Feedback Making games, being underestimated.

[kaddy]

Hi,
I once showed someone a game i made in GM, and he was like "Do you call this a game?" (he was expecting something like Call of duty or Tomb Raider).
You guys had any similar exp?

 

[StuffandThings85]

Whenever you show someone something you made, always expect harsh criticism. Everyone hears it at some point. But criticism can only make you better. I posted a short demo of a fangame I was working on, and it was torn to shreds. That told me I had much more to learn, and I'll continue working on it to make it better.

 

[StuffandThings85]

Thought I'd share my brutal reviews. The first one is the version I made from scratch, I didnt use any kind of engine, and I this is really the first thing I had even done.

Spoiler: Review 1

This is from an updated "improved" version with an actual engine. Believe it not, this one was actually better than the original.

Spoiler: Review 2

 

[kaddy]

Yes, criticism actually helps one get better. However, some criticize just for the sake of criticism, with no actual reason.
That's specially bad when you have an app/game in the Play Store, where reviews are taken into account (by some) before installing. Which makes you look a bit notorious.

 

[kaddy]

Lol, StuffandThings85, the person who wrote the first review pointed to many things. For which i see his review "Helpful" in my opinion (except for the last expression, lol).
KingdomOfGamez Some times we need to hear some of the "Cool/Good/Awesome/Amazing game!" comments. They also helps you stay motivated.

 

[Overloaded]

I don't understand how harsh criticism can improve you. Harsh criticism is just spreading negativity and can disappoint the content creator. No matter how bad a game is, being harsh does not help at all. It just shows how much of an idiot you are.

The only criticism than can help is constructive criticism. It lets the creator know that you care about the content enough to criticize it in order to IMPROVE it and it's a good way to express your opinions, whether they are positive or negative, to the creator.

Ignore harsh comments, embrace helpful and constructive ones.

 

[StuffandThings85]

^true, that's why you should always consider the source, and gauge their attitude as well. You can clearly tell when someone is complaining just to complain or actually offering something helpful. That is a huge problem with AAA games, when people on the internet whine about some new game. Some people will just say "this game sucks", instead of something like "the progression of the game is unbalanced" or "the menu/HUD is disorganized and confusing".

 

[makas]

worst than criticism... the totally ignored thing, for me is heartbreaking, I would really appreciate some harsh criticism like the ones showed in this thread because this at least gives you a hint where to work, but being totally ignored when you post your work in some places is really sad and hard, because you actually dont get any feedback at all... good thing Im too old give up because of those feelings...

 

[TsukaYuriko]

I'll move this to Game Design, Development and Publishing because I think it is a very relevant topic and does not in the slightest belong in Off Topic - the process of receiving feedback and processing it is essential to being a developer.


I'd choose to receive harsh, yet helpful criticism ("This game is a disaster because (...)") over sympathetic pity ("This game has lots of room for improvement and could be better") or silence at any time. The latter two do not help me improve. The former does - if I allow it to do so by realizing the benevolent intention behind the rough equivalent of a wake-up slap.

If whatever I make or do is complete and utter crap, I expect people to tell me that this is the case instead of essentially lying to my face. If a concept I present or represent is so fundamentally broken that no amount of effort could fix it, merely steer it in a slightly less bad direction (or maybe not even that), they are free to tell me exactly that. I highly value all forms of criticism if it helps me to improve. The exact method of conveyance is merely a matter of personal preference and capability, and may differ in feasibility between people.

Mere bashing without offering improvement suggestions - destructive criticism - is not helpful in the slightest. Therefore, I discard it entirely, as it is not even relevant to my ever-lasting core interest: Improving.

 

[Nallebeorn]

I don't understand how harsh criticism can improve you. Harsh criticism is just spreading negativity and can disappoint the content creator. No matter how bad a game is, being harsh does not help at all. It just shows how much of an idiot you are.

The only criticism than can help is constructive criticism. It lets the creator know that you care about the content enough to criticize it in order to IMPROVE it and it's a good way to express your opinions, whether they are positive or negative, to the creator.

Ignore harsh comments, embrace helpful and constructive ones.

