next »

[dustin]

I'd love to edit the reviews and give more positive feedback when I have time, but writing 48 separate reviews isn't easy, so I kept them short. I only had time to list one or two of my biggest complaints, before I went on to the next game.

Even a one-sentence review can be very helpful, though. With a single statement, you've told me that lack of game balance and poor level design choices were the biggest problems with my game and fixing those issues are top priorities after the competition ends.

I agree I found the one sentance review of my game (the only one I can really judge) very accurate.  I'm glad to know that the game was fun for a while but repetitive.  I  was pretty sure this would be the case having played it a lot myself but still it's nice to hear from someone else.  Now next time (If I was going to continue on with this game which I'm not) I can make sure to add more enemies and throw in twists to the game play.  Just because I wasn't told how to fix the problem doesn't mean it's not helpful.  I'm capable of fixing it on my own.  Like I said though I can only really see how helpful the review of my own game was I can't tell if the reviews for other people are helpful to them.

[Soulliard]

Erm... pachinko in real life is random, but I made a conscious choice to use a deterministic physics engine.

I expected the pachinko in the game to function like pachinko in real life, which is why I made this assumption. I didn't have time to extensively test the game (or most of them, for that matter), so I may have missed a few details like this. Sorry about that.

(I still played long enough to get a good ending, though)

Honestly, I think one-line reviews leave way too much information out, although I appreciate you trying all the games. I guess my main complaint is that this doesn't feel like "constructive criticism," and instead focuses more on the subjectivity of your tastes.

I agree that longer review would be better, but that doesn't mean short reviews are useless. I'll add to them when I find time.

[Soulliard]

Hmm. I'm not sure that comments like, "It didn't look all that exciting anyway," "Unreliable collision detection hurts an already unexceptional game," and "Didn't seem that great anyway" are especially constructive.

True... true. I'll clarify my positions. Thanks for pointing those out to me.

[Saint]

In Saint's review, which while also negative I find more fair, he has the completely opposite complaint of too much determinism. (Btw, I'm not quite sure what GDI graphics refers to.)

What I wrote was never intended to be considered as reviews, which is why I didn't post it here in the first place (perhaps I was mistaken mentioning it in this thread... Oh, well). I liked some aspects of Shameful Pachinko Romance - The idea of the different romantic combinations was great and while the game was deterministic figuring out a good place to drop the balls took more than a few tries. In the spirit of providing constructive feedback, I would have liked to see some additional challenges to counter this; such as bonuses for clearing the game in a short time or keeping many balls in the machine at once, or some feedback regarding how well you succeed (perhaps the player would get nervous and shake when things heat up and the balls would start out with a small random velocity). I also would change the rules of the game in order to make it more skill-based and interesting, but that's just me and I can understand if you want to keep true to the original.

With GDI graphics I mean the simple shapes that you draw with basic windows tools (lines, arcs, primitives...) in a single, basic windows color. Saying that was kind of pointless though, and I'm sorry if you took any offense - I blame it on me being tired and, again, the fact that it was never intended as a review anyway.

I didn't give them a bad rating. I couldn't give them any rating at all, because I couldn't play them. I'm sure many of them are fine games, and if I somehow get hold of a better computer in the next few days, I'll post reviews.

Oh, no, I wasn't complaining about your treatment of the XNA games in any way, I was just relieved someone else had issues with it and went off on a rant about it. Not directed at you, really, as I said I think every opinion is important.

[Wilson Saunders]

Papal Shotgun Gladiator
An average top-down shooter. Not much to say about this one.

I agree that my game wasn't very inovative, but could you have put a little more effort into finding something to say about it?

[ProgZmax]

It's a shame you're not a fan of the adventure game genre, Nightshade, but you're clearly entitled to like what you like and I fully respect that.  I'd just like to say that Hillbilly Burger Bastards doesn't follow strict adventure game conventions, so it's not just a boring puzzlefest (there IS action) and when I extend it I'd like to add even more action/adventure minigames to it.  If you haven't played through it thinking it was just going to stick you with illogical/boring puzzles, do give it a try.  If you did play through it, I'd still appreciate some feedback from a non adventure game fan for things that you think would make it more fun for you since I'm all about shaking up the genre!

