Windows protected your PC
More info① click here
Run anyway② and this button appearsDon't run
A signature costs money every year, and these days a signed file still gets the box until enough people have downloaded it. For a free game, it wasn't worth it.
## Your save lives elsewhere, so new versions keep it
The save isn't next to the game file; it's in `%APPDATA%\Pixling`. When a new version comes out, **download the new zip and overwrite the old files.** Your creatures stay.
## What it can't do yet
| Can't | Why |
|---|---|
| Run on Mac or phones | It relies on Windows window features |
| Update itself | The game never goes online. New versions come from this page |
| Skip the blue box | No code signature |
| Vouch for antivirus behaviour | How antivirus tools view the "is a key held down?" polling **hasn't been measured yet** |
## Sprite credits
This is a non-commercial fan game. The Digimon sprites belong to Bandai; the Pokémon sprites belong to Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures. The full notice is in the in-game credits window and in `OUTPUT_NOTICE.md` inside the zip.
## The detailed record starts here
## Three sessions built it, and the line between them is whose sentence it is
Pixling is built by three AI sessions. The **planning session** writes the design and the spec, and decides what comes next. The **development session** owns code, tests, building the executable and the verification tools. The **art session** only makes pictures. Orders arrive two ways: as a stage table in the spec, pass conditions included, landing in a commit — or as a message between sessions.
At first the boundary looked like a **list of prohibitions**: development doesn't edit the spec, and so on. But on the day the line actually broke, nothing prohibited had happened. The development session handed planning **"the line you should add to the spec" as a ready-made quote.** It never touched the spec — but it **decided the sentence**, which is the same line crossed.
So the line was redrawn. **Measuring and handing over is development's job; deciding with that number is planning's.** "Doing this gives that value" is fine. "So let's write this in the document" is not.
The messaging itself leaked too. **Three of four messages** between sessions went by unread. So the design stopped trusting the sender: **the receiving side now checks for itself every turn.**
## All-green checks still don't tell you whether it runs on screen
Every executable build runs four checks: was it stamped, have no commits landed since the build, is nothing left uncommitted, and was the game not running while it was built. One day all four were green, and the intended commit was confirmed to be in the build.
Then the game was launched, and the new feature **didn't show at all.** Only the code that positions the fighters had shipped. **The battle animation itself was missing entirely.**
The four checks were perfect at **"what went in"** and looked at none of **"does it run on screen."** Those are different questions. Since then, before saying a feature works, the rule is **to launch it and look at that screen** — and if it can't be launched, to make the check look at the resulting screen before saying anything.
