next »

[Mark Mayers]

How do you personally handle criticism about your game?

This question is both from a logistical sense (how can I improve, what information is useful) and an emotional sense (how do I not feel awful afterwards).

At what point does someone's criticism or ideas become invalid? Is there no such thing as invalid criticism?

[Alec S.]

One of the best pieces of advice I've heard regarding criticism:  listen more to player's problems than their solutions.  For example, if the player says "This bit was too hard, you should make it easier," well, maybe the answer is to make it easier, but maybe the answer is to do something earlier to better prepare the player for that challenge, or there was some mechanic about the game that you didn't teach well enough.  That's not to say you should completely discount potential solutions provided by players, but you should take it with a grain of salt, while focusing more on the problems the player experienced.

[voidSkipper]

Alec definitely is on the money here.

Even if the feedback is completely non-constructive, it's worth considering that something about your game or brand is giving the person a reason to write it.

The only time I'd consider feedback completely disregardable is when it comes from something so far outside your target demographic that to cater to it would involve changing the essence of your game.

A 25 year old hardcore gamer complaining that the game mechanic is too shallow in your educational game designed for 5 year olds is probably not something worth taking on-board.

Though maybe it's at least worth analysing why it's having an impact so far outside your target audience anyway

[krides]

I agree about the player feedback things said above. I'd like to add a couple more.

If you are indeed testing your game with players, it's a good idea to formalize the encounter: make a playtest protocol, make sure you know what you're testing and aren't forgetting an important question. What are the potential problems? It's always better to ask yes/no questions (as long as it's not "did you like the game?") because they are easily quantifiable, but open-ended questions are also good as long as they are not "what did you think about the game?"

You can ask this one as well, but keep in mind that most people can't express their thoughts about video games coherently. They can't analyze either. You have to keep that in mind. The player usually doesn't know how to fix your game, but you can quickly determine what is broken. Also, don't lead people on, don't nod your head or say "yeah" while you're listening to the answer. People usually want to please you (or the opposite), and what you want is feedback and not praise.

Now, as for peer reviews: make sure that you get those as well. However, it's a whole different story. Seek criticism. Find someone whose work you respect and whom you trust, and then ask them to say everything how it is. Make sure you're not asking your mom. Be humble and listen. Don't try to defend yourself: you have asked for this. If you can't deal with this criticism well, the YouTube comments will destroy your life, so you better learn to.

[michael_88]

You should always embrace criticism with open arms, because at the very least it will shed some light on a different perspective. But the tricky part is knowing when changing your design based on criticism is a good idea. If the goal of your design process is to create a product for a specific group of people (casual phone gamers, serious RPG players, etc) then you would seek out as many representatives from that group as possible for testing and feedback, and you would prioritize their feedback when considering changes. But if you're making a game for yourself, or anything with a strong personal importance, then perhaps any criticism is not useful simply by nature of coming from someone other than yourself.

Of course, the tricky part is being honest with yourself about who the game is for. If you're trying to make money, odds are the game isn't for you. There's a mental balance to be achieved between having strong creative principles ("sticking to your guns") and allowing external opinion to steer your design towards the mainstream ("compromising your vision"). Everyone wants to make exactly what they see in their head, but sometimes that particular vision is just not suitable for mass audiences. Focus testing in small, laser-focused doses can sometimes make the difference between a game that succeeds and a game that fails (commercially speaking).

tldr... Who are you making the game for? Figure that out, and you can adjust your critique threshold accordingly.

[s0]

You should always embrace criticism with open arms, because at the very least it will shed some light on a different perspective.

yeh that's my opinion as well. a lot of the criticism/feedback ive received has made me look at my work in a new light. it's especially crucial when making a game on your own, because without feedback you develop a blinkered perspective that can blind you to glaring problems.

knowing what feedback to incorporate is tricky, but it's largely a matter of experience imo. the one thing you should never do is trying to please everyone and "crowdsource" your game design. some kickstarter games try that and it almost always ends in a mess.

[readyplaygames]

Listen more to player's problems than their solutions.

Definitely. And ask questions about why they think something is "wrong" or broken. "It's too hard" may mean "I didn't understand this one aspect that would have made it easier."

