The point here isn't to slam these games. These games are decent, perhaps even good. The problem is that BYOND users have low standards. If you make a game and people say "wow that's amazing", it's not likely you'll be motivated to improve it (even if the game is terrible). Because so many people are quick to say "good job!" and leave it at that, I'm trying to provide the less popular feedback, "good job, but you could do better". I've tried to be as constructive as possible, so I'd appreciate if the comments (if there are any) follow suit.

Decadence

The game is widely praised for its graphical appeal and from seeing the screenshots I understand why. However, after playing the game, I'm a little disappointed. The overall visual appeal depends on more than just the quality of each individual icon, it depends on how they're used. Here are some comments and suggestions on the graphical aspects of the game:

* The game needs 8 directional mobs. Movement looks strange, shooting looks even worse - you can shoot in a direction up to (and sometimes more than) 45 degree off of the way you're facing. Having icons where the mob is facing one direction and shooting in another would be an improvement.

* The mob's movement animation never quite seems right. When you take a single step the feet move too much and too quickly. When you're constantly in motion it should look more like running and less like walking.

* The mob and the camera can get out of sync - the player doesn't stay centered in the client's screen, they kind of wobble around. I'm not sure what you do to manage the camera. Is the mob's pixel_step_size the same as the client's?

* Grenades should travel in arcs and bounce around.

* Tile-based movement means tile-based obstacles. The maps have an oddly organized look because all obstacles have to span whole tiles and meet at nice right angles. The player movement in the 8 directions adds to the odd organization.

Other comments:

It seems odd that players can't move freely while crouching. If someone was shooting at me, I'd tend to stay crouched. I'd probably do a good bit of crawling around on my stomach too (aren't soldiers known for that?).

The game window repositions itself. Unless it was off the edge of the screen when it loaded, I'm not sure why you'd need to do this. Also, the game window can't be resized, 640x480 is small.

The gameplay isn't innovative. An indie game can introduce weird game mechanics that you aren't likely to see in big mainstream titles. If I wanted a typical shooter, I'd play one (ex: Call of Duty). So unless your plan is to make a better shooter than all mainstream games, there's no reason to stick so strictly with tried and true gameplay.


Casual Quest

The last time I really sat down and played this the game changed my class on me and the game became much harder because I lost my ranged attack. I'm not sure what happened or why it happened, but for a game that prides itself on simplicity I was very confused. More explanation would have been helpful.

It would also be nice to have a title bar on the window. Having to press F3 or F4 to open the menu, then having to use the arrow keys or mouse to change the screen size is a hassle. Having a title bar would have avoided all that.

A pause button would be nice too. An action game with no pause button isn't casual =)


NEStalgia

The gameplay is indeed a mix of Dragon Warrior and World of Warcraft, but if you could mix the best elements of those two games, who would pick the combat system from DW over WoW? Combat in WoW has many factors - party composition, positioning, overall strategy, level, equipment, character customization, etc.

NEStalgia's simple combat system means that many things from WoW just aren't possible. There's no fight where you kite the boss around the room because there's no movement in combat. What could make combat more interesting is the character customization, but in this regard the game is also more like DW than WoW - very few equipment slots, no talents for character customization, etc.

The greatest extent of customization is party formation, but with three characters in a party the number of possible combinations is very limited. It's hard to have fights where a certain class is essential - there's no way to hire NPCs (that I'm aware of) and the time needed to level up a character means its not trivial to say "oh, I'll play a ranger then if that's what we need".

The simplistic graphics are part of the retro motif but they're a little too simple. Dragon Warrior had neat character sprites, these are just stick figures with clothes on top. Everyone looks the same. I expect more from the tilesets too. The SNES and Gameboy remakes have some nice visual touches that show that using a limited resolution doesn't have to scream "made in 1988". Lots of modern games have a retro look without being overly simple (ex: flixel.org has many examples).


Conclusion

Hopefully you can find ways to apply the same ideas to other games. Perhaps the most important point is that while these games are well made, the gameplay isn't very innovative. armorgames.com is full of simple games with innovative twists. Oh, and those games have been played milions of times. Sure, people expect games to be well made, but they're also looking for something new. They're playing the games because of those innovative twists. You don't have to make the biggest, most epic game, you just need a good, clever idea.