Fizzles – Playable Level 1 Demo of a Cute Godot Puzzle Rescue Game

hpwsoft · May 19, 2026, 6:43am

Hi everyone,

I’d like to share Fizzles, a cute puzzle rescue game I’m developing with Godot.

Fizzles is about tiny round creatures who walk on their own and need your help to reach the exit. The player guides them by assigning abilities at the right moment. In the first playable level, the main mechanic is digging a path through the ground so the Fizzles can reach the magical exit.

The Level 1 demo is already playable and includes:

one complete handcrafted level
animated Fizzles
digging mechanic
HUD
intro sequence
music and sound effects
touch-friendly controls
browser-playable Web version

You can play the demo here:

The Kickstarter campaign is also live here:

https://kickstarter.com/projects/hpwsoft/fizzles-a-cute-puzzle-rescue-game

The campaign funds the next development phase of Fizzles: additional handcrafted levels and content, new shared Fizzle abilities, UI and onboarding polish, mobile testing, audio and presentation improvements, and preparation for a first public release.

Fizzles follows the HPWsoft philosophy: no ads, no tracking, no account requirement.

I’d be very interested in feedback from other Godot developers, especially on:

whether the core mechanic is easy to understand
how the controls feel in the browser demo
whether the HUD and goal are readable
the overall presentation and game feel

Thanks for taking a look!

phoenixdk · May 19, 2026, 10:57am

Ahhh Lemmings There’s something inherently satisfying about helping cute little creatures not to kill themselves.

The core mechanic is very clear. Of course there’s currently only one

The controls are very straight-forward too. The only issue I see is that it might get a little frustrating trying to tap the creatures on a touch interface (typically also with a smaller screen), since they’re moving and sometimes close together.

The UI is a little rough, but has the needed elements. The values could be a bit more prominent, especially the digging one, which is essentially important. You might also consider putting the numbers over, under or on the icons, as it’s clearer than putting the values between them.
A small bug too - the number of saved creatures is always X/1, rather than X/total.

Overall I think it’s a fine start - it really just needs more levels and mechanics

hpwsoft · May 19, 2026, 12:51pm

Thank you very much for the detailed feedback — this is really helpful!

Yes, the Lemmings comparison is absolutely understandable. Fizzles is meant to be its own original game, but it clearly belongs to that guide-and-rescue puzzle family.

You’re right that there is currently only one core mechanic in the demo. The goal for this first level was mainly to prove the basic loop: Fizzles spawn, walk on their own, the player assigns an ability, a path is opened, and enough Fizzles reach the exit.

Good point about touch input. We have tested the current build on both Android tablet and phone, and it is playable there, but selecting moving creatures on a smaller screen is definitely something I need to keep watching closely. Later levels with more Fizzles and more abilities will make this even more important, so selection comfort and readability are on my list.

The HUD feedback is also very useful. The current UI is functional, but still rough. I agree that the values should be more prominent, especially the remaining ability count. Placing the numbers directly on, above or below the icons may indeed be clearer than placing them between the icons.

About the X/1 display: that is not meant to show saved/total Fizzles. It means saved/required. In Level 1, only one Fizzle needs to be rescued to complete the level, even though more Fizzles spawn. So 1/1 means the goal has been reached. But your reaction shows that this is not clear enough yet, so I need to communicate that better in the HUD or onboarding.

And yes — additional levels and mechanics are planned. The Kickstarter is specifically meant to fund the next development phase: more handcrafted levels, new shared Fizzle abilities, UI/onboarding polish, mobile testing, and presentation improvements.

Thanks again for taking the time to play and write this up. This is exactly the kind of feedback I was hoping for.

phoenixdk · May 19, 2026, 8:10pm

Happy to be of assistance

Best of luck with the kickstarter, but you should plan for the eventuality that it doesn’t succeed. Last I checked about a third of Kickstarter campaigns succeed, which are not good odds if the budget hangs in the balance.
If you haven’t already, check articles and documented studies on Kickstarter campaigns’ success rates - it’s a small time investment relative to the potential gain.

hpwsoft · May 20, 2026, 4:57am

Thank you, that’s a very good point.

I agree that a Kickstarter campaign should not be the only plan. For Fizzles, the campaign is meant to fund the next development phase, not to decide whether the project exists at all.

Level 1 is already playable, and I will continue developing the game step by step even if the campaign does not reach its goal. In that case, the scope and pace would simply have to be adjusted.

That is also why I’m keeping the campaign focused and not promising a fixed number of levels too early. The goal is to build Fizzles carefully, based on the playable demo, feedback, and realistic development time.

hpwsoft · May 24, 2026, 4:33am

Since Fizzles is designed as a mobile-first puzzle rescue game, I am considering a small Android test build for people who are specifically interested in testing the game on real mobile devices.

