next »

[Guert]

I got my feedback as well. I too have a few comments that are repeated 4-5 times in the email. However, they are good comments I didn't take the time to dissect them all yet but so far they all go toward the notes I had. Which is good since there's no new major issues I had not spotted. I still can't believe I got an honorable mention for the Nuovo award.

[Alexander Bruce]

Fig8 was great. I loved it. I also like the 3D render that you have on your site of it. Clever.

[VinceTwelve]

Resonance scored highest in Overall and lowest in Technical, which was actually just what I was expecting.  The game is a 2d point and click made with AGS, so technical was never a question.  And I really feel that Resonance is more than the sum of its parts (despite, if I do say so myself, a pretty high sum of its parts), so I had expected it to do fairly well in Overall.

I wound up with six comments for a total of 1200 words, with one of those six being nearly 600 words by itself.  Only one of the judge's was negative (he admitted that he only played for ten minutes, but I suppose that fact that he wasn't interested enough to play beyond that is my fault, so it's all good.) and the rest ranged from positive, but with some very constructive criticisms, to positive without reservation.

Although one guy complained at length about something that was not true, to the point that I thought for a while that it might have been a note intended for another game.  Still kind of baffled by that one.  He was maybe not paying attention?

My fav was:
"Very slick and fresh-thinking approach to a well-worn genre. Bringing memory and rewinds into play both refreshes the experience and solve [sic] some of the perennial adventure game problems. Very high class work."

[Mike Lee]

The feedback this year is so far and beyond what I received last year (on an entirely different game) that I feel satisfied entering IGF regardless of how well I did. Congrats to Matt and Simon and all the judges for greatly improving the IGF judging process this year. It may still not be perfect, but it's no longer the blackbox it felt in years past.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

closure scored highest in technical and lowest in game design

which what the opposite of what I was expecting (before the nominations at least)

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

sd scored lowest in overall and highest in audio

you can read its feedback here:

http://rinku.livejournal.com/1712385.html

i think some of those judges had no idea what they were doing, and theoretically that's my fault, but it's just weird to read things like they thought the ship was getting damaged, when it was actually that they were damaging the creatures. i imagine some of them skipped the text and didn't read anything. i know a lot of people hate text in games and skip every cutscene or textbox without reading it as a rule (my 13 year old brother does that too), but that always seems kind of ADD to me, particularly if you're judging a game

[Noyb]

Congratulations to the winners, and my condolences to the other entrants. (VVVVVV and Captain Forever not placing is a headscratcher...)

From some of the comments here, it might be worthwhile to encourage the judges to record how long they played each game. The number of sessions, how long each session lasted, game completion (where applicable) and such.

[Alexander Bruce]

Moving away from feedback for a minute, I know times have changed, but I think that one of the biggest issues people have with the how games are currently sampled by judges can be summed up by the 2008 IGF:

Best Student Game: Synaesthete
Best Game: Crayon Physics

Both were entered into Main and Student IGF. How, if not through personal taste, did this happen, when clearly such a thing should state that Synaesthete should have won overall.

Tiered systems sound the most logical, because at least that way you're getting more and more focus on the same set of games as competition gets tougher up the chain.

Just pointing that out. I'm not saying anything should change for this IGF. Judging is done and people have talked about it. But moving forwards, using tiered systems throughout the entire thing rather than just selecting finalists, and then winners out of those, could help solve some problems.

As for feedback, it would also be nice to know how long people played the game for. If after several hours, your game is just boring, that's different to not being an attention grabber for the first 10 minutes of the game. It would also be nice to know what the actual scores were. Saying that it was highest in one category and lowest in another could mean that the scores were 10 for best and 9 for worst, which isn't good in either case, or 100 for best and 0 for worst, which means a whole lot more.

[Alec S.]

Got the feedback for Dadaists 2.  I think just the feedback was worth the entry fee.  Helped me get in order what needs to be done with the game and gave me good outside opinions on it.

