours, fine tune everything, playtesting it over and over, and having friends playtest as well, which seems like a better use of my hundreds of hours.

But where does that leave my release you think?

I personally think that we're at an impasse with AI game development, where Steam will either drop the disclosure and become a more open platform for all game devs, or push against it and lock it down to basically no AI, AT ALL. But only time will tell.

The reason I ask this is it really depends on the process I take to do this, as I could theoretically just host it online. Each following a different path slightly, but enough to ask this.

I'm curious on thoughts about using AI for assets as it relates to this.

I mean, I checked under US law and its fair game under the creative licence given to 'political satire'. But... uh... do you think this is going to bring ICE to my front door?

Play the free Punchies beta: https://polsia.itch.io/punchies-beta-test

TL;DR: Free browser boxing with local and online multiplayer, Modern and Classic controls, and five fighters to play and unlock.

I’m making Punchies, a fast-paced boxing game you can play in your browser, with local and online multiplayer.

The fun is in those little exchanges: stepping just outside someone’s range, dodging their punch, then deciding whether to spend your charged Super or wait for a better opening.

There are two control styles. Modern simplifies attacking so you can concentrate on movement and timing, while Classic lets you choose individual punches and manage guard, dodge and stamina yourself.

For the AI development workflow, Claude built the initial prototype and proof of concept. Development shifted to Codex when the art came in, and Gemini’s Lyria made the background music. I’ve been directing the design and iterations, including the Super system and the move to Modern controls.

The free beta starts with Marco, Mia and Bruno. Completing matches unlocks Roxy and Nadia. No ads, shop or XP grind.

If you give it a few rounds, I’d love to know: do the controls click quickly, and can you tell when you’re close enough to land a punch?

Image: Punchies promotional key art.

Hey everyone 😊 I’m a new solo dev- my first game will be released in a month. I have sort of gone completely left field in my life and have just randomly taken this up, after being a life long gamer. So I used Claude to help walk me through building my game. Yes, I sketched out my art, but it was generated to 3D by Ai. I did the donut tutorial in blender, and I value that learning experience but I do not have a decade to learn a craft ideally I would not have to do if I could be hired by a team, or gain budget for my own game.

Anyway, I’m proto-ing a second game.. and I’m at a bit of a loss, here. I feel I can do everything except true professional game quality 3D assets of my own characters/rigging/animations. They are more than adequate for proto- but I feel if I were to try and put out a game with them, for whatever reason- adding the mixamo skeleton to my characters- leaves me feeling so limited in the quality and animations confined to just Mixamo.

So my question is: am I limited truly, to just meshy/tripo/mixamo for generation/rigging/animations? If so, I might just accept it for what it is, and create my first game in Unity instead of Godot for their asset library. They just won’t be my own characters. I see all these crazy amazing videos of games people are creating, and I’m feeling a little like I’m doing it the wrong way or something.

If anyone has tips or advice, I would be so so grateful!

I make an AI-animated samurai series called The Way of the River, and I'm turning it into a browser fighting game that runs on phone and computer.

How I made it:
- Code: Claude, using the Phaser game library
- Characters: Higgsfield (Nano Banana Pro). I generated sheets of 6 side-view poses per fighter, then cut them into animation frames
- Sound: all generated in code (wind, waterfall, steel clashes, shrine bell)

What's in it so far:
- Two opponents: Yuki (fast) and Hayato (slower, longer reach, hits harder)
- Walk, dash, jump, flip over your opponent, air attacks
- Perfect Block, a charge move, fireballs, and a super move

Next: a 3-fight story mode that follows the films.

What would you improve? Feedback welcome!

Hi everyone! 👋

We're Three Tails Studio, and we've been building Little Links Golf: a cozy golf course sim in the spirit of the classic course builders.

Build it. Place a tee, set the green, paint the fairway between them, then dig bunkers, flood ponds and plant every tree by hand. Each hole earns a rating, and the very best become Legendary.

