>>28582
Alright, technically pretty solid but I don't see a lot of work being put into the game design itself. I don't know if you just haven't thought about it or you were just tight on time, so I'm just going to dump some of the notes I made while playing with a few extra comments.
>tutorial too obtrusive, pop up messages jarring
Calling a level "tutorial" is the best way to get as few people to play it as possible
>little feedback for reloading
Visual and audio indicators for reload time would be nice
>what the red things are isn't obvious (beer?)
>why do wood crates have so much health?
>why are exploding barrels different colors?
>items hard to see on ground
>tutorial popup out of place
>few opportunities to use environment tactically
>why slow player down while shooting and reloading?
Limits game play choices, mostly just to moving back slowly and shooting
>never explained how to switch weapons
Would prefer mapped to some buttons, not all mice have scroll wheels
>mines never formally introduced, don't affect game play
>few enemy types, no need to prioritize targets
>enemies spawn off screen so fights are reactionary
>not encouraged to use different weapon types
>too easy; low skill cap
Again, not much to do other than choose your weapon and maybe throw a grenade
>ranged enemy is nice, but only have to face it on it's own
>water has no effect on movement
As a game demo, you only needed one level and demonstrate everything once. all the extra visuals didn't add much to the experience
Since this genre's pretty saturated the success of these titles is in the details. The quality of art, the feel of the game, or some unique mechanic, is what separates it from the crowd. Think Enter the Gungeon is the latest iteration of the genre, and while being not that different technically, feels a lot juicier.
Also I'd learn how to run a proper, impartial play test, you're in a pretty good position to do that being surrounded by other students.