[seregrail7]

RE: Saint's review of my entry
Thanks for the review. Couldn't have put it better myself, if I had another week there would have been stages and obstacles to keep things interesting. And the mines appearing would have been tweaked a little.

[deadeye]

Not to mention rating something on "fun" alone is not very objective.  It's totally subjective to your personal taste.

Of course it is. There's no such thing as an objective review. I'm just posting my opinions, and you're free to disagree with them.

That's kinda my point... you're not posting reviews, you're posting your opinions.  And yes, it is possible to be more objective in reviewing something.  Good, useful reviews don't just say "it was great" or "it was boring."  Check my review of your game again... I didn't enjoy it all that much, but I would still rate it decently.

'Potential' is even more subjective than 'Fun'. In any case, I'm rating the games as they are right now. If, several months from now, the game turns out to be incredible, I can write up a more positive review.

Fair enough that you're rating them in their current state.

Perhaps I should clarify. I meant *not very fun for me*.

No need to clarify, it's obvious who wrote the post.  My point is you can't rate a game on "fun" alone.  If you don't have the time or energy to go through and make a detailed review of each one, that's fine... but as I stated before it's not really a list of reviews, just a list of opinions.  Which is pretty much useless.

  "Hey, this game looks interesting."
  "Is it on the 'Nightshade thinks it's fun' list?"
  "Uh... no"
  "Then don't bother."

[Corpus]

"Hey, this game looks interesting."
  "Is it on the 'Nightshade thinks it's fun' list?"
  "Uh... no"
  "Then don't bother."

And thus, a new standard in indie game ratings was born.

[Soulliard]

There! I've clarified and lengthened all my reviews, so hopefully that will put your minds at ease!

I agree that my game wasn't very inovative, but could you have put a little more effort into finding something to say about it?

Basically, it just didn't do anything differently from any other top-down shooter. The graphics were nice, but besides that, nothing separated it from the pack.

If you haven't played through it thinking it was just going to stick you with illogical/boring puzzles, do give it a try.  If you did play through it, I'd still appreciate some feedback from a non adventure game fan for things that you think would make it more fun for you since I'm all about shaking up the genre!

I'd like to say that HBB was pretty good compared to many of the adventure games I've tried, so I will attempt to finish it some day. One general criticism I have of adventure games, though, is that there tend to be a lot of controls for accomplishing relatively simple actions. For example, you could probably get by with just the Eye and Hand buttons; the Feet and Mouth buttons could easily be combined with the other two.

That's kinda my point... you're not posting reviews, you're posting your opinions.  And yes, it is possible to be more objective in reviewing something.  Good, useful reviews don't just say "it was great" or "it was boring."  Check my review of your game again... I didn't enjoy it all that much, but I would still rate it decently.

I never stopped at just saying a game was "great" or "boring". I always provided a reason for why I felt the way I did, so don't accuse me of doing the opposite.

Now, the way I see it, when reviewers try to be objective, they generally just try to say what the public wants to hear. They might think, "I don't really like this, but I should, because I'll bet everyone else does (or at least my peers do)." I don't think that's a good method for evaluating anything. Do you see where I'm coming from?

I, on the other hand, make reviews solely based on my personal experiences. I don't know of any reliable criteria for evaluating a game objectively, nor do I think there are any. The only way I trust myself to give a fair review is to simply state my opinion, honestly and unfiltered.

Of course, I don't expect everyone to agree with me. I'm just one voice out of billions. So, if you disagree with any of my reviews, please post your own. If more people share their honest opinions, we will all have a much better idea of what people like and dislike about our work, and how we can improve.

My point is you can't rate a game on "fun" alone.

Why not? Though 'fun' may be a nebulous concept, it's still the primary reason why most of us play games.

