next »

[FamousAspect]

I just read a great post on gamasutra by an indie, mobile developer explaining why seeking coverage on mobile review sites is a waste of time. I wanted to share some highlights in case you don't want to read the full post.

The setup:

Dozens of guides exist providing tips on how to make your mobile game stand out in the hopes of garnering some review attention. So armed with this knowledge, you put together a press package, research which sites to approach, find out who to contact and what their favourite color is and then start initiating contact. This is what I did, and in my opinion it was about as effective as wishing on a star.

On the effort spent:

On [both titles]  I’ve spent weeks of my time reaching out to review sites and have zero to show for it.... Between Vex Blocks and Itzy3d, I’ve initiated over 400 contacts with mobile review sites, not counting some actual back and forth conversations and follow-up. I’ve received a big, fat goose egg for reviews for our latest title, Vex Blocks and one review for Itzy3d from a site that is no longer active.

The paid review scam:

The other reviews we received for Itzy3d were paid reviews of poor quality I shelled out for in a desperate attempt for exposure before I realized I was being scammed. I currently have an email box full of review sites asking for money for their “expedited review services” ranging from $25 to upwards of $300-$400 for exposure on sites that rarely even reveal meaningful data regarding readership when requested.

On being a small fish in a big ocean:

Now while I’m sure a piece by a well known game site certainly wouldn’t hurt app exposure, the reality is these sites are inundated with requests for reviews and most likely if you don’t know (or aren’t willing or able to pay) you’re just one of thousands of voices crying for attention.

The conclusion:

I’m not saying that you might not get lucky with review sites. You might win the lottery. What I am saying is there’s probably more productive ways you could spend your time promoting your game.

Obviously, this is from the perspective of a developer who has had success getting onto review sites. Have you successfully gotten your mobile game reviewed, and if so, was it worth the effort?

[Chris Koźmik]

I think it's even simplier. Players who look for a mobile game do not read review sites (I would find it really odd, someone spending hours to find out which game (which cost $0.99) for his phone (on which you play waiting for a bus) would be best). So no matter on how many you are covered it is meaningless.

I guess PC gamers (especialy for niche games) could read reviews (to estimate if it is worth their money).

[Impmaster]

Yeah, it's different for PC and console gamers cause a. It's hard to find good games. b. Games are expensive.

I'm guessing putting up youtube vids or getting people to like your game on facebook are probably better ways to get marketing for your games.

[Mittens]

Yeah, this article pretty much mirrors my experience with app review sites, I have 'shipped' 2 games on the app store and I went to the same level of effort at this guy, putting together all this media in the professional way, researching how to do effective press releases and review request emails blah blah blah.

all of it amounted to nothing, the one site which got me the most exposure was one I never contacted, they somehow stumbled across my game on google play and decided to give it a good review without ever talking to me.

[TeeGee]

Spoiler: the games in question are poop. 


AppStore is saturated with quality stuff. It's hard to breakthrough even with something really cool, so mediocre games stand absolutely no chance. That said, a few friends with very successful and widely reviewed games also told me that most mobile reviews are worth nothing. Even a raving review or an award on Touch Arcade don't really have that much impact these days. You pretty much have to build your audience yourself, get a publisher, or hope to get lucky with N&N.

[Gregg Williams]

I think getting coverage on Touch Arcade, and some others is really important. The more external media exposure, pre-release reviews, and so forth you manage, the higher your chances of an Apple Feature IMO.

[Ruxar]

That said, a few friends with very successful and widely reviewed games also told me that most mobile reviews are worth nothing.

That's a bit depressing... but i guess its all about building your brand. Even if you don't get a lot of impact from a review at least you've got a contact for next time. 

[SterlingDee]

The game they were trying to get reviewed wasn't really review friendly imo so I'm not surprised. The graphics are fine but I don't see that type of screenshot appealing to a review site.

[Hijinkz]

So yeah, reviews of a game are great for potentially putting a feather in your hat if it well received, but typically doesn't do much for downloads unless the game is outstanding.

User reviews are going to the some of the only reviews that potential downloaders see and building a great app will help keep the star ratings high.

What are press reviews good for? To generate awareness and community in addition to possibly getting noticed by App store editorial boards that most likely scour sites in search of hidden gems that slipped past their radar.

[mychii]

Nah, I wouldn't say its a waste of time. It's like sales pitch, you'll always get rejected in order to get a few who approved your games. I mean, I can't really focus on which review sites I have get approved to, but more like a quantity efforts. For example, I'll list as many review sites I thought they have potential, then I aim 1/10 of them would approve my game to be reviewed.

In my experience, there are some of them who requires payment as well, but since I have a super tight budget, I have to post in on free reviews, but as my consequences I have very very small reach (almost zero maybe, quite a failed attempt ), not counting some of them would reject as well, simply because unfortunately some who requires payment have reach to their own connections (they've extra effort to promote our games). Posting to forums have restrictions on themselves, such as ethics on not posting just the game when you're not active in it (as it'll be referred as classified ads), so it takes time to get into them. Posting to social networks (such as Reddit) would help too (never tried it); I think its more like a lottery ticket for free, so its a 'why-not' situation.

It always leads to money and effort in marketing (the same effort as the development itself), UNLESS of course your game is extremely exceptional that it only needs word-of-mouth to make it viral *cough* Minecraft *cough*.