I scored highest in overall, since a recurring theme in the comments was that most of the individual bits of the game didn't work, but they somehow managed to work together.  Pretty much all the reviewers agreed it was a ridiculous hodgepodge of things, but some thought it was awesome while a few hated it.

Lowest was on technical, which I expected to go to art or audio (I guess someone judging really must have dug random short clips of progressive rock songs and synthesizer sequences I wrote being played in random order and 8-bit sound effects).

I think the main thing I take away from this is that the base gameplay is still rather weak.  I kinda knew this already, but I had pushed it on the backburner to get the content ready.  I want the game to confuse and bewilder players, but it should at least be a fun way to go blind.  I really need to take some time to make the platforming tighter, polish some of the rough edges on the artwork, and make the beginning of the game less jarring.  I'm also going to need to change the music (I can't write enough progressive rock songs fast enough to get enough 30 second clips to last the game...).

The one thing that bothered me is a few of the judges assumed that this is the only type of game I can make, which is mainly just motivation to work harder on the "proper" game I'm working on as well.

[Crackerblocks]

Enviro-Bear got best in overall, worst in audio.

750 words of comments, all very well thought out. A couple were very critical. And a couple it seemed obvious that they had previously played it. Makes me think releasing your game to the public before the deadline and getting a bit of hype might be a good idea.

[bigpants]

For anyone interested, I have posted the complete, unedited feedback I received here.
I think everyone here will get a kick out of it.
I know I did  

Highlights

• "hmm execution of this game is quite average and there's nothing really new and original in it. I doubt this game can become a finalist in any category..."
  
  
• "can sum up: the game is way too long for what it is. Lots of filler, with a few grains of potentially interesting payload."
  
  
• "Frustrating and wholly unsatisfying experience as a player."
  
  

[ChevyRay]

Enviro-Bear got best in overall, worst in audio.

 

Makes me think releasing your game to the public before the deadline and getting a bit of hype might be a good idea.

Sometimes, maybe, but VVVVVV would seem to argue the opposite in this case.

Regardless, this looks like it'll be a fun IGF even if some people are unhappy about how the voting went over. No opinion on it myself as of yet. I might actually end up attending this year, though

[supershigi]

I don't know why, but I was really excited to receive feedback when I checked my email today.  Melolune scored highest in audio and worst in game design... that seems about right. 

One thing I learned, is that people seem to be fairly polarized when it comes to rpgs.  I had 5 comments; the first 3 were fairly positive and had some good and relevant constructive criticism (pointing out that certain maps had unclear exit areas, suggesting that placing Melolune might alter your party members stats or battle abilities in addition to how they already change the background music, giving advice about what to include in a tutorial, etc.). 

The fourth comment was mostly about how the person didn't like jrpg mechanics; I understand if this genre isn't their cup of tea, but relevant cc would have been more appreciated.  I was happy that they liked the intro sequence and music though.  And there was one part that I thought was sort of funny.  They mentioned that this was an outdated genre and that parts of the story weren't realistic:

boy gets a fish net to fight a bird, complains he's never fought anything that big before, next goes on to fight soliders and magicians

Um, yeah, and your best friend is a talking cat creature with wings... It should be pretty obvious by now that I'm not going for realistic here

[simoniker]

Just wanted to say thanks for everyone posting their feedback and comments on judging and what judges thought. We're being extremely transparent, obviously (tomorrow we'll be posting an article by some IGF judges about their process) and we hope that helps.

I'm guardedly optimistic we could consider some of these (even more complex, erk!) tiered voting systems in the future, but we need to evaluate how our first attempt at that (Nuovo) went, and if it could be applied to the main competition. (Just because people liked the results this year doesn't mean the process is perfect!)

Thanks,
Simon.
[IGF Chairman.]

[Tom Sennett]

RunMan scored best in Design and worst in Technical (Game Maker, represent!). Most of the feedback was quite positive and people seemed to like the overall style of the game. One judge was super nice:

Beyond that, I can't find fault, especially when compared against the typical IGF field. In my opinion it will be a crime if you don't win any awards.