Criticism can be both harsh and constructive. I don't approve of overly negative and derogatory comments; but if they contain good, useful advice on how to improve the game, that advice shouldn't be ignored just because it was delivered with harsh words. It's great for the morale to hear people tell you how awesome your game is once in a while, but that doesn't help improving it.
Of course, the best feedback is both encouraging and constructive (but I'd rather have the latte). And the worst "feedback" is neither, like what OP mentioned.

 

[YanBG]

I suppose it was underestimated back in the day when many companies got broke because you had to write engine from scratch and sell CDs, but now that everybody with free time can make games using GM i would say no.

 

[FrostyCat]

Here's my argument for those simpleton "this sucks" replies being useful: They signal precisely where not to target.

If it's just a small handful of those bullet-porn mongerers flaming back about your game not being like Call of Duty or Halo, that's fine. Haters will be haters. But if you get mostly those, you should focus your efforts elsewhere --- either your product or your market segmentation sucks.

 

[Cavender_Games]

I have yet to hear back on my post about my first game and it is scary. People are seeing the post and I don't see my game being downloaded. On the other hand though the best way to get feedback that counts is to watch people in real life play your game. If you have a phone game just hand your phone to someone and what their facial expressions and how they react and interact with the game!

 

[GMWolf]

I suppose it was underestimated back in the day when many companies got broke because you had to write engine from scratch and sell CDs, but now that everybody with free time can make games using GM i would say no.

Sure getting a small demo up and running isnt difficult thanks to Gm and other engines, but completing a polishing a full game? This till requires a large ammount of effort.

Games these days are much more polished, and generally better than before because less dev time is a located to the engine. Look at indie games today, they are generally better than a lot of commercial games made 10-20 years back!
This isnt because its easier these days, but because more time can be spend making a good game. If anything, I would argue that good game design and asset creation can be harder than getting an engine running (for me, at least.)

Then there is filling your game with content and polish. However you look at it, its always going to be at least 80% of the work. Even if its procedurally generated. (Yes, even flappy bird. I'm sure the menus, high scores, etc took more time than the game engine).

 

[fxokz]

yeah ive had an experience where people laughed at my game but i realised it actually sucked. Once i showed people a mobile game i was making and they actually liked it and took turns playing it. There are too many variables..

 

[Alice]

Generally, I think useful feedback can have different components to it.

First, what player simply didn't like - it doesn't necessarily need to be an objectively bad design choice, but it signals that some aspect of the game might make it less successful; if no one disagrees, or even the same sentiment is shared by multiple people, dev might want to change it. And, conversely, what player did like - so that developer gets better idea of what's the main appeal of the game, and should not be given up on (especially if some others dislike that part).

Then, suggestions of fixes - how to resolve the issues the game has; possibly the most useful aspect of the feedback, as it gives dev some clear direction instead of leaving them with issues, but no way to address them. Of course, sometimes it might be hard to nail down how to improve things. I might be able to find that "this animation looks wrong", but don't know what exactly should be done to make it look properly. Still, it might be phrased like "this animation looks wrong, but I can't quite tell how to improve it" - it can spare the dev fruitless asking for details.

Finally, there can be additional ideas (related to new features, rather than improving existing ones), though it's best to avoid overly pushy tone (like "you totally should add X!", as opposed to "maybe you could add X?") - not every idea is great, and not every works well with the game concept the developer has.

Of course, another thing is the tone of the feedback - I generally try to focus on the potential ("how the game could be made better") instead of the current state ("why is the game terrible now"), and generally try not to use expletives or be harsh just for the sake of it. At the same time, people have different temperaments, and some just don't bother, or simply cannot, phrase their criticism in the motivating rather than judging way (the former is more desired for WIPs). Sooner or later, the developer will still need to learn to deal with them, and to salvage the useful information out of their feedback. The comments on @StuffandThings85 weren't particularly nicest and phrases like "you should feel bad for creating this" are unnecessarily negative, but they did contain plenty of useful information, too.

 

[GerPronouncedGrr]

One thing I've personally had to learn about praise & criticism, is that they are always subjective. A person may say, "x y and z are objectively bad design choices", but in truth there's no such thing as truly objective criticism. And while this is heartening when applied to criticism, it can equally be applied to praise. What a person likes about your game is exactly that, what *they* like, not some kind of objective truth.

I think there's a general trend in the industry, both in large studios and indie, to avoid "known bad design choices" and gravitate towards "known fun stuff", or whatever. This is why every huffing game these days has crafting and zombies. My assumption is that this is, in large part, due to playing it safe financially. As solo developers, however, we have the great advantage of being able to be highly experimental with our time & projects.

