Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Feedback Requests' started by flamingpear, Jan 8, 2005.
I'm trying to stay on his good side so we get good reviews
What if the site gets popular and becomes actually influential? Would you feel the same way if it were your games being dismissed in a two-line review if it happened in front of an audience of hundreds of thousands?
As for my first game, it was a text adventure without an ending, so no, it wasn't "up to par". But I was 12, cut me some slack!
It would then be a fanboy site with no credibility, and I would still abstain from direct contribution to the site, for fear of being seen as a self-serving type looking for easy reviews/awards.
I agree. I'd like to be able to discuss development details without some guy with a blog treating it as headline news.
I'd feel even happier! That means that an audience of hundreds of thousands will hear about my game. If it's dismissed in 2 lines then I'm sure people will be keen to download it and see how bad it is.
Just drop it. You build the popularity to him.
Guys around know my always battle with another "indie news" site. And what we got in the final? Our game they were blaming still sells pretty well - our bestseller. And that site... it's still alive as well - god bless them!!!
A few thoughts
I went to the site, and for what it's worth, here are my two cents:
1. Wow, those are some nasty comments on some of those games. Obviously, if it's a bad game, you should tell it like it is (I can say that because my game isn't out for you to review yet ), but you could be a little more polite. Look at how the reviews on sites like gametunnel are done. Even when they give a really negative review, they try to remain polite about it.
2. Crappy previews dilute the excitement. Everyone likes previews. But what they like are previews of stuff that looks awesome. Open up one of the mainstream gaming magazines, and you'll see that it's filled with previews of cool looking games. It's not filled with poorly animated screenshots of early alphas. If you post a link from indiegamer, remember that many of the links posted here aren't all that interesting to outsiders yet. People are interested in attractive looking betas, not early looking buggy alphas. Posting links to test executables that crash and unfinished screenshots don't just annoy the developer, they fail to satisfy the reader.
That said, it is a nice looking site, and it does look like it could have potential. Just remember, that unlike with the tabloids, a gaming mag is mainly about introducing the reader to stuff that's awesome, not telling them about stuff that isn't.
Now Thumper, if you cant say something nice....
But seriously, perhaps focusing on games you thing are good will help - with the occasional negative one. I honestly, however, dont see the reviews as much more harsh than say gamehippo.com which can be brutal as well.
So, I finally went over to see what all the fuss was about.
I don't see these mentioned previews, but surely alpha/screenshot/previews should *only* go out if the developer is intending to release those screenshots to the public at large, as opposed to a developer forum? If I post a beta here for *developer* comment, do I need to include a 'Please do not link this' disclaimer?
I'm okay with opinionated reviews, especially ones that don't have numbers attached to them. If you just say "This game sucks" then it's hard to argue that it's unfair. You hated the game! But if you say "This game sucks" and give it a 1/10 where you give a fairly similar game (that, for whatever reason, you didn't hate) a 6/10 then it's likely to stir up arguing over how unfair it is.
I have more objections to a couple of specific things - take as suggestions?
You mention this Ginger Monkey thing and say that the game's a stinker. Okay, but... WHAT THE HECK KIND OF GAME IS IT? I have not a single idea from your reference. Is it a puzzle game? An action game? An adventure game? What was bad about it?
I used to read SOmething Awful ROMpit reviews with glee because one guy who did them was great at pointing out stupid things games did in a really funny way. Then at some point I guess he left and someone else tried to do the reviews, just ranting for paragraphs at a time finding new ways to say "This sucks" without ever bothering to say what, exactly, the game did that was crappy. (It's the difference between 'My grandma could write a better game with her cane!' and 'This control system is so unresponsive that my grandma would have a better chance beating up bad guys with her cane!')
Also, when you're doing the opinion stuff, try to avoid the use of 'We'. You do not speak for all gamers. Stick with 'I'.
This seems to be a popular request, so I'll try to keep those things more seperate from now on.
This one makes me sad. You're honestly saying that you would prefer a total indie-centric game site to be unpopular to being popular? Wow... .
As I've said before, I'm trying to do the best I can here, guys, to spread the news about indie games. I saw what I thought was a hole in the market (a site that focused on bringing all the news to one place), and am trying to fill it. The site is not really a review site. There are other review sites out there that do a good job (both of reviewing, and not stirring anybody up )... now that raises the question of why the opinion, if it's not a review site? Well, because I believe that the opinion makes the news more valuable to the readers... I don't have to play every game that I post about, but I try to do so, so that I can offer my readers a little bit of information beyond the press release. Now it's been kindly pointed out to me that there are some things I could be doing better, and I plan to try to do them better. People want the "facts" seperate from the "opinion"? Fine. I can do that. More useful information about what exactly I liked or didn't like about the game (thanks Papilion for really slamming me on that one--I needed it)? I'll do it.
I really hate to feel like I'm fighting the developers here . I don't want to fight you guys. I repent of some of the things I've done wrong, and I hope we can be on the same team. And you know what Ricardo, Reactor: if you want me gone, chances are I will be gone soon enough.
They didn't like the game, yet they presented that opinion in a professional manner (i.e. at no point does the word "sucks" appear).
Not at all flamingpear, I hope you're around for the long run (being impressed with how you handled our beta demo- thanks). I like the website too. Point was- just make sure you realise that your words carry extra weight, and need to be chosen carefully... and if that means doing a proper review instead of a quick opinionated comment, so be it.
I hope you see what I'm saying here.