We got six comments in all. Four were pretty much "Great Job!", one was unfocused and didn't present a clear opinion, and one was this:

The game has a really cute aesthetic, and I enjoyed the feeling of the world. The reason the scores seem so low is that I graded them within the 40-59 range of "an average experience." There's not much unique to this game in the runman platformer genre, other than the skin it puts on it.

What the fuck is "the runman platformer genre"? And since when does "the skin" - I'm assuming visuals and audio - not count for anything?

I would definitely like to see how we actually scored.

[mirosurabu]

Enviro-Bear got best in overall, worst in audio.

Why? I really liked audio. I guess other grades were excellent and audio rating was slightly lower.

[Zaphos]

It is kind of curious that the feedback emails didn't include the actual scores.  Any reason for their exclusion?

Overall though the feedback is really nice to have

The reason the scores seem so low is that I graded them within the 40-59 range of "an average experience."

Is there no rubric for what the scores mean?  It sounds like that judge is making up what his numbers mean, which is not really a good thing when the scores are averaged together (especially since averages are so sensitive to outliers).
edit: oh apparently he was actually just quoting the official rubric there, so nm, heh.

[aeiowu]

I just got my feedback back and I must say I'm very happy with it. Hell, I'd consider paying $95 for in depth criticism from a handful of professional devs even without the chance for an award! Really top notch. Whatever you guys did to stoke the fires, keep it up. Thanks Matthew, Steve, Simon and crew!  

--

For anyone interested, I have posted the complete, unedited feedback I received here.
I think everyone here will get a kick out of it.
I know I did  

I know it's tough to hold out hope for something you've worked so hard on, believe me, I know... BUT take another look at those comments one more time. If you have to actually think those things, lock them up in your brain and not on a gamasutra blog, give it some time and take another look and you'll see all those things are not out to get you and they're not _wrong_ they're trying to help. Game's are a weird type of medium in that two people can have a totally different experience based on loads of other things. As a developer, you're always going to be used to the mechanics because you made them! Take into account their experience and consider your game from their perspective. It will help. I promise.

--

I loved Fig8...

Thanks dude! I think you have me confused with Guert. Guert->Greg it's an easy snafu. Guert's game is The Art of Crime: http://www.worldofguert.com/aoc/ BTW, I can't wait to play hazard, it's really intriguing, both visually and mechanically (or so it seems from the trailer you released).

--

I would definitely like to see how we actually scored.

Yea, that'd be nice but I understand the rub with everyone getting their individual score so I'm fine with that remaining under wraps. I would be _very_ interested in seeing a chart of how all the games scored. What was the threshold and how many were right at the precipice?

[bigpants]

For anyone interested, I have posted the complete, unedited feedback I received here.
I think everyone here will get a kick out of it.
I know I did  

I know it's tough to hold out hope for something you've worked so hard on, believe me, I know... BUT take another look at those comments one more time. If you have to actually think those things, lock them up in your brain and not on a gamasutra blog, give it some time and take another look and you'll see all those things are not out to get you and they're not _wrong_ they're trying to help. Game's are a weird type of medium in that two people can have a totally different experience based on loads of other things. As a developer, you're always going to be used to the mechanics because you made them! Take into account their experience and consider your game from their perspective. It will help. I promise.

While i appreciate the life lesson, not sure why I'm receiving one. I put the feedback on the blog to share it (I'm hoping more people do the same). I agree with some judge comments, and disagree with others (particularly the ones that contradict my kleenex testers). Is that wrong?

Make no mistake, I'm extremely happy to have ANY feedback.
Allow me to second your toast to Matthew, Steve, Simon and crew  

[supershigi]

To the IGF organizers, I'm curious if there's any way we can know how we ranked in a particular category?  I would really be interested in knowing where my game stood in terms of audio... but I understand if that information can't be revealed.  Also, thanks for all your hard work with this... being able to receive feedback is really nice.