[Corpus]

The primary reasons that most people watch films are either to coo approvingly at explosions or to coo approvingly at a soppy love story. It would still be wrong to judge films purely on the number and quality of explosions and love scenes which they feature.

[threesided]

Crud. I fail at being fun.

But that's ok, I kinda saw that coming. I can't expect my first attempt at game making to blow people away... Oh wells

[Soulliard]

Well, 8-Bit Gun Tales was probably a little overly-ambitious for a first project. But, with some work, it could still turn out very well in the end. Better collisions and more well-designed enemies would be a huge improvement.

[Derek]

I think it's fine to post reviews of the entries and definitely encouraged to give feedback to the developers.

But I just want to jump in and say that overly harsh reviews are not entirely in-line with the spirit of the competition, which is mostly about having fun and getting people excited about making games.  A lot of people who enter these compos are making games for the first time, and I don't want them to get discouraged because someone through their game was "boring" or "unoriginal" or "not very fun."

I know a lot of people prefer the blunt, hit-you-over-the-head style feedback - that's what they give and that's what they ask for.  Which is fine, and totally appropriate for, say, the Feedback forum.  I'd just ask that you show a little more consideration to the developers that are not asking for these types of reviews... and ultimately, that makes for a more constructive criticism, imo.

Example of what I think is a good crit:

Well, 8-Bit Gun Tales was probably a little overly-ambitious for a first project. But, with some work, it could still turn out very well in the end. Better collisions and more well-designed enemies would be a huge improvement.

What you said here points out problematic areas, but is also encouraging and takes into account that it was Mr. Trianglehead's first effort (and a very good one, at that).

[Soulliard]

Which is fine, and totally appropriate for, say, the Feedback forum.

Perhaps this thread would fit better there?

[deadeye]

Crud. I fail at being fun.

But that's ok, I kinda saw that coming. I can't expect my first attempt at game making to blow people away... Oh wells

Overall I thought it was fun 

It has it's drawbacks, sure.  But then you already know all this, I posted a more detailed critique in your thread a while back.

[William Broom]

One thing I really have to say: Wasn't the whole point of 8-bit Gun Tales that it had precise collision detection? Hanging off platforms by your nose/barrel and sniping enemies was sweet.

[moi]

Yeah, I see no problem with the collisions of 8bit G.T., the levels are perhaps a bit crude and bare, but remember it's supposed to be 8-bit.

I for one didn't take offence at the harsh critique of my entry, I knew the weaknesses of my game anyway. Nightshade does very concise criticism and so he has to concentrate on what he sees are points to improve, which IMO is a good way to criticize, I like to do that sometimes myself. Doeszn't mean that I don't see the potential for each game.

[ProgZmax]

I'd like to say that HBB was pretty good compared to many of the adventure games I've tried, so I will attempt to finish it some day. One general criticism I have of adventure games, though, is that there tend to be a lot of controls for accomplishing relatively simple actions. For example, you could probably get by with just the Eye and Hand buttons; the Feet and Mouth buttons could easily be combined with the other two.

I see what you're saying, and I agree for the most part.  The weird thing is, most adventure game fans 'like' having multiple options rather than a context-sensitive system doing all the work.  Maniac Mansion, for example, had something around SIXTEEN commands, which I agree is extremely redundant.  I do like the idea of having a left click on a person initiate conversations automatically if you are in walk mode so perhaps I'll implement that.  The walk button is mainly there in case people don't read the readme (and there are plenty) and do not realize right-clicking auto defaults you to walk mode . 

[threesided]

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind being told the bad points about my game. I'm just happy I didn't give up completely on it.

A lot of the frustrating bits, such as shitty collision and bad level design is mainly due to never doing that before. I was kinda annoyed with those points by the time the deadline, so I had to kinda just settle. In hindsight it's a VERY amateur feeling game to me, even in comparison so some of the other VGNG games. But i'm totally cool with that. It was a major learning experience, which I'll bring with me on my next attempts.

I'm still finding a good level of ambitiousness for things right now. I'm pretty green to the whole indie game scene, y'know?

Anyways, enough about me, i kinda derailed things a bit here.