Some indie-communities are huge circle

There are communities of indies out there where... let's just put it simple, the circle-jerking is too damn high!
You wouldn't believe the crap people applaud, i bet if i posted a picture of poop there would be at least 3 "amazing work" posts. And that's not the worst bit that mediocrity gets praised, no they are also encouraging the "ideas guys" you should see the follow your dreams posts XD

And than some people wonder why greenlight is getting jam packed with garbage and why 40% of steam games never get played... Im pretty sure those communities are breeding delusional kids, or at least serving as an echo chamber for delusional people. And it could be damaging to "indie industry" since it's not bad enough that there are already a lot of people who consider indie games pretentious and too amateurish and if more crap gets shoveled, consumers could even associate "indie" with shovelware, hell why do you think there is such stigma attached to games based on movies, same could happen to indie games if it hasn't already happened.
Or maybe im just too pessimistic?

 

"Develop a built-in bullshit detector." —Ernest Hemingway

If you detect BS, why waste your time ranting about it? Just make sure you do things they way you believe they should be done.

 

Nobody who has ever called anything a circlejerk or a hugbox has ever had anything meaningful to say.

 

I blame a general lack of time. I have quite a selection of games on my Steam account, but I simply do not have the time to play more than a handful. Especially with games such as Skyrim where I can easily rack up hundreds of hours.

 

There's also the fact that a lot of games are coming in bundles with other games that people just don't want to play. I know there's a few bundles I bought specifically to play a single game.

 

Good point. I do have several games I simply have no interest in and I really do wish I had a convenient way to remove them from my list.

 

I mentioned my reason in OP. May i remind you of "Video game crash of 1983" where everyone was jumping on the video game boat and shoveling crap for quick buck. Same thing can happen now if consumer gets fed-up and looses trust in the industry.

 

No.

The videogame crash was caused primarily by there being far too much competition in the console space (at the time, there were more than ten consoles on the market, usually with several by the same company); home computers reaching the point where they were becoming less expensive and more versatile; hastily manufactured new consoles like the 5200, which barely functioned; a series of failures by major companies, like the Pac-Man port for the 2600; AND a glut of low quality titles making it more difficult to make decent purchases.

Don't ignore the mass of other factors here, that's bad history. Also, indie games are not even remotely close to being at the forefront of game development, so even if your bad history was TRUE this would still be a non-issue.

 

Well hopefully we can make games to the best of our talent and survive the crash (if it ever happens), I think a lot of people lost faith in the games industry a while ago. Whilst I don't believe people should be jumping up and down on devs who do quality games, which the internet has allowed in droves. Neither should it allow some indie's all the way up to AAA's to keep doing what they're doing.

Which is doing anything they can for a quick buck, seems to me more and more care less about protecting their reputation and more about money. Anyone who does games for a career big or small know money is an important factor is and you should be aiming to earn money to make games, but don't do it at the cost of quality or take tons of fiscal shortcuts to try and pry money out of people.

 

Well, the others have made some good points. Bundles alone are probably a significant source of unplayed games. Though I have to ask you: Why bother? It's not your money after all.

Anyway, what I find far more worthy of discussion is your second point. In short: I hate when people praise other people's work when it's not actually good. And I use the word "hate" there fully aware of its meaning. This kind of feedback is helping nobody. It's useless; A waste of everyone's time.

Lots of people are quick to point out that there is a line between criticism and bullying. However, few are as quick to point out that there's also a line on the far side of the spectrum.

Spoiler: Rrrrrrrrranting time

I AM SICK of forced political correctness. I feel like you can praise something like there's no tomorrow, but at the same time there seems to be a growing number of people that would love to restrict criticism to: "It could be better, but you did your best and that's what counts."
That's. Not. True. At least most of the time.

Don't be nice. Don't be politically correct. Be honest. Sure, don't be a dickhead, but if you feel that something is bad - like, really bad - you should say it. After all, people who praise your work don't help you all that much. Those who criticize honestly however, do.

That's why I think that Linus Torvalds > Bill Gates/Steve Jobs.
Guy just has it figured out.
He's incredibly lucky though. Most people don't have a job that allows them to be this honest. I know how this works.
Everyone stands behind you, then S*** hits the fan and they come out like: "I didn't think it was such a great idea from the beginning." or "I wasn't quite sure." Of course no one has opened their mouths beforehand.

Seriously people: Say what you think, but don't be dicks. What's so hard about that?

Anyway, as far as idea-guys and "cheap indies" go, I handle it in the same way most of the time.
I tell the idea guys that they are of no use in a team and have no future in game development. After that I tell them that if they still want it, they should learn something practical. As a programmer I usually tell them to learn programming.