[lolpatrol]

My knee jerk reaction is to defend myself right away. I try to stop myself and just listen to what people say. Write it down, wait a few hours or a day until I am not in defend-mode. I can usally evaluate it with a more open mind later.

[halk3n]

You should always embrace criticism with open arms, because at the very least it will shed some light on a different perspective.

knowing what feedback to incorporate is tricky, but it's largely a matter of experience imo. the one thing you should never do is trying to please everyone and "crowdsource" your game design. some kickstarter games try that and it almost always ends in a mess.

Yea, especially conveyance, that is something that you should always pay attention to regarding another's perspective.

[hmm]

This.

listen more to player's problems than their solutions.

How do you personally handle criticism about your game?

Its very hard to take criticism. As a designer, who has made hundreds of little decisions while making something, the immediate response is to defend those decisions, but that doesn't really help you to improve your game.

Instead, I personally try and identify what problems the player was encountering by listening to what they have to say and probing further with questions.

At what point does someone's criticism or ideas become invalid? Is there no such thing as invalid criticism?

If people are suggesting solutions to you, that's where criticisms starts to become invalid. Some people 'get' what you're trying to do, and will suggest solutions that help you to achieve that. This is great. Other people though, just want to see the game that they want to play, and will make suggestions that do not help to support your vision - ignore this.

[froggyishere]

How do you personally handle criticism about your game?

This question is both from a logistical sense (how can I improve, what information is useful) and an emotional sense (how do I not feel awful afterwards).

At what point does someone's criticism or ideas become invalid? Is there no such thing as invalid criticism?

I listen to it and try to figure out where it's coming from, and try to figure out how I could make that person not say that negative thing in the future. The only time that the criticism could be said to be "invalid" is if there is no way to please that person, as in... that person just hates your face or that person hates everything.

[teatreegames]

I never had much criticism yet (due to being in the dark for a while), but I consider any constructive criticism vital for development.

[darkhog]

I don't think making "feedback form" is a worthwhile thing. I've created a "predemo" containing one of the levels that will be in the final demo (of course that it will look better because for now I am concentrating on making levels functionally complete, making them look better will be done later, when all 5 are functionally finished). I've then make a google forms-based "feedback survey" so the players can tell me what's wrong and what's good.

Effect? My dropbox account's transfer is maxed out (or was when I've last checked), which with build the size of just 26.3MB is quite an achievement. Fortunately there's also a MEGA link in that post so the predemo is still downloadable.


Quite a success and you'd expect that I have lots of feedback by now? Nope, only 2 people answered to the survey, one of which I had to practically beg to do it.

//edit: That's not to say I won't make any forms like this in future as I value people's opinions and I'm all about the open development. Just don't expect much and YMMV.

[Pfotegeist]

I was originally thinking of going with opinions matter, but that's vague. Instead, I'd rather say ideas and opinions reveal more options.

One of the best pieces of advice I've heard regarding criticism:  listen more to player's problems than their solutions.  For example, if the player says "This bit was too hard, you should make it easier," well, maybe the answer is to make it easier, but maybe the answer is to do something earlier to better prepare the player for that challenge, or there was some mechanic about the game that you didn't teach well enough.  That's not to say you should completely discount potential solutions provided by players, but you should take it with a grain of salt, while focusing more on the problems the player experienced.

Since most people stop at "it feels bad man" a comment like "this bit was too hard" would be golden. A dev may have never considered that bit could be done any other way, but now there's a definite possibility.

[Alec S.]

In regards to lack of quality feedback, I think it's important to learn the skill of asking questions during/after testing without asking leading questions.  If you're testing in person, I find it's usually good to occasionally ask questions like "what are your current thoughts."  If they've noticed a problem but aren't bringing it up, they'll probably take the opportunity to do so.  If there are no glaring issues, they'll tell you about their current gameplan/strategy/considerations which gives you some good insight into how your players are responding to the game.  And, of course, there's always the fallback "Could you be more specific?"

[darkhog]

Unfortunately on my part I can't afford to "playtest in person". So the only way I can ask for feedback is to put up a form and wait for answers of people who played it. Which isn't very effective.