The browser demo remains the easiest way to try Level 1:

But mobile feedback would be very useful, especially for things that are hard to judge properly in a desktop browser:

touch selection: tap a Fizzle first, then choose an ability
readability of the HUD and ability popup on smaller screens
timing and pace on a touch device
whether the digging mechanic feels clear enough
overall comfort when playing without mouse and keyboard

This would not be a general public release yet, just a small test build for interested testers.

If anyone here would be interested in testing Fizzles on Android, please reply in this thread. I can then share further details once there is enough interest.

phoenixdk · May 24, 2026, 9:47am

I’ll give it a go
I have a Pixel 8 phone and some kind of Galaxy tablet.

hpwsoft · May 28, 2026, 3:46am

Hi, I saw your profile line: “A former video game producer who discovered that the games industry sucks.”

That sounds like there is an interesting story behind it. If you don’t mind sharing: what made you leave the industry, or what was the point where you realized it wasn’t what you expected?

I’m an indie developer myself and I’d be genuinely interested in your perspective — especially what you think small indie developers should understand before going deeper into game development.

phoenixdk · May 28, 2026, 9:53am

It’s the same as most, I suspect - too many hours, too low wages, low job stability and a stressful work environment. I worked for Progressive Media (~20 employees) the longest, mainly producing EA titles, like The Sims for mobile - sadly my finest hour in the industry

In my handful of years, I never had one week of regular (40) hours, often enough working through the weekend, without pay, in crunch periods. If you count all the hours, I was making less than minimum wage, essentially like everyone else at the company.
I didn’t find that too hard to cope with, as I was young, single and living cheaply. I think the thing that really put me off was lay-offs - when you’re dependent on publisher contracts to finance games (and the company), losing a contract often means losing people. And working so intensely together, it felt like every employee was a friend. The CEO took care of breaking the news, thankfully, but I had to assess who was least profitable, essentially… and everyone knew it.

The stress in general was almost indescribable, though that is coming from a person with bipolar disorder. We would always have to over-promise on our contracts, to be competitive with all the other companies that do the same, so a project would be behind schedule before it even starts. From there it’s an hour-to-hour scramble every day, to make it to the next deliverable / greenlight meeting / milestone / whatever. Even when we finished a project, the joy would be cut short, since we’d be months delayed, and so already behind on the next project.

That was surprisingly cathartic to write, so thanks for asking

I’m not sure, to be honest. I can tell you that earning money making games is almost universally a bad decision, if you’re just interested in the money… in my experience, even established developers with experienced employees struggle to make ends meet, and creating a hit game will always be elusive. Of course, I quit over a decade ago, so things may have changed… but I doubt it

hpwsoft · May 30, 2026, 9:27am

I’m currently thinking about a possible progression system for Fizzles and would like to get some feedback.

The basic idea is to keep the core gameplay the same: each level still works like a classic Fizzles rescue level. Fizzles spawn, walk automatically, and the player assigns available abilities to individual Fizzles when needed.

The difference would be a new layer around the levels.

Instead of every level always giving the player a fixed set of abilities, the player would earn points by completing levels. These points could then be assigned to abilities before entering certain special levels, called instances.

For example:

A normal level gives points depending on how many Fizzles were rescued.
These points are not consumed.
Before entering an instance, the player distributes the available points between abilities such as Digger, Climber, Floater, etc.
The instance only shows the normal rescue goal at the beginning, for example: 10 Fizzles / rescue 5.
The player does not know in advance which abilities are needed.
While playing the instance, the player may discover that a Digger is needed to progress.
If the current ability setup is wrong, the player can leave the instance without penalty, redistribute the points, and try again.
Later in the same instance, the player might discover that several Climbers are also needed.
The player can again leave, adjust the ability setup, and return.

So the gameplay loop would be:

Play levels → earn points → assign points to abilities → enter an instance → discover what is needed → adjust setup → solve the instance.

Normal levels and instances could both be replayed. A level would not give endless points, but could offer a limited number of points based on rescue performance. For example, rescuing the minimum number of Fizzles gives 1 point, rescuing more gives 2 points, and rescuing all Fizzles gives 3 points.

The goal is not to turn Fizzles into a complex RPG, but to add a light progression and preparation layer while keeping the actual level gameplay simple and familiar.

The main question is:

Would this kind of system make the game more interesting, or would it feel like unnecessary extra management between levels?

hpwsoft · June 1, 2026, 3:51am

I am currently thinking about a progression/instance system for Fizzles, but I want to keep the main game simple.

The idea is to separate the game into two layers:

Normal level progression

The main game should stay straightforward and accessible.