What I'm trying to say is, when receiving praise or criticism, harsh words or kind, we need to be critical of both their source and their context (the game being discussed). If we're making an FPS, probably don't be surprised if RTS players don't enjoy it, or give you advice that seems weird or wrong. Conversely, if hardcore FPS communities are excited about what you show them, you should be proud of what you've made already, but also be prepared to listen very closely to their critiques and suggestions.

Having said all of that, I'm also reminded of that famous Ford quote, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have asked for faster horses." So, regardless of what people say, you need to have a strong vision for your project, and stick to it. Only you can make your game. No one else will ever have those exact ideas. Please don't make another zombie crafting FPS.

 

[SnoutUp]

To be fair, it's also very common for developers overestimate their own creations and sugar coat feedback to others creating a warm cozy bubble, which hurts a lot when popped by the harsh reality. People who expect Tomb Raider from you or those, who don't think that 2D games are games, are not really relevant, but harsh criticisms can still bring something to the table, if reviewer chooses strong words/trolling, but still brings up valid points. Learning to ignore the trolls or keep your calm while reading negative reviews is pretty hard, but important step to keep you away from public meltdowns.

I stopped showing games to my friends, because they're only politely interested and don't really know how to react. Also, they start asking if I earn any money from this, which just hurts more.

 

[kaddy]

I stopped showing games to my friends, because they're only politely interested and don't really know how to react. Also, they start asking if I earn any money from this, which just hurts more.

Very good point. I noticed that too.
Someone asked me once whether do i generate any bucks from making games. And i just couldn't find where to start answering him (i hate that question).
In the first place, i just started making games because i enjoyed making games. I didn't even think of it as a money source or sth.

 

[Yal]

IMO playing objectively bad games (e.g. more or less anything released by LJN (for the NES) or THQ (for GBA etc)) is a really good source on finding stuff to avoid, and it's always good to find a bunch of gamer friends that are genuinely interested in game design... having something be acceptance-tested by end users is one thing, but having that be the ONLY testing means you'll always make mistakes that makes the end quality of the game worse. If you know someone that's interested in cult classics like Majora's Mask and Psychonauts, that's the perfect type of test player if you're making any sort of 'meaningful' game (and not just quick soulless mobile apps made to generate money).

IMO the first sign of making a good game is when you end up test playing for much longer than planned because you're having fun. If you never reach that point, and your goal with your game is to provide interesting gameplay, you need to change up something because you're doing it wrong. You should always aspire to do a game filled with stuff you enjoy, because you can tell when you're doing that right. Trying to make something you THINK someone else would enjoy without being able to relate to it... will make your game feel slightly off.

Also, don't underestimate marketing... if people won't notice your game, you won't get any players. I've kinda got first-hand experience with that. If you're making a big game, save stuff for the sequel(s), and make them using an improved version of the same source file... get a fan following over time before you try to make a big splash.

 

[Galladhan]

One thing I've personally had to learn about praise & criticism, is that they are always subjective. A person may say, "x y and z are objectively bad design choices", but in truth there's no such thing as truly objective criticism. And while this is heartening when applied to criticism, it can equally be applied to praise. What a person likes about your game is exactly that, what *they* like, not some kind of objective truth.

I think the same. There are aspects in a videogame (but also in a movie, or a book, etc) that can be judged "objectively". For example, if i say: "Tetris is a horrible game", it's pretty clear that i don't understand much about game design. The same holds true for the opposite: some games are undeniably bad, as @Yal pointed out (and i agree with you: they're very useful to understand what is a "no-no").

But, in my opinion, there's nothing like "the perfect review". Many videogame critics think they have enough experience to judge a game objectively. They write their review, they put a number below them, and then they go and check metacritic.com to see if that number is aligned with their colleagues around the world. And some of them even think: "The more the number is aligned to the average score, the more my review was objective" (!)

Giving a final verdict to a game is handy for those who have to (or want to) judge/review the game, but it's kinda a trap.
How can you decide that a game is worth 8/10 instead of 6/10? It's very limiting, and pretty unfair for the developers, cause their games are thrown in a big cauldron where there are many different ingredients.
How can you evaluate a game like Rhythm Tengoku or Electroplankton with the same value system you use for Call of Duty or Forza Motorsport? It's a stretch.

