August's Indie Games (GT)

[cyrus_zuo]

The replacement for the monthly round-up is up. The new article is called 'The 60-Minute Trial.'

Read it here: http://www.gametunnel.com/articles.php?id=636

[papillon]

Well, it's sort of a pity not having different points of view to compare anymore, but it still does a good job at bringing up a bunch of interesting good-and-bad games that people might have missed under the floods of hidden objects. So, yay? :)


I don't know if it's the shorter format or just that none of the games this month were It for me, but I didn't feel compelled to pursue anything beyond a quick glance over the listings. Still, I am picky.

[cyrus_zuo]

Yeah, I think it is a shame that the panel dissolved itself. I would have loved to have kept the monthly panel running indefinitely, but the number of people that quit the panel over the last 6 months brought it to its sad demise. At the end there was 1 person on the panel (notably that person was actually 2 people who combined to a single review slot).

Without panel members there is no panel...despite my wishes to the contrary!

After months of extra work and stress in trying to keep the panel afloat, I came to the realization that I was trying to push an empty boat over the land. Clearly, it was time to try something different.

Long live the Illustrious panel! And one more big thanks for all those who donated their time and energies to making it happen for as long as it did :). (3 years and 1 month!)

[WaveRider]

I have to say, the different viewpoints were the key element in the monthly round-up. It's just not the same without them.

There must be others out there who are willing to be a part of a new panel. I will volunteer my services if it will help kick things off again.

I understand what you're saying about it being time for a change, but maybe getting rid of the panel concept isn't your only option. Was ten games a month too much for your people? how about 5 a month? What about a "Game-A-Week" thing?

With Panel = great resource for finding what's hot and what's not.
Without Panel = just some guy's opinion on just another blog.

[tagged]

I admit, like papillon, I found this to be unexciting, unlike the feeling I got when viewing the monthly roundup.. Is that the format or the games that made me feel that way though?


Hmm, with the lack of volunteers.. Have you thought about maybe having some bonus for volunteering, as in if a developer volunteers then you end up doing some feature on their latest/upcoming game? It's probably something you have already looked at with multiple angles, but just wanted to put out another voice about missing the panel.

Good job on this one though, I should at least mention that your work isn't ignored and is appreciated :)

[jankoM]

cyrus ... maybe you can spice it back up and add "multiple voices" by alowing commenting on each review (you know people here are always full of oppinions on the subject)

[jeb_]

What does the symbols represent in the verdict? Some kind of rating?

[Addictive 247]

You got the full version price of Donuts in Danger wrong. It should be $12.95 not $19.95

I also believe that Hap Hazard is cheaper than stated in the round up

[papillon]

What if it were something like it is currently plus a bunch of talking heads who were only intended to make *really quick* comments instead of full reviews? Snap-Judgement Heads?

If each little chirpy head is only supposed to say one or two sentences expressing their overall opinion instead of a paragraph, then they could do it a lot faster (and perhaps there'd be less complaining if they ARE giving snap judgments rather than in-depth multi-hour playtest comments, making it easier for Cas - or me - to take part :) )

Verdict: A fun all-around game for the whole family, but perhaps not challenging enough to sustain interest in the long term...

Head 1: No mouse-button swap support? I hate you.

Head 2: Those flying sheep are SO CUTE!!!

Head 3: I feel guilty for liking this game, but my daughter adored it.


You'd still get the feeling of different opinions without a lot of commitment on the part of the talking heads.

[princec]

Hm yes... the new format's not nearly so interesting I think (but then I would say that wouldn't I ;))

Cas :)

[Andy]

cyrus ... maybe you can spice it back up and add "multiple voices" by alowing commenting on each review (you know people here are always full of oppinions on the subject)

Nice idea really!!!!

[Promaginy]

I don't mind the new format. I would suggest a stop watch graphic that illustrates how fun those 60 minutes were. Have the hand at 15 minutes if the first 15 minutes were fun, at 45 minutes if the those 45 minutes were fun, etc.

Glad to see you capturing those games that have long tutorials being deeper than the first 60 minutes. A good strategy game must be deeper than 60 minutes of play whereas a good action game should have the player thrilled within the first 10 minutes.

This could be a unique feature of Game Tunnel by emphasizing what is fun in 60 minutes instead of doing a short review. Also, you should always list the version you are playing since gameplay can always be improved with modification.

[rioka]

Why not have your volunteer reviewers only play and review one game per month? That way, they won't be overburdened with multiple games and you can still put out an article with that reviewers voice plus yours and readers can see opposing views about the game (or not).