Oh and also the packaging matters a lot. Don't expect to anyone to share your game if you can't pack them in a very interesting way (logos, screenshots, short description of the game, platform decisions, etc.). I mean, see it this way, I want to believe game review sites are gamers too. So if they find the game interesting, then they wouldn't hesitate to share it to anyone. The difference are only these reviewer guys have commitment to reach more audience.

[Impmaster]

The article says that even after you spend so much time trying to get reviews, barely anyone reads those.

[mychii]

It's always worth it, but of course, it all comes down to the marketing priority. I have enough time to do so, so it's worth a shot. I don't know if anyone concluded that article says he's given up and noone should do it at all, but for me I just get more information based on his experience on how to avoid casting to web review sites, even though in the end I got the same situation with what the article says (luckily without the scam cause I spend no money on it).

Since my priority wasn't that much on paying, and I always checked on web analytics on how these websites perform, I thought that it'd be worth it just to chase those allow me to request a review for free with the highest traffic I could filter. So in the end I have nothing to lose to do so, and no reason for being scammed.

Its just a fun part of marketing for me. It could be optional.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i would suggest that if you make a good mobile game, ignore sites that specifically review mobile games, and instead get your game reviewed on sites that review games in general. most sites that review games also review mobile games occasionally

another thing that i think helps, even though this is unreliable, is to ignore sites with no or few comments. i think the level of comment activity a site has is more important than its traffic actually, because it shows how *involved* people are, not just how many of them there are. if a site's reviews regularly get hundreds of comments, that site reviewing your game is probably worth more than a site that has more traffic, but where the reviews have very few comments. back when i was trying to get immortal defense reviewed by various sites after i had released it, my criteria was: only submit it for review of a site has an average of at least 10 comments per review. if a site has less than that, it's not worth being reviewed on, not even worth the time it takes to email them a review copy

[mychii]

I agree with Paul, especially the user involvement part. Its not always about the traffic though, you always have to see how loyal the people there too, not just a come and go, or website that only found by back links. (thanks for the tip on how to submit it too ).

[Konidias]

Spoiler: the games in question are poop. 


AppStore is saturated with quality stuff. It's hard to breakthrough even with something really cool, so mediocre games stand absolutely no chance. That said, a few friends with very successful and widely reviewed games also told me that most mobile reviews are worth nothing. Even a raving review or an award on Touch Arcade don't really have that much impact these days. You pretty much have to build your audience yourself, get a publisher, or hope to get lucky with N&N.

Harsh... but accurate.

Take a look here and you can see that the guy who wrote the article cannot handle criticism at all:

http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2013/06/10/mobile-game-review-sites-are-a-waste-of-time/#disqus_thread

He deleted all his comments to the person who was just offering constructive advice because he took it all as personal attacks.

The point is, if your game just isn't that good, don't expect to have it get reviewed and praised. Especially don't write an article about how game review sites are a waste of time because your average/bad game didn't get reviewed.

Lots of people live in a bubble where they think if they just make a game and release it, that it should instantly be top 10 games of all time and get reviewed by all sites and get millions of sales.

People even pointed out that he just made a match 3 clone, then he denies it's a match 3 game, then people point out that his own description of the game on the game's page is that it's a match 3 game.

I don't understand how some people think sometimes.

[Hijinkz]

That's too bad that the guy wasn't able to handle some of the criticism of his games in such a public way, if not uncommon. 

It's also one of the biggest downsides of doing your own press outreach for your own games. You're so close to the development, the blood, sweat and tears that taking an objective look at what you made is darn near impossible.

[Pandara_RA!]

This isn't so much about your game directly, but the mentality of many devs when a project gets a low response or doesn't sell gangbusters

Making a great game tends to lead to a good bit of press.
Making a "okay I guess" or "decent" game on mobile means you are in a huge competition with so many other games that are also "okay I guess" means you might not get press.

Maybe it's not so much that the press is an impossible wall to pass over and more so that when sales go wrong, people have a huge issue with blaming their work without before blaming everything else from art design, the press, and the viral factor.

If a 6.5/10 rated masterpiece stomps it's feet around for a bunch of time it doesn't mean it deserves a higher score or even attention.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

the game in question is vexblocks right?





it doesn't look terrible to me. not a game i'd play, since i don't like casual games very much, but it looks competent. worse-looking games have sold millions of copies (like snood)

[Pandara_RA!]

the game in question is vexblocks right?





it doesn't look terrible to me. not a game i'd play, since i don't like casual games very much, but it looks competent. worse-looking games have sold millions of copies (like snood)

Did you know that snood was a crazy popular game back in the day. that won a large amount of awards.

"Jupiter Media Metrix found in 2001 that Snood was the ninth most-played game with 1.5 million unique users. This is most notable because most of the games on the list came with various versions of Windows (such as the top-ranked game, Solitaire, with 46.7 million users)."

This of course scaled with time as computers became more and more of a household item...so yeah it sold while looking bad, though it had a massive following before it released.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

i'm not sure what you mean by before it was released -- there were many releases of it. it was a puzzle bobble clone; the original pc / shareware version was the first, and i don't believe it had a large following when that version was released

so basically you seem to be saying it succeeded because it was popular, not because it was a good game, which doesn't make all that much sense to me. i think it succeeded because it was marketed well, and because puzzle bubble was fun, so a game that shamelessly ripped it off is also fun