Those people who release countless clones of Flappy Bird/Slender/whatever fad is popular at the time; Well, I refuse to call them developers in the first place. There isn't any "development" involved in following a "How to make a Slender game" tutorial or using a "Flappy Bird Kit" to create the nine-billionth copy of something somebody else thought of.

 

Agreed with the OP, go take a look in the showcase if you want to see some mediocrity in action. Sure once in a while a good project is posted, but 90% of them are complete tat.

My solution is to simply ignore the mediocre and clone games, I don't have the energy or the will to tell them they suck. If I think a project or the creator has potential though, I will post constructive criticism if necessary.

Good projects that are well executed should be complemented too, carrot and stick.

 

I understand that it wasn't that simple and thanks for pointing it out, but what i meant was Indie-side of industry could crash hard, not the whole industry itself. People could simply get fed up and decide to ignore indie games. And it would be really hard to sell a product that has negative stigma attached to it.

 

What is a circle-jerk, exactly? And, how is it different from any other polygonal or polyhedral form of a jerk?

 

A group discussion or activity between like-minded individuals that validates mutual biases or goals in a non-confrontational environment. Kinda like "yes men" sitting in circle and agreeing with each other.

 

Thank you. I didn't know a 'circle-jerk' was a real thing at all, before this!

 

That's because it isn't. It's something that nerds have taken to saying whenever a group of people doesn't match up with their expectations of how the group SHOULD act.

 

I miss those times when developing a game was a sophisticated engineering problem. Like Commodore 64 era, or late 90's. Streamlining development process did no good to the average game quality. Tomorrow, with the advent of subscription-based model in engines / tools business it'll become even worse. The whole industry feeds on hopes of young people who are striving to become the next super star game designer, just because they enjoy playing games.

 

Games back then were just as S***ty as they are now, you're just blinded by nostalgia.

 

Regarding this topic, I gotta agree with the original post. You know, some people are "too nice" in the indie game community. I try not to be that way. Sometimes developers have to be told "your game sucks". Plain and simple. And to be honest, most of them I see do. The absolute worst "circle jerking" I've seen was in my days of Xbox Live Indie Games (before it was called "app hub") with XNA. That framework had some of the most awful, stupid, poorly developed games I have ever seen. I mean, some of the games were absolute trash on there. But somewhere along the line, someone didn't want to hurt someone else's feelings and told them their game looked interesting or something.
I think they should have made the review process more stricter with people having to rate games before they would even get listed on the marketplace because it over-saturated the marketplace and too many bad games overshadowed the few that were actually good.

I've been working on a game for quiet sometime and I welcome people to rip it apart. I would rather be told honesty than have people pretend it's a good game. Then I fail miserably trying to release it and find out I wasted all my time. That would hurt me more than being told that "my game is bad". In fact when one person finally did have the balls to tell me some of my original concepts were bad, I developed something (I hope) is astronomically better than the original.

 

At least consumer options were limited, and every new game was a relatively huge deal back then. People weren't lost in a big stinking pile of crap that is now released by hundreds every day.

 

Consumer options weren't limited at all, especially on the C64 or home PCs in general. They weren't even limited on the Atari consoles, where getting a developer license was about as difficult as pissing in a lake.

XBLIG was like that by design.

 

Umm..no..it actually has it's origins as a term for a type of group sex act and said reference has been a part of the more vulgar colloquialisms in the english language a time long before nerds and computers.

 

missing_the_point.png

 

I have no problem with circle jerks just so long as everyone is allowed into the circle. They're not responsible for the state of the industry. Indies have no power at all. If Steam is collapsing as a viable marketplace that is down to Valve after all they own it and were curating it, if they were interested enough a solution could have been found. All these platform owners are the people with the ability to change the situation. After all if I put a game on Spil games or Big Fish or Steam I am allowed to do so, no-one has a gun to anyone's head in that situation. The reality is that when it comes to games pretty much nothing has changed. Twenty years ago it was hard to break into game development and be a success. Usually it required money, but funding did not guarantee quality and there was always the possibility that a good idea would allow entry. This situation is pretty much the same now, and throwing the blame on indies making crap games, well, again, the wrong target is in someone sights.

 

Couldn't 'Indies' also develop a good understanding of business rather than focusing on solely being 'I'm a creative person and I have nothing to with business.'

Both are necessary IMO. Taking an MBA doesn't make you a bad developer surely but it enhances your ability to produce high quality products which generate money.

 

There is a difference between when people applaud motivation and learning, and when they falsely praise that which is undeserving.

I firmly believe like many people, you are lumping all of it (and more) together and then condemning it. Probably so you can feel justified in venting your frustration at the times when you felt it was most deserving of condemnation, alongside a larger frustration created by your incorrect but rational linking of "a market flooded with crap" with "praise of crap in dev circles".