[cyrus_zuo]

You got the full version price of Donuts in Danger wrong. It should be $12.95 not $19.95

I also believe that Hap Hazard is cheaper than stated in the round up

Oops...need to fix those :(.

[cyrus_zuo]

Thanks for all the thoughts.

Don't want to beleaguer this too much, but it sounds like it is worth mentioning again the amount of time that has gone into tweaking the round-up so that it would work. It's only been after a year of trying to make it work and feeling like it was only becoming more troublesome that I realized I was pushing the empty boat on the sand.

Here's perhaps an easy way to think about it.

Work/Time = Article Appeal

Over the last 18 months, the article appeal, as measured by readership, links to the article, and comments about the round-up, has been decreasing.

Over the last 18 months, the work/time put into the article has been increasing. (this is largely due to a revolving door of writers, and the newer writers, in addition to being hard to find [many volunteer, few follow-through], have also required more guidance on my part and not been as dependable)


What I've done over the time has been to try many different ways to put the equation back in balance so that one side wasn't increasing at a great rate, while the other was decreasing at a great rate. Notably, many of the suggestions given here further increase the work/time side of the equation while the article appeal isn't increased. Those ideas are fun and great and I'd love to do them, but with the article appeal steadily declining for so long despite many efforts to change that, increasing the work to do it is not an approach I'm pursuing any further (I believe the last 18 months were strongly indicative of the future of the article).

So with that, I love the ideas, please keep them coming. And as you do, frame the ideas in the equation above; it will be more effective in attacking the issues.

[papillon]

What about if you allow a cadre of trusted developers (trusted in the sense of 'will not post "THIS BLOWS GOATS!" as their remark') to add optional comments, even after the article is posted?

Admittedly this would require some work on your end up front to rejig the webpage and therefore might be a pain for you. I expect some sort of blogging software could do it, though. If each review were like a little post and it allowed comments by those with access...

Then you wouldn't have to wait around screaming and nagging at people to get their reviews in already, you could just post your reviews and be done with it. The additional viewpoints would materialise over time. This could increase interest in the articles, since people could get involved by adding their say, or could reread the same roundup they'd read before to see new content added to it as comments came in.

[RinkuHero]

I really like that idea. It'd be like Amazon.com's reviews, except only for trusted reviewers.

[arcadetown]

Think the information is more concise and better. Overall an improvement. However my initial impression is one of mostly confusion from a user perspective. What is a "Case"? What are those timer dohickeys? I quickly figured out but I bet your normal attention deficit user won't bother. Also why not sort best games at top?

[Promaginy]

I would agree that perhaps the best time games be listed at the top - it makes it easier for the user viewing it. Let the creme float to the top. Also, I would change the title of each game reviewed from 'case' to 'clock' or just remove the 'case' title.

Consider a statement at the top like - "10 hours was spent checking out the 10 latest indie games - which ones are worth your time?"

I like the time clock (it was my suggestion - so I better like it :p). I was thinking that with each game being played for 60 minutes and of that 60 minutes how much was enjoyable. A game that loses its fun at 15 minutes is not that great from the reviewer's perspective.

When you think about it, time is the currency we are talking about when it comes to free demos. We don't want to waste a customer's time so we recommend the games thought to be worth their time.

[cyrus_zuo]

Think the information is more concise and better. Overall an improvement. However my initial impression is one of mostly confusion from a user perspective. What is a "Case"? What are those timer dohickeys? I quickly figured out but I bet your normal attention deficit user won't bother. Also why not sort best games at top?

Think the sort at top is in order...and I have gotten a couple people confused with the timer dohickeys (and some people wondering if the new style is just incredibly harsh...which...maybe it is?).

Will continue to consider changes for the coming month(s).

@ papillon
I have to say I just don't trust opening it up more would lead to more information. I think some games might get several comments, others would get none, and I doubt it would increase the likelihood of people linking to the article or reading it. I think having a set panel greatly increases the chances of solid coverage across all the games and the consistency increases the readership. So I think it sounds fun, but as well, I see extra work, stress (wondering if anyone will post), and I think flat readership. However, I would love to have comments on the articles...that was a part of the master plan...years ago...still think there is a positive to comments :).

[mooktown]

Woah... I'm having serious dé·jà vu about 'Arcadia' & 'Out of Your Mind', what's happening to me...? :confused:

EDIT: ok, I worked it out, this is 'Arcadia-Remix' and 'OoYM' I played a beta of earlier in the year.
I think I'm catching back up with the fabric of the universe now! ;)