A player chooses a profile, selects a difficulty, and then plays through the normal levels one after another. Normal levels may award points based on rescue performance, for example:

minimum rescue goal reached: 1 point
better result: 2 points
perfect rescue: 3 points

These points are not required for normal progression. A casual player can ignore them completely and just continue playing level after level.

Optional instances

Instances would be a separate optional mode for players who want more depth and harder puzzle challenges.

The points earned in normal levels would act as a reusable action budget for these instances. They are not permanently consumed.

For example:

the player has earned 30 points
an instance allows the player to use these points as an action budget
Digger might cost 6 points
Floater might cost 4 points
Climber might cost 5 points
every time the player assigns an ability to a Fizzle, the cost is subtracted from the current instance budget
if there are not enough points left, that ability can no longer be used
restarting or leaving the instance restores the budget
failed attempts do not permanently cost points

So the player does not configure a fixed skill bar before entering the instance. Instead, all unlocked abilities are available inside the instance, and the player decides during the level how to spend the available budget.

The instance itself could start with a short planning phase:

the level is visible
the rescue goal is shown
the available budget is shown
available abilities and their costs are shown
Fizzles only start spawning after the player presses Start

During ability selection, the game could pause or slow down briefly, especially for mobile play, so the player has time to choose the right ability without unnecessary stress.

The goal is:

casual players can play the normal game without caring about points or instances
more experienced players can use the optional instance mode for planning, optimization, and harder puzzle content
points add long-term progression without turning the whole game into an RPG or management system

In the menu, this could be presented simply: the normal difficulty buttons remain as they are, and there is an additional “Instances” button that opens the instance selection.

phoenixdk · June 1, 2026, 12:07pm

It’s a little hard to digest all that text and turn it into a working mental game

Overall I think it sounds like a good idea to have more Fizzle abilities that are paid for in points of some kind. Not sure what that means for normal levels - will they have free abilities, or no abilities at all? Maybe a set number of points for each normal level?

As I understand it, you’ve decided against making the point decisions before entering the level - good idea. Trial and error is generally not as fun as making informed decisions, so you could just let the player spend their points as they’re playing a level. That also eliminates the between-level management.

hpwsoft · June 1, 2026, 12:50pm

Thanks, that is a fair point. I probably described too many ideas at once.

The current direction is simpler:

For the normal levels, I plan to keep the classic structure. Each normal level gives the player a fixed set of available abilities. So a level might provide 1 Digger, another level might introduce Floater, another one Climber, and later levels can combine several abilities.

The first normal levels should work almost like tutorials: one ability is introduced, then used in slightly more complex situations, and later combined with other abilities.

The point-based system is not planned for the normal level flow at the moment. Normal levels should remain straightforward and playable without any extra management.

The point system would be for optional “instances” later. In those special levels, the player would not configure abilities before entering. Instead, all unlocked abilities could be available during play, and each use would cost points from the current instance budget.

So the split would be:

normal levels: fixed ability counts, simple progression
optional instances: point budget, spend points during the level

And yes, I agree: making the decisions during the level seems much better than forcing the player to guess a setup before entering.

hpwsoft · June 1, 2026, 1:47pm

Just as an additional explanation why these ideas are coming up right now:

I am currently working on the first release version of Fizzles. The plan is to create 10 levels and release that version on the Apple App Store and Google Play. All 10 levels should be freely playable.

While working on that, I also started thinking about how to keep the game interesting after those 10 levels. The first step was to add difficulty levels for each normal level. There are currently 4 difficulty settings, which I am still balancing.

And because my brain apparently refuses to rest, the idea of optional point-based instances came up as another possible long-term extension.

After getting several helpful comments from the community, my current decision is to focus first on creating and polishing more normal levels. The instance/point system is still interesting, but it is something for later, once the basic level structure and abilities are established properly.

So for now the priority is:

finish the 10-level release version
introduce abilities step by step
balance the 4 difficulty settings
release the first version
keep the instance idea as a possible future expansion

I guess I am just a restless mind, but I am trying to keep the first release focused.

phoenixdk · June 1, 2026, 6:16pm

Sounds like a good plan! The (former) producer part of my brain isn’t shouting

It can be time-consuming to balance difficulties - I’d keep an eye on how much time goes into that, and weigh it against adding more levels and features. I do think it’s a good idea to have difficulties though, as it makes the game more broadly accessible.

hpwsoft · June 1, 2026, 7:24pm

Thanks, that is good to hear — especially that the producer part of your brain is not shouting.

And yes, I agree about the difficulty balancing. It can easily become a time sink.

My current approach is to keep the first balancing pass pragmatic. The difficulty settings should make the game more accessible and give players a reason to replay levels, but I don’t want to spend endless time tuning every value before the first release.