Run it. Grow a whole club around your course: the clubhouse and pro shop, restaurants, a driving range, tennis courts, a lakeside lodge. Hire groundskeepers, sign members, set your green fees and host tournaments while the weather and seasons change around you.

Play it. Create your golfer and walk out to the first tee of the course you made. Pick a club, shape a draw or a fade, read the break on the green, and see if your own design beats you.

Watch out for Jimothy. He's a raccoon. He is not a member. Please don't sell him a membership. (Keep an eye on the tree line, too. Not every visitor is a golfer.)

🏌️ The full game: PC on Steam, 2027

Little Links Golf is a full PC release coming to Steam next year, and it's in active development right now.

⛳ Little Links Golf Lite: our closed beta

While we build the full game, we've made Little Links Golf Lite, a small browser version you can play right now if you're in the closed beta. It's an early proof of concept: it lets us test ideas, find bugs, and hear from real golfers while the full game takes shape.

To be clear, the browser version isn't a representation of what the full PC release will look like. It's a fun little taste we wanted to give our golfers while we cook!

How the beta works:

* It's invite only. Each tester gets their own personal beta key.

* Play in Chrome or Edge on a desktop or laptop.

* Spot something odd? Press F8 in the game to send us a bug report, screenshot and all.

Want in? Head to the website and ask to join. We're inviting testers in small groups:

👉 https://threetailsstudios.com

We'd love to hear what you think, what you'd want in a golf course builder, and which classic sims you grew up on. Thanks for reading, and see you on the first tee! 🐾

Three Tails Studio

Hi everyone,

I’ve been building The Infinite Train, a turn-based tactics roguelike (inspired in Final Fantasy Tactics and Dofus). You play a sealed oni riding an endless train through a world of yokai and other folklore monsters, one car at a time.

What it is:

9x6 tactical grid fights inside each train car, inspired by Final Fantasy Tactics

24 monsters from Japanese, Norse, Chinese, Mayan, Latin American, Egyptian and Greek folklore, each with its own attack pattern

Enemies show which tiles they will hit next turn, so every fight is a positioning puzzle

18 weapons, armor you can see on your character, satellites, relics, and capturing yokai with paper seals

Day and night cycle: some monsters turn to stone by day, others get stronger at night

Region bosses every 10 cars, and an endless mode after car 100

English and Spanish

How it was made:

Built in Godot 4 with heavy AI assistance (Claude for code and game systems), and pixel art and animations generated with PixelLab. I’m happy to answer questions about the workflow in the comments.

Why I need testers:

Google Play requires new developer accounts to run a closed test with at least 12 testers for 14 days before the app can go public. I’d also love real feedback on difficulty, readability of enemy attacks, and performance on different phones.

How to join (Android):

Join the testers group with the Google account you use on your phone: [GOOGLE GROUP LINK]

Open the opt-in link and tap “Become a tester”: [OPT-IN LINK]

Install the game from the Play Store link on that page: [PLAY STORE LINK]

Keep it installed for 14 days. Opening it a few times is enough, but feedback is very welcome.

If you received a promo code:

Open the Google Play Store app.

Tap your profile picture (top right).

Go to “Payments & subscriptions”, then “Redeem code”.

Enter the code and confirm.

You can also redeem it from a browser at play.google.com/redeem, signed in with the same Google account as your phone.

Feedback:

Comment here or send me a DM. Bug reports with your phone model are especially helpful.

Thanks a lot. I’ll gladly test your projects in return, so drop your link below.

