I like the premise and setting of the game a lot. I think that this will be a fun party-style game. I really like that you're incorporating different types of atoms with different powers. It's educational! This game really intrigued me and made me want to play it, seeing your description of it.
I don't like that I have to start the second bullet with "I don't like." There is nothing I dislike, but several things I would consider:
This is kind of silly, but immediately I thought that I would reconsider the 10^(-32) premise, because it just doesn't make any sense. I would say "early instants of the big bang." Because there really weren't atoms at all until a few minutes in. It's not a big deal, and it's cute, so I would keep the concept, but being so precise with 10^(32) seems weird if there is no scientific significance.
I like the "prisoner's dilemma" style decision of whether to protect the center or your own stash, but I fear that, like the prisoner's dilemma, the optimial choice will always be to just protect your own stash.
I would like to see "reflecting" types of walls (that reflect antimatter), though you've probably already thought of that.
My biggest question is the physically-based structural analysis of the molecule structure. My hunch is that this will propose some limiting factor, either in the possibilities of building interesting structures or in computational resources. I don't want to discourage it, because it sounds really cool, but to me this sounds like a strictly ETH-inspired idea rather than a gameplay one.
Jonathan Merlevede
I like the fact that you're not doing a 'mini-game' like all the other teams. The setting is also quite nice.
I don't like the seemingly very large gaps in gameplay. A lot of new elements are introduced in the section 'Atoms description', like the fact that you can 'poison' the other player and even the fact that you have to move around. I'm afraid that the fact that you yourself don't yet have an idea on how long a game should take doesn't bode well. The scope of the game also seemed to be too large, but my idea of how the game would look like is not clear enough to be sure.
I would be careful with the 'Cooperate but don't be a fool' idea. While original, it seems to me that building defenses only for your own electron source could easily become a dominant strategy. There should at least be a great private, not only shared, advantage to defending the shared resources: I suspect this will be a difficult thing to balance.
Pascal Spörri
I like the construction aspect of the game and the ability to throw stuff at other players. I also like the general theme.
I don't think that it's going to be easy for players to control the individual players. You'll need a very concise wall build system that is easy to use with the XBOX gamepad.
I in the beginning of the would provide all the players with a "cheap" precreated wall around the proton source. Giving the players some air and allowing them to protect their base. You also should think about moving to a 2D style gameplay since this allows better reaction to antimatter rays and doesn't waste precious screenspace. Since you don't have to split your screen.
Nicholas Pleschko
I like the idea of playing cooperative first and then attacking each other. Also building structures which have certain properties seems very fun.
I don't like long round times. I think the whole building process will require much tactical skill.
I would simplify the building process by having automatic building while only shooting at your structures.
Jakob Progsch
I like, that the concept allows for emergent behavior from construction and creativity.
I'm afraid that a gamepad as input device might make construction awkward and introduce a entry hurdly by requiring a lot of dexterity.
I would maybe also have premade "standard" building blocks of multiple atoms to ease fast construction.
Werner Randelshofer
I like the idea of having a multiplayer tower defense game (each player builds structures which have to withstand continuous waves of attacks). Very nice!
I don't like that the gameplay in a level is two-fold (first cooperate and then compete with each other). I fear that the cooperation phase might get boring, because the fun of the game will be in the competition phase. I think that the construction process is too complicated. I am not sure whether three "atom crafting" menu screens will fit on the screen.
I would get rid of the cooperation phase and start with the fighting right away. I would simplify the construction process, so that the player can just place walls and turrets on the map. The strength of the buildings will depend on the resources that the player has gathered. Maybe you can get rid of the menu screen by supporting just four building types. This way, you can use the four colored buttons on the controller.
Rudolf Schreier
I really like the tacticality of the core gameplay. This could really be a hurdle, but the way you presented it, you seem to have it under control...
...but then you will probably spend a large amount of time with balancing, and probably make your lives pretty hard :\.
I don't recall if you mentioned this in your presentation, but for variety, you will probably need multiple stages, or at least make one stage which has very different topology.
Daniel Zimmermann
I like the physically-based structural analysis. I hope it will work the way you imagine.
One round of your game could take a lot of time, if I understood it correctly. This could lead the players to lose interest...
I hope the two-stage gameplay works out. You will need to give the players a really strong reason to work together, otherwise the anarchy will break out too soon.
Adrian Blumer
The gameplay idea "First Play together / later betray and fight each other" sounds promising.
Split screen: shared screen might be better as it also gives a good overview.
Fighting each other must be more andvantageous than simply standing by and letting the other players fight each other.
Christian Schüller
I like the mix between tower-defense, bridge-builder like game. Smartly combined in a multi-player game could result in a great game! I am also very interested how you realize the influences of the different elements to the construction.
Nothing
I am curious to see how you implement the building of the 3D atom structures. Right know I see there the biggest challenge.
As I understood, the crafting of the atoms will be kind of offline, therefore the architect cannot be controlled during this process. Therefore, this must be quick and simple in order not to block the game flow. I think a few distinctive elements will do the job. A big number of elements will complicate the job.
Nicholas Waldin
I like the part where the players try to work together as well as backstab eachother.
It would be interesting if the center node had to be protected later on as well, forcing the players to work together and against each other for longer
I think the construction system might be a bit to complex and "actions per minute" heavy