In reality, the amount of intended improper praise or "yes-men" praise is significantly lower than you, or anyone else, perceives.

This is how the internet works. You have an endless number of millions of people, all unique with their own communication style and individual personality.

You have someone who compliments everything, even crap, alongside someone who pisses on everything, even quality. Then you have all those inbetween that. One person's "good" is another person's "OMG THAT IS SO EPIC PLZ HAVE MY BABIES NOW!!!!!!!1111"
I know people who would never say anything more than a simple, vague, and brief "That is good." That is their greatest way of complimenting someone. As silly as that is, some people are like that just as some people respond with their least compliment being "OMG THAT IS AMAZING!!!!!1111"
To truly know what any of them are saying, you have to start asking them, learning about them, and getting more details from them.

Otherwise, you are incorrectly lumping different categories together and your frustration is exaggerated.

Detailed communication is the antithesis of internet communication. Although forums are better than comment sections, many people on the internet fail to comprehend how vague their statements can be. In the end, there is nothing you ca do to alter someone's communication style or personality. To put it simple and dumbed down: Some people will be optimists and rate everything highly, some pessimists and rate it low. There are ways around this (ex. the grading scale you use, such as a "Yes or No?" or "Good or Bad" 2-choice question, 1-5 scale, 1-10 scale (inferior), etc.)

Since communication and personality are complex issues requiring extensive knowledge in multiple skills, and the internet is a social environment which is susceptible to irrational phenomenon like GroupThink, all combined with an endless number of unique individuals...I am perplexed as to how communication even occurs. Of course, there ARE people who claim it actually doesn't. I cannot find the article anymore, but one author talked about how in most internet arguments neither side listens and simply rants, posts their rant, and then argues without even trying to listen to the other side. Communication doesn't exist when there is no legitimate attempt to listen to the other's side. Thus the vast majority of internet conversation is literally akin to both users hearing themselves talk (and never anything more.) You might as well just talk to yourself in the mirror if you want to argue online. After all, that would be more effective because you'd realize how vain it was.



If you don't believe me, then do your own research. Look at the history of each of these posts: both the person giving it and the person receiving the comment. Yet if you did, you would find the actual number of real praise (praise you can actually change, as you will NEVER change the fact specific people praise everything) for undeserving effort (efforts which are not deserving in any way) will be next to null.

Take a moment back, and realize that there are more reasons to praise than quality of work.
That alone will make you realize how less undeserving some comments are.
Someone who believes people should never be praised unless the work is quality, are both a**holes AND idiots.
Once you accept that it is good for people to praise others for motivation and praise their work because it is praising their LEARNING, not their actual work, you will not rage so hard when people compliment crap.


Also, the praise or lack of public shaming has nothing to do with why crap floods the market. The vendors are responsible for quality control. That is the sole reason. Without quality control, you will always have crap flooding the market for many reasons. Most of which revolve around people thinking they can make money for some uneducated reason or because it actually works to make them money for some ridiculous reason. The reasoning behind development, release, and sale of crap is as varied as the reasoning behind praise.

 

Just to point out, not everything you perceive or say is justified confusion. There is rational, practical, acceptable intelligence. You are on the right track! Just going the wrong way.

Even among professionals, there will most likely be an indie bubble where they appreciate the work of other indie developers because they have more insight into the work required. They know even CRAP takes a lot of work to make.
It is up to the professional to take preventative action by developing a strategy to pop this bubble so they can get a more accurate understanding of their work. It will ALWAYS be the fault of the individual for allowing themselves to live in a bubble of yes-men. The reasons people become "yes-men" are as varied as anything else. Some will be correct in doing so, some fake or mindless in fandom and thus incorrect. It will never be the fault of the yes-men. It is up to everyone to make sure they have a realistic perspective on their work.

This is not why there is crap though. It will have effects, but it will most likely effect usability and user experience rather than a crappy graphics or bad gameplay design. The blind bubble of needless praise from fanboys and indie developers alike harm games like Dwarf Fortress or Roguelikes far more than it does [insert crappy Greenlight or Android mess].

Of course, some developers and ALL human beings do not have an impenetrable ego and thus cannot take the full brunt of the internet every second of every day. There are even developers who have quit game development entirely because of the vile spewed by overly negative trolls who fail to grasp that they understood "7 insults ago."

Also you have to take into consideration that just as some people's praise is undeserving, some people's negativity is undeserving all the same. There are people who have no taste, are utterly rotten individuals, or should keep their opinions to themselves. In fact, there is more likely more undeserving negativity than undeserving praise. Yet I do not see you getting upset over that. Most likely due to the fact people around here would point figures at you declaring you a "whining baby" or some trollish insult. Even if it were true, apparently you are more allowed to condemn positive action than negative action. Such a disgusting internet we live in.