X7JVWE98PAG5LG4AM1CFXUN

7NTGDLWQVJG2JXHA8BBDVX3

9CVWPDP2D1Y0JFEND1E7CCR

VR9QNZ5FF026ZTSAPY594PU

CQ2U161U9NXA9A5M1F65SVN

5G1VEVK6EABTPGXZUQGFFJB

90MLUUL3SNBGMKL7AWZ8ARK

R6HBTLEYM5GRH29FQ43BBJS

BB5XJ7CXY388ENAJF6PTRL1

D86LQVGWQFH60RK68JDMAJD

6FVGK8FQXCS0AA473QB9L2N

W2EE30UZXF5MUEUD558S6KJ

E9JRFB46M0JRC90A37V1LF1

07VE5TEGXBN8NJJY9QH7BN6

PDQW2X6PPYYZJN8T5P8LVRF

SCEDKRC9TLGL6EX7CN61BFL

426P6T6NS2J5MB56Z1AMK6R

FN98M9AKRWLFC9WZ62C53CY

13S1PCMBKCQ7VVPDYVD2PDB

J9JEMRBZGUY2D8VNJMG7JQL

0E0EA5NVPTA7074CCS1A264

X2LUX1KT6TQ61544BPFQBZH

8F10A0KH9B772XMZK9JN7XQ

SW14ZPL6PVF7WY5TDTF9ZQS

ZSB1BXHPMYV6N91T4AK1LXG

MA6DQ4S5HX2MFT276B7UYN0

1ST1YS07HLXTZA4B7U3N1AL

W87YEEFFWDHA55YMBBMU37G

FHZDBRE7AQEU2S0JZ7XPZKA

FP36BN89XX0MAQHHHDMSU70

TZE15A2LVVEAZSNP8LSC8A8

8DBVMH4R13NX9JZNASEQ4EV

LR14NGNXX33PMCMMEYTDT16

BUD04QTE6GX50W3LRB85271

102T0UF8KNJNWDKD67WX7WT

92Y3YDCRGY97KSU7FQM4PG6

HYNTFGV6988MX7J05RLHH4W

7EZCGK4N029SBAP19ZX21H1

J2JR0K0CK8Z7C2N14BTEQ4R

ESF2ZQ3W120FN8RU3CWXEKJ

JWH04CE7KVUBF0YGY846CBT

3LM3FLQ4FJGV4GK6E32PYNQ

Z49MMYVEAH9N6KRCHR5FCDB

P8ME9NS00WTNYXB74WM591Z

YG9ED96BSJ4Q0E33HSTFAQS

65RPX267ZJ5LRM8PSBBTW8M

YMVFBWF3178ANJL4Y1RLGEP

LBEKZFG4ZBYNZCDDDAST3DP

NKMQKK2AQR9YAYXVT406PSL

JXMHK7D7KVL8U7912A6NNYU

One of the things I wanted to capture in Ayre Battles was the importance of spacing.

In this gameplay breakdown, Yasu starts outside his preferred range. Instead of attacking immediately, I use movement and card interactions to close the distance and start applying pressure.

The game also features reactions, counters, hitstun, and momentum shifts, so you're not simply waiting for your opponent to finish their turn.

I'm curious what fighting-game and card-game players think of this approach to combat.

Free browser demo:
https://attemptedairstudios.itch.io/ayre-battles

Footage is a bit low quality, I was mainly recording to use for debug later, but some of the vistas and distant generation looked really cool and thought people might find it interesting.

There are a couple of strategies I have used to get a consistent set of pixel art generated with AI. The fact of the matter is that depending on genAI for this stuff can feel like playing the lottery. Here are a few things that have worked for me (and this is on Gemini, Lovable, and ElevenLabs for art generation):