Even worse when someone is forced to judge/review a game they don't like. I can do my best to be very neutral and objective if i write a Metal Gear Solid's review, but if i don't like stealth games and kilometric FMV cutscenes, it will be clear to the reader that i didn't have much fun playing the game.

When i was a kid, and i was reading C64 games' reviews on Zzap!, i wasn't expecting "the perfect reviews".
I knew that a couple of reviewers had tastes similar to mine, and so i was pretty sure that if they appreciated a game, i would have liked it too.

That's why i think you should always try to figure out who's judging your game.

 

[vidokas]

Some time ago i wrote music.
Now if I showing it to someone, I dont say that it's my music.
I Just say "Listen to this"
Then I get straightforward opinion

About those reviews on top.
They are harsh but constructive.

This game zucks is harsh and not constructive

 

[fxokz]

There is also the factor that people just may not like the game but others love it. For example when my friend played undertale he hated the game soo much yet there are 2 million sales and soo much love and fan art for the game. Even a facebook page made by fans..

My point being that you cannot please everyone.

 

[Ramaraunt]

I have a friend named muffin who is a 13yo. He once told me my 2d game is terrible because it has "poor graphics" and I probably spent no time working on it. I then invited him to help me work on it, and he quit after a day.

EDIT: But he is a pretty chill guy, don't get me wrong. I just find him funny sometimes...

 

[ajan-ko]

What doesn't kill you only makes you stronger.
In the end of the day, they just hitting keyboard with their fingers, move on, raise your skill level.

Well, don't get discouraged, some job even much sh*ttier.
At some point of my life, I was working on traditional chinese restaurant (helping my parents),
You have to put your hands on cold ice to mix the smelly dough, and remove the fish bones (d*mn, I hate making fish meatball).
and people can really harsh in your front on your face.

Negative comment on internet? That's just so kawai.

Don't get discouraged, everybody start being a noob in life, but you have to learn fast, and raise.

Very good point. I noticed that too.
Someone asked me once whether do i generate any bucks from making games. And i just couldn't find where to start answering him (i hate that question).
In the first place, i just started making games because i enjoyed making games. I didn't even think of it as a money source or sth.

Be careful, money is really sensitive topic.

 

[Cinderfire]

Most people I find take critque the wrong way. Feedback given from a user is always shaped towards their perception they had of the game, not nessecarily how you wanted the game to be percived upon creating it. Do not let other peoples opinions and ideas shape your product, it is afterall yours, not theirs. Feedback is used to ground you in reality and give perspective. It is often used as another form of "debugging", not in testing the mechanics, but how they are communicated to the user. This is why the most valueable feedback is always having someone play your game, as you can clearly see where your design fails or succeds and adjust accordingly, whereas a written review with a bunch of because reasonings, leads you to deconstruct the feedback to find the real source of the problem, not what they think to be the source. Disregard the because, focus on the what.

 

[Fredrik]

I work with 3D in GMS and rarely work with 2D, and I often have to inform that the game was made in Game Maker, as with other engines like etc: Unity, you'll already have most of the shaders, effects and other basic stuff like cameras, fps/3rd person player instances already pre-created for the developer, while in GM you usually have to create all this yourself. Due to this a random person just trying "game developement" for fun with other engines/softwares than GM will probably manage to make a better and prettier game than you will in GM.

 

[TomS]

Thought I'd share my brutal reviews. The first one is the version I made from scratch, I didnt use any kind of engine, and I this is really the first thing I had even done.

Spoiler: Review 1

View attachment 4526

This is from an updated "improved" version with an actual engine. Believe it not, this one was actually better than the original.

Spoiler: Review 2

View attachment 4527

brutal

 

[Shariku Onikage]

You say he was expecting a game like Call of Duty and that his expectations may have been too high but i think most people nowadays, even in the mainstream gaming audiences, are prepared to see terrible games in some form of another (Flappy Bird is pretty much the pivotal example of a terrible looking game that became mainstream). If the guy played it and was disappointed then his opinion shouldn't be dismissed as it just being different to his expectations (unless that's exactly what he said).

The opinion is still relevant. There is something to be learned from every review (unless they're clearly going out of their way to mock and belittle you to the point where it's cleared they've not played it).