Educational example — not a CrocoApps project. This page analyzes a third-party product and presents an illustrative plan for a different, original project. No client relationship, development credit or endorsement is claimed.
Golf Peaks provides a useful reference for mobile game. The exercise below considers how a team could test a reusable level framework for a premium mobile puzzle concept.
Reference product: verified public facts
A puzzle game that uses movement cards to guide a ball across compact courses. The App Store presentation combines terrain obstacles with a sequence-planning mechanic.
Source: Official product listing / project site. Reviewed October 21, 2026.
Project screenshots
Project snapshot
| Reference product | Golf Peaks |
|---|---|
| Developer / seller attribution | Afterburn Lukasz Spierewka (listed seller) |
| Client | No CrocoApps client: third-party educational reference. |
| Country | Original commissioning-client geography not established. A US-facing brief below is hypothetical, not a claim about this product. |
| Industry | Mobile game |
| Platform | iOS / iPadOS |
| Engine / technology | Proposed: Unity/C#, scripted level assets and automated simulation checks. Original engine not verified. |
| Genre | Card-driven puzzle |
| Scope — proposed | A proposed slice includes 20 original levels, three terrain rules, a card interface, restart and undo. No live content service, shop or account system is included. |
| Team — proposed | One gameplay engineer, one designer, one environment/UI artist, shared QA and producer. |
| Timeline — illustrative | 8–12 weeks: rules prototype, authoring tools, level production, then device and usability testing. |
| Engagement model — proposed | Milestone-based discovery and vertical-slice delivery; any subsequent production requires a new estimate. |
| Status | Reference has a public product page; this educational production proposal has not been built or released. |
| CrocoApps role | No involvement in the reference project is asserted. |
| Budget range | Not estimated: dependent on approved scope, staffing, hardware and acceptance criteria. |
Links: View reference product.
Challenge — illustrative brief
The visible action is simple, but movement must remain consistent across terrain, direction changes and card order. A designer needs to know whether an apparent difficulty spike comes from the puzzle or an unclear rule.
Solution — proposed approach
Prototype a deterministic board simulation before adding presentation. Give each terrain tile an explicit transition rule. Add a designer-facing move trace so a failed level can be diagnosed as a content issue, a simulation issue or a feedback issue.
Gameplay and systems
Read the course, choose a movement card, predict the landing point, execute and revise the sequence.
Progression unlocks level groups. A finite card set is a puzzle resource rather than a paid economy. The proposed slice is single-player and offline. Analytics would compare failed attempts by obstacle type. A developer level editor replaces the need for a web admin panel; localization covers menus and accessible instructions.
Production scope
A proposed slice includes 20 original levels, three terrain rules, a card interface, restart and undo. No live content service, shop or account system is included.
- Game design: a written rules specification, content list and acceptance scenarios.
- UX/UI: interaction flows, readable feedback and supported-screen layouts.
- Art and animation: original assets limited to the agreed slice; no reuse of the reference game’s intellectual property.
- Development and backend: only the systems explicitly proposed above.
- QA: functional, device and interruption checks tied to the risks described below.
- Store submission: not included in the slice; prepare a separate release checklist if full production is approved.
- LiveOps: not included; ongoing content and operational ownership require a separate agreement.
Tech stack
Proposed: Unity/C#, scripted level assets and automated simulation checks. Original engine not verified.
Delivery and acceptance
Test every card at map boundaries and on each terrain transition. Compare the solver trace with the visible result. Confirm undo restores both ball position and remaining cards.
The illustrative schedule is 8–12 weeks: rules prototype, authoring tools, level production, then device and usability testing. These dates are planning assumptions, not the original project history or a binding quote. A handover would include source files, build instructions, a known-issues register and an acceptance report.
Results: evidence and measurement plan
The public product page supports the existence and described features of the reference. It does not establish a CrocoApps business outcome. Verified downloads, retention, session length, revenue, cost reduction, training completion and client testimonial data were not available in the reviewed evidence. No such results are invented here.
Track completion distribution and retries by level, time before the first valid move and abandonment after a new obstacle. These are proposed measurements, not published results.
What we learned
A level editor is a production investment: it helps designers test combinations without asking engineers to modify every course.
Illustrative appreciation letter
ОБРАЗЕЦ. The letter below is an AI-generated educational mockup from the fictional company Misty Summit Studio. Its text, emblem, seal and signature are invented. It is not a testimonial from the actual developer, seller or publisher and does not evidence a CrocoApps engagement.
The team translated the movement rules into a clear, testable level framework.
Illustrative wording — Misty Summit Studio (fictional company).
Build a game in this category
Planning an original project with comparable production needs? Share your target platform, audience, core mechanic and release constraints so the scope can be estimated. This reference analysis is not a promise to reproduce another studio’s assets or proprietary implementation.