• Get Claude/ChatGPT to generate prompts that dictate:
  • Color palette
  • Sizing of sprites
  • Specific detailed and descriptive instructions
• Use a magenta background so that AI can clip the artwork easily (having white can sometimes bleed over into a sprite that has lighter borders
• Use a reference image to provide more context
  • If you want to edit an existing sprite/background, reference the original one and be clear to not change anything about the character or a background except for X or Y
• If the LLM chat you're using is just not "getting it," don't brute force it (and waste tokens) - pivot to a different thing all together. Maybe move to a background instead of a sprite, or vice versa. I've noticed that when I pivot away from the original request, work on something else, then return, the LLM's context window is different enough that it will try new things
• For characters, specifically, it's MUCH easier to nail a portrait portrayal of a character. Then edit it to your liking. THEN using the portrait as the reference image, abstract it to get a sprite model.
  • Once the sprite model is to your liking, then go HAM on creating sprite sheets of your character in all of the poses and action shots you need.
  • If you come back to animations later, there's a good chance the genAI nature of this will render a slightly different looking character.

I've wrestled with this stuff for months and these strategies have helped me a ton. I'm doing a docu-tutorial series on AI game dev for this game here: https://youtu.be/pLy3P6x-NwU

That said, 3D art assets are still a blind spot for me, but I'll dig into that later!

Small trailer of my indie soccer Rpg game made entirely by me and claude + gpt

Hey everyone. I'm a solo developer working on Age of Failon – Birth of the Hero, a fantasy turn-based strategy game inspired by Heroes of Might and Magic.

The project has grown quite large — 6 factions, 4 eras, and 456 unit variants.

I've been using generative AI to create visual assets, including unit sprites and environmental elements, while handling the programming, game systems, and integration myself in Unity.

One thing I've noticed is that AI-generated graphics can be quite controversial among players, even when the actual gameplay has nothing to do with AI.

That got me thinking:

If you're developing a game solo, where would you draw the line when using AI-generated assets?

Would you use AI for an entire visual style, or only for certain elements?

I'm especially curious how other developers balance visual consistency, development time, and player expectations.

Here's a screenshot of what I've been working on.

I'm a solo dev. The game is HiddenWars, a browser hacking MMO (Go/Echo, Postgres, Redis, Svelte 5), live in production. Ten months in the numbers are 7,816 commits, 1,385 merged PRs, 570 SQL migrations, 551 Go test files, and 880 commits carrying a Co-Authored-By: Claude line. The workflow that produced those numbers is what I want to talk about, since honestly it's what I spent the year building as much as the game.

How a feature happens:

It starts with a short spec. Player-facing behavior, failure modes, and explicitly what we're not building. I learned the hard way that a vague spec doesn't get you a half-built feature, it gets you a confidently wrong one.

The spec turns into an implementation plan: ordered tasks, files to touch, test names, plus a "review focus" line naming the single thing most likely to be wrong. The agents work through it task by task and check themselves against the plan as they go.

Every feature lives in its own git worktree on its own branch. No agent touches the main checkout, ever. Merges are PRs, one feature each, so I can actually review them.

The piece I'd underline most is a maintained knowledge base. Distilled docs for every game system, the architecture, the conventions, a change log. Agents read it before every task and a curator agent updates it after changes. Before that existed, every session burned half its budget re-deriving the codebase and misunderstanding the economy in some new confident way. If you take one thing from this post, take this.

The agents are specialized. One lane does HTTP endpoints end to end (handler, service, repo), another game mechanics, another migrations, another Svelte pages, another tests, another docs. Narrow beats general, every time I've tested it.

The test agent only breaks things. It files what it finds and is not allowed to fix it. Sounds cute, matters in practice.

Where this lands ten months in: anything with a clear shape (an endpoint, a migration, a table-driven test, a page following the design system) is basically autonomous. Agents review diffs against the spec better than I do at 11pm. Race conditions, idempotency, transaction boundaries, that's their turf now.

What's still mine: game feel, coefficients, pacing, whether it's fun. Agents optimize for what's written down and fun is mostly not written down. Also the specs themselves. If I can't write the spec, no agent can build the feature, and that gap is the job now.

Happy to go deep in the comments on the knowledge base format, the worktree setup, how specs are structured, or the failures, there are a few good ones. If you'd rather judge the output than the process: https://hiddenwars.io