Puzzle phenomenon 2048 spawned a lot of copies and imitators, which, depending on your point of view, is sort of ironic since 2048 is itself more-than-heavily-inspired-by Threes! 2048 Bricks offers a slightly different spin on things by keeping the basic concept and adding in a twist. Or... stack. See, each level has five stacks, with each stack having a certain number of blocks on it, and each block has its own value. Click a stack to pick up the top-most block, and then another stack to drop it, though you can only stack blocks on those with numbers of equal or lesser value. By stacking a block on top of one that matches its current value, the two will combine into a new block that represents the combined total of the old ones, so stacking two fours will net you a single eight. The goal is to figure out how to reach a single block with a total of 2048, which usually isn't hard, but doing so in as few moves as possible is another story.
2048 Bricks is a simple game in much the same way as 2048 itself was, and it's got a super simple presentation to go with it, not that that's a bad thing when it comes to a straight-forward puzzle. The concept itself is a good one, since it makes for slow, thoughtful play as you plan out your moves in advance in order to try to break the world record for each level, though after a while you'll probably find yourself wishing the game had more teeth to it. There's no real way to lose, so it's more a matter of how long it takes you to win instead of if you'll win at all, and the fact that it's broken up into levels instead of being randomly generated makes the lack of variety more glaring than in its parent concept. Still, its emphasis on structured puzzling and winning conditions as planning versus a simple high score is appealing. There's nothing random about it. No-frills puzzle games are always welcome in the same way games of Solitaire are, to fill the time with quiet, satisfying entertainment. 2048 Bricks is unlikely to become the next slayer of free time and social obligations everywhere, but it's on the right track to developing the concept beyond "cloning" what already exists.
This game is better than towers of hanoi because it doesn't take 10000 years to beat one game. Also, it's less repetitive and has music.
The only thing wrong with it is I wish I could click the next brick without having to wait for the starsplosions to finish. I played it a bunch of times in a row and that was the only issue. Sometimes I clicked three times trying to get it to go. It's a super simple game and doesn't need anything else but that little speed up. I didn't bother trying to get the world records and I ignored the score. Just clear the board and move along. It's fun to beat a level right when the music ends!
I'd love "restart level", "undo move", and "back to level select" buttons. Other than that, great puzzler!
Fun little puzzle, indeed! Thank goodness for mute, that soundtrack is not my favorite.
Level 20, 21 moves, "New World Record"! Yay!
In lvl #100, "world record" says 2. Anyone here who managed that? ;)
Set a new world record for 61 was 26 now 24; it may be possible to do better.
@Ristina Nielsen
I think James T. Kirk might have.
WOHO! World record for me!!!!!!!
Level 10 World Record was 24, Now its 22. Still possible to improve I think.
Does world record really mean that they save the record for everyone to see or is it just shown to the person that got it?
I am saving an image before the last move, not that I think I need to prove it, but to answer your question as to how you can prove it.
96 is no longer 29, but 27
If you replay your world record level and don't make a world record, you lose your status as having had that world record. :-(
A couple of the world records are apparently somehow "0"?
I find it fun to create my own challenge: Build a tower of 1024-516-...-2 and then put a 2 on top for a huge combo!
Sue Gallo
Yea, I noticed that it loses your record, which sucks. It would be nice if it kept your lowest score.
The world record for 33 is now 25 moves.
Update