The main priority is still:

finish the 10-level version
introduce the abilities properly
make sure the levels are fun and understandable
keep the difficulty settings good enough for the first release
refine them later based on real player feedback

So I see the 4 difficulties as an important feature, but not something that should block adding more levels or finishing the first release.

hpwsoft · June 5, 2026, 6:54am

Small update:

Thank you to everyone who took a look at Fizzles and the playable Level 1 demo.

Fizzles will continue to be developed regardless of the outcome of the current Kickstarter campaign. The current plan is to finish a first public version with 10 handcrafted levels and then publish the game on Google Play and the Apple App Store.

I have now created a small Fizzles community and updates page:

This page will be used for future development notes, demo news, feedback opportunities, and updates about the next steps for the project.

There is also an optional email signup for occasional Fizzles development updates. No one is added automatically; it is only for people who actively sign up themselves.

The playable Level 1 browser demo is still available here:

Feedback from Godot developers is still very welcome, especially around browser/mobile behavior, UI readability, touch-friendly controls, and overall game feel.

Thanks again for checking it out.

hpwsoft · June 7, 2026, 9:23am

I’m currently working on the player/menu screen for Fizzles, and I’d like to discuss one design question with you:

What kind of highscore or statistics system would make sense for a Lemmings-like puzzle rescue game?

The current menu already supports:

multiple local players
four difficulty levels per player
separate progress per player/difficulty
music and SFX volume controls

My original idea was to add a highscore/statistics screen, but the more I thought about it, the more complicated it became.

A classic time-based highscore does not feel quite right for Fizzles, because I don’t want the game to become mainly about speed or pressure. The core idea is still rescuing the creatures and solving the level calmly.

A few possible approaches:

Highscore per level and difficulty
Example:
Level 3 / Difficulty 2:
Player A rescued 8/10
Player B rescued 7/10

This is clear, but with many levels it can become a lot of lists.

Overall player highscore
Example:
Player A rescued 120 Fizzles in total
Player B rescued 105 Fizzles in total

This is simple and easy to understand, but then the question is:
Should repeated plays of the same level count?
Or should only the best result per level/difficulty count?

The main reasoning is:
The more Fizzles you rescue, the better you mastered the level.

Used abilities are not necessarily a good ranking criterion, because some levels are designed so that the optimal solution requires using the available ability, for example Floater.

So my current question is:

For this kind of game, what would you personally prefer?

A highscore per level?
A global player ranking?
Something closer to “best rescue result” rather than time?
No highscore at all?

I’m especially interested in what would feel motivating without turning the game into a stressful speedrun experience.

The screenshot shows the current local player menu. Each player can choose a difficulty level, and progress is saved separately per player and difficulty.

phoenixdk · June 7, 2026, 11:55am

I definitely agree that a time-based score doesn’t fit the game, and the success of the player should be measured primarily in how many they fizzles they save.
I forget how higher difficulties work, but if they have more fizzles, the score “cap” goes up automatically, giving the player a potentially higher score.

If there was no competition between players, I think I’d prefer a score system where there is a clear max, to track how close to perfect I’ve come (this requires knowing the theoretical max, or simplified values like 0-3 stars). An arbitrary number doesn’t seem meaningful on its own, unless each level has the same max score, so one can compare scores across levels.

As for what scores points, you should obviously reward sensible actions and possibly penalize bad ones (losing a fizzle for instance), but I can’t quite picture how to calculate them… maybe something like: fizzles_saved * difficulty_multiplier + (starting_moves - used_moves) * points_per_move. At least I think those are the relevant values

hpwsoft · June 7, 2026, 1:48pm

Thanks, that confirms pretty much the direction I was leaning towards.

I agree that a pure time-based score does not really fit the game. The main success value should be how many Fizzles the player manages to save.

Your point about a clear maximum is important. A random-looking total score would probably not be very meaningful unless the player understands what the maximum possible result is. That makes me think that a simple “rescued / total” result, or maybe a 1–3 star system per level, might be easier to understand than a complex score formula.

Something like:

1 star: minimum rescue requirement reached
2 stars: good rescue result
3 stars: all Fizzles rescued

I’m still unsure about rewarding unused abilities. Some levels are designed so that the intended or best solution requires using the available ability, for example Floater. So using fewer abilities is not always “better” in this game.

At the moment, I think the safest direction is:

measure success primarily by rescued Fizzles
avoid time pressure as the main score
keep the result easy to understand
maybe use stars later as a clear “how close to perfect was I?” indicator

For the next step I’ll probably keep the level result screen very simple and show the rescue result clearly, then think about a more polished score/star system later.