No, however, I am saying that as it currently exists, I see your blog as being potentially harmful to the indie industry, should it become popular enough. Well-written and explained negative reviews are fine. Even a total trashing can be fun to read, provided the writer is able to back up his point of view. I don't think you're doing a good job at it.
If a game is bad, explain why. Personally, I don't think that saying something "the last thing the world needs is another Space Invaders type of game" is enough. Judge a game based on how well it succeeds in its genre, not based on what you would like it to be. You wouldn't trash Quake for "having poor RPG elements", would you? And I think you subconsciously realize this, because even after dismissing a game as being "another Space Invaders game", you toss is a recommendation for fans of the genre. So the game isn't bad, it's just not your cup of tea. I think reviews acknowledging that would be most welcome by everyone.
But you inject the news with your opinion before the reader has had a chance to evaluate things for him/herself. Sing it with me: "You gotta keep 'em separated"
That sounds great. If it is done, I think most of my complaints will be quieted for good.
One of your readers left a comment to the effect of "your loyalties should be to the gamers, not the developers", and I agree. I'm not trying to say you should cater to developers to the point where you lie to readers about the quality of the games you review. But I do hope you take a fairer approach to your reporting. If you're giving a negative review, justify your criticisms. It will show the developer that you actually spent time with the game and analyzed it, and perhaps will even help him/her improve it. And if you're reporting news, report news. If you want to write an op-ed piece, mark it as such. There's away to do both without mingling them, and then everyone's happier.
If you happen to review my first indie effort once it's out, I will hope for total honesty. The good, the bad, and the ugly. If you think it sucks, I want to hear it. But I also want to hear why. If devs just wanted to hear "meh, it sucks", we wouldn't seek media reviews at all, we can get that from any two-bit forum on the net.
I agree with papillon on this one.
I would actually prefer if posts here weren't used as a news source for re-printing. If people post on indiegamer.com then they know that they're exposing an idea or beta etc.. to a particular group of people. I think there's some fair level of expectation about where that post will end up.
It's not right to cut and paste their info to another forum or site no matter how benign the intentions are. I appreciate what you're trying to do with a new site and all, but I think you should encourage people to post news directly to your site and not just grab it from the forums. You could put up a little news entry form. I think there are obvious exceptions to this. A press release for example.
Well for what it's worth.. thats my 2cents
I had this problem on another board I used to visit, FWIW. I would post something remotely game/technical related and the Unreal news sites (who were apparently lurking the forum) would take it and run off to post it as news.
Hi, been working on the new BreakQuest release, and saw this thread today.
I don't really get the point of all this fuzz. I think anyone can write whatever he pleases (without personal offenses of course) about anything.
If he thinks that some indie games are crap I don't see why should he restrain to say so, of course some people may get upset/offended/sad/... but this is business and you should be ready for all kind of comments. Life is hard and not fair, this is a sad fact but a fact nevertheless.
It is fine that sites like GameTunnel try to push the people to the indie side with good comments for most games, but even there the most appreciated articles are the most critical (Monthly Roundup), anyway a mostly critical site (I'm not saying tigsource is a mostly critical site) would be as fine. It is up to the readers to choose what do they want to read and who will they thrust.
In my opinion, good sites get big, and bad sites do not. If someone bashes all the indie games and gets lots of traffic and adepts, good for him, I'll try to do better games and don't worry much about that.
Just my two cents
Yes, annoying, I agree. I've had my troubles with this and have stopped thinking of grey distinctions between public and private. Either the membership and policies of an area are controlled by you (private) or not (public). If I made a comment here about say... dividing my users into segmented markets, it might sound okay on Indie Business, but Machiavellian if quoted back out-of-context someplace else for my users to hear it. So I treat every statement made in a public place as public.
tigsource is fine the way it is
I'm new here, but I'll weigh in on this anyway...
I think flamingpear's site is great. He shouldn't change a thing. To the devs who don't like what he's posting, don't you realize he's getting most of his info from the News, Annoucements, and Feedback forum?
I think any site like his should cater to game players and not the developers. If he thinks a game is boring, he should say so. He shouldn't have to separate his facts from his opinions. In fact, I don't see how anyone could be confused by the two. Besides, if I wanted facts on the game I'll visit the official site. In my opinion, the only thing he shouldn't do is outright lie.
Good job pear. I read your site every day now.
Unfortunately, that limits and puts ceilings on open, honest discussion - which we could all benefit from.
Yes. "Feedback". People post downloads and screenshots in that forum all the time that aren't meant for consumption outside of this community of developers.
I asked Game Tunnel to review Open Range on Alawar's behalf. It's a well-done review. It might not be positive but the writer points out what he feels are the game's good points and shortcomings without resorting to base comments.
Another site (that will go unnamed) published a review of an Alawar game that said the audio caused him rectal pain and that the only people who should play it are Satan worshippers who want to torture small kids.
The writer made some valid points but wrapped them in insulting language. We can handle a bad review but there's a line between professional analysis and saying a game sucks that writers who want to develop a sense of integrity shouldn't cross. Anyone can download a demo and say "That sucks" but it takes a more thoughtful approach to write a good review.
Regarding TIG Source: I'd to see the site keep the news straightforward and leave the analysis to the editorial sites. What's news: That Deep Wars flopped or that it's out?
It's a small problem. Generally, you can say the same thing you would normally but with extra discretion and tact. Thinking practically, it doesn't make much sense to persuade other people to limit what they will repeat when you say things in a public forum.
It's not a matter of "tact." For example, there is nothing offensive or insensitive about princec's experimentation with different demo versions for a single release, and the analyses of it we all engaged in here. But gamers might think it so, regardless of the language used.