 

^Makes sense.
So forums have always been echochambers and crap on the market is due to irresponsible/apathetic vendors.
Still though im not a huge fan of that "everybody wins" doctrine.

If no one criticises, how would ppl know that they need to improve?
Were talking about aspiring professionals here, not school kids drawing with crayons.

 

What's there to crash?

I don't mean to be facetious there, it's a genuine question. I'm not aware that we were in a boom to be able to have a bust. Big indie game successes are few and far between, and are achieved by people who've been working hard at earning success for a long time. That kind of success doesn't happen because there's a boom or a bubble or anything else that you could consider able to "crash". It happens because there's a market that someone managed to identify, target, appropriately satisfy and effectively market to.

While I'll admit that it's totally possible for the term "indie" to get a stigma or for people to get over playing indie games for the sake of playing indie games (but... how many people really do that anyway?), none of that matters to the people who are able to do the four things I just mentioned. To those people it's just a market shift, and not even a particularly big one at that.


Edit: The other thing that could die out is this trend for large vendors (Microsoft, Steam, etc.) to take active interest in indies. I'm a strong believer that effectively curated marketplaces with high quality bars are a good thing, though, so I don't actually have the slightest problem with that. We have to fight just as hard either way for success - either it's a challenge to get into the marketplace or it's a challenge to make sales once we get there. Making it easier to get in just means the place is more crowded...

 

This is the post that the new "like" button was made for.

 

It's not just the Internet, either. I find that asking people what they think of my game has little value compared to watching them play. Deliberate communication is filtered, whereas reactions often are not.

Plus, observation gets you details that asking often does not. Why ask "what was the best/worst part of the game" when you can watch and see where they smile or where they groan? You can easily observe where tension builds and releases, what makes someone happy/triumphant/annoyed/frustrated, when they decide to stop playing, and many many other things. Plus, if you can see the player and the screen and the controller then you know exactly what causes every single one of those things.

Also, mix the two. Observe someone playing the game and ask them things like "Do you know what you're meant to be doing right now?" "Do you know how to achieve that?" "What does <some element of the UI/world> mean or do?"

Think about more than just the game. You're trying to craft an experience. You wouldn't try to craft anything else without knowing the tools at your disposal and the effect they have, would you?

 

4 words: we are independant developer!

 

That's the thing though. I have a very passionate view that most people shouldn't (fail) at their attempt to criticize others. Perhaps it's arrogant of me to say, but I really don't think a lot of criticism is all that helpful because the people doing it (the people talking, period) are often not very skilled or talented.

I would gladly take 1 constructive criticism from an intelligent indie developer than 10 praises from some total newb. However, the worst of all are the 10 criticisms from total and complete idiots who have no idea what they're talking about.

The vast majority of the time on the public internet, the criticisms are usually the opposite of constructive. Even the ones which aren't offensive in any way, are still idiotic opinions or irrelevant to actual quality.

When an obviously intelligent person responds, that is the time for the professional to take the criticism, irrelevant of insult or offense. Those who are intelligent, even if offended, still take to heart intelligent criticism. Smart people can figure it out.

Around the internet, there are very few people I would consider to have a valuable opinion, for me. That's just my opinion for myself. Even though I am willing to listen to ANYONE who has a criticism or opinion, the most likely conclusion will be me simply rolling my eyes, explaining why they are wrong (which obviously appears defensive, resulting in them becoming more aggressive even when I take no offense), or explaining how little I care for uneducated opinion.

The worst of all is when the fans of a game start arguing with a developer. Especially when defending the object of their fandom. Oh dear god, the eye rolling results in almost seizure-like frustration when the fanboys roll in full force.

I've even been insulted and belittled on one specific game forum when seeking to gather the indie developer's attention for a simple question. Emails are often ignored as developers of even minor games don't often respond, yet if they are active on the forum it's much quicker to get a response by posting. I stated "I only want the opinion of the developer, thank you." Tons of fans poured in their opinion on a technical question, with me simply saying "Please, for your own sake stop replying. I do not care for your opinion, you are wasting your time." I was declared a troll, flamed into hell, and a few days later got the response I wanted. To suffice to say, everyone else was a total idiot as the indie dev agreed with me, contradicting all that his own fans said. You can imagine how their brains exploded when they were torn between winning the argument and bowing to their fandom god. Quite hilarious, honestly

Anyways, I could care less for amateur developers, idiot developers, or ignorant fans' "help" unless it relates to something they are proficient it. EVERYONE is proficient in their opinion of how something looks, like art. It's when it's not opinion, and far more "let me tell you how to do that technical or philosophical thing." that I wish people would keep their mouths shut on. How many times have I seen people flamed (on other forums) by others for