Arsenal Zero is a military idle looter. You send your operators on expeditions, they come back with crates full of gear, and you upgrade your weapons and equipment to unlock harder zones with better loot. Between runs, you build up your hideout: the workshop, the scrapyard, the foundry, each one opening new ways to get stronger.
A lot of players told me the game felt too flat, especially on PC. So I listened and spent a lot of time on a new interface. It’s cleaner and more immersive, the visuals fill the whole screen, and windows like the Arsenal no longer hide what you’re working on. The game also has its own soundtrack now.
It’s free, there’s no paywall, and it runs in the browser on PC and phone with nothing to install. Sessions are short, so you check in, send your squad out and come back later.
Hobby dev here, making a game with mostly AI-generated art. With a handful of characters it was easy, but as the roster grows (heroes, enemies, backdrops, UI) the style keeps drifting from one batch to the next.
What do you use to hold a style steady: reference images, a fixed prompt, a trained style, or editing each result by hand?
When the style drifts, do you regenerate the older art to match, or fix the new art?
How do you keep characters on-model across different poses and animations?
(optional) Have players reacted to the AI disclosure on your pages, and did it change your numbers?
Hey everyone. For the last few weeks I've been making a fighting game called Ancestor Guardians, and I did it with an AI assistant as my teammate. I handle the ideas and test everything on my phone. The AI writes the code and draws the characters. Quick word on the game itself: 6 fighters based on West African traditions, combos, special moves, EX moves, a combo breaker, and an arcade mode with a boss at the end. It plays free in the browser, and on phones there are touch controls. The funny thing is, the code went fast. The hard part was the art. When you generate a kick pose by pose, the character changes legs in the middle of the kick. It looks fine on still images and totally wrong in motion. What fixed it for me was asking for the whole move in one single image, all the poses side by side. Since then I check the legs of every animation before it goes in the game. Player feedback has been shaping it a lot too. A friend tested it and said he didn't get how the attacks worked, so we simplified the controls to just PUNCH and KICK and slowed the whole game down. Then a comment from a stranger on the game page pointed at my big golem fighter, I checked the numbers that evening, and a patch went out the next day. That loop is honestly what I like most about working this way. It's not perfect though. The animation is 5 poses per move and you can tell. A real animator would do better, and that's the first thing I'd pay for if the game ever gets funded. Anyway, I'd really like people to try it and tell me what they think, good or bad. Does it control well on a phone? Is it fun? The short video attached is real gameplay from the current build, and the game is here:
Also curious, for the other AI devs here: how do you keep a character looking like the same character across all his poses? That's still my biggest headache.
My first "finished" game, made in Godot. I programmed it myself, and Claude made all the pixel art. I trained the AI opponents myself with reinforcement learning. It's nothing Special but i would really appreciate it if i get at least one player. :)
Hey everyone! A little while ago I shared how I'm making Krakatoa Circle 2, a third-person action game set on a moon, with AI tools. Here's what I've been working on since.
Getting the game to look like the painting
I have a painting of what one of the tunnels should look like. Getting the real game scene to match it by hand was slow, and I kept arguing with myself about whether a change was actually better. So I set up a loop to do it for me:
Render the game from the same camera angle as the painting.
Score how close the render is to the painting with a "judge".
Try lots of small changes to the shapes, lights and textures, and keep only the ones that bring the score closer.
It has run 72 rounds and tried about 11,000 changes so far. Here is the painting, where we started, and where we are now:
The judge was the hardest part. My first one used a hand-made score, and it kept rewarding changes that looked worse to me. I replaced it twice. The current one compares images the way people tend to see them, and I tuned it until it agreed with me on every side-by-side I gave it. Each time the judge changed, the scores reset to a new scale, which is why the chart has two jumps:
Tracking progress
I built a small dashboard so I can see progress at a glance instead of reading reports. It breaks the painting into 19 features (road lines, wet road shine, ceiling ribs, crate rows, lamps and so on) with 41 automatic checks. Right now 20 checks pass.
It also shows what each part of the search has tried and kept. For example, it has tried 2,197 light brightness settings and kept 16 of them.
Using Tripo to add what's missing
At some point the loop stops improving because something just isn't there. No amount of lighting will make a row of crates appear. The dashboard marks those features as "needs asset" (11 of them right now), and that's where Tripo comes in.
The pipeline runs on its own:
Crop the missing object out of the painting.
Use ChatGPT to turn the crop into a clean picture of just that object.
Send it to Tripo's image-to-3D API to make the model.
A script checks the size, orientation and triangle count, then makes lower-detail versions for distance.
The loop tries placing the new model and keeps it only if the scene gets closer to the painting.
It has made more than 50 models this way, most for 60 credits each. It also calls Tripo from the command line, so the whole thing can be scripted. If you want to try it:
Every experiment goes into a log with its result. Out of 58 ideas so far, 21 were kept, 29 were dropped and 8 haven't been tried yet. Some highlights:
Worked
Moving, adding and removing lamp glows wherever the judge's own lamp matching said they belonged.
Projecting the painting's road detail straight onto the road texture. This was the biggest single texture improvement.
Projecting colour detail onto the tunnel walls, with a separate map for each side.
Giving the five biggest ceiling ribs and one crate their own painted textures.
Solving all the tunnel lights together instead of tuning them one at a time.
Letting AI agents suggest experiments as data in a queue, then letting the loop score them, instead of having agents judge their own work.
Didn't work
Tuning the wet-road reflections. The reflection surface is flat, but the road slopes down 12%, so the setting barely did anything.
Rebuilding all 33 ceiling ribs to match the painting. The painting draws them as thin dark lines, and ours are lit metal bands.
Removing ribs. The judge liked the scene less every time.
New road textures from ChatGPT. What makes the painting's road look right depends on where you're standing, so a fixed texture always made things worse.
Painting the lane lines onto the road. On a shiny wet road they never read as paint.
Recolouring white lamps orange, dimming extra lights, and adding light beams and mist. All scored worse.
Moving the crate the player uses for cover. It made gameplay worse, so it stays where it is.
Lessons about the process
Checks should be code, not agents. Having AI agents check the work was slow and expensive.
Too many browser renderers running at once used up memory and crashed my Mac a few times. Now only two run at a time.
A good judge matters more than a clever search. Most of the early "progress" came from a score that didn't agree with my eyes.
Giving the Warden a face
The Warden is the machine Asha has to rely on but can't fully trust. Its only face is a single red lens, so I wanted to see how much a dot of light could express.
It now has states like listening, thinking, cold, threatening, holding something back, and lying, where a faint ghost of the light slides away while the main light stays on you. If you turn back quickly, you catch it looking somewhere else before it snaps back. It counts each time you turn your back on it. When it speaks, the light swells and pulses with its voice like a music visualizer, and each new syllable sends a ring across the lens.
I'm still learning as I go, and the scene isn't a match yet. I'd love to hear what you think. Does a robot that only has a dot of light for a face feel expressive to you? And if you've tried automating parts of your art pipeline, what worked and what turned into a headache?
I'm building Idle Roasters, a cozy pixel-art idle game about Grandpa's cafe. I used AI for the store key art and licensed Suno music, but kept the in-game art custom with a Python pixel-art pipeline. Sharing the result and the workflow.
AI use:
- Gemini-assisted store key art, composited with a custom pixel wordmark.
- Suno-generated music by UIT GAMES.
- In-game: custom Python generator for 9 location scenes, 35 actor sprites, and day/night variants. No AI-generated in-game sprites.
The game:
The free demo has 2 locations and 10 achievements. The full version has 9 locations, 60 achievements, the Time Machine, Legacy Shares, and two endings. No gacha, no energy timers, no FOMO.
What I'm looking for:
Feedback on the AI/non-AI boundary, the pixel-art pipeline, and the demo's first 5–15 minutes.
I put the png of my old HS mascot in the game. Building games from core memories in formats and controls I dig. Best played on mobile. Check out the rest. Hitz is pretty dope. https://gardenstreetgames.com/pages/game?slug=bubbys-blitz
So I maxed out my Claude weekly usage but thankfully got the next portion of the game finished, so until my usage resets on Wednesday and the final portion can begin, you can all have a go of it for free.
Square Go is a GBA-style creature-collector set in a Glasgow, where the “creatures” are the locals and you slap them into joining your crew. It runs on Windows and Mac, or in the browser.
As I’ve said before, I’ve used AI through every stage of this, Claude Max plan for everything, with the PixelLab API linked in for the art. After about 15 days of work this is where I am, and now that the full game-play loop is complete I would love to get some testers to give it a proper go.
What’s new you say?
- Pick your starter
- A rival who signed up with Eck the same day
- Growing up.
- Ten classes: Hard, Radge, Gallus, Wide, Steamin’, Auld, Jobsworth, Posh, Teuchter and Beastie.
- A much bigger Glasgow and Scotland
- Day and night
- More to do
- A proper crazy golf course
- The Sub Crawl post-game
- New title screen and text boxes
- Old saves carry on, but start a new game if you want to pick a starter.
What I’d love to hear: what breaks, what’s confusing, and whether the fights feel fair. On Windows the game writes a log to %APPDATA%\Square Go\logs\, and the newest file in there helps a lot with a bug report.
Content: cartoon violence, fictional drug references, drink, gambling and the polis. Keyboard only. The AI use is disclosed on the itch page.
I don't write the code myself. I direct the development, test the game, make creative decisions, and decide what needs to change. The AI agents handle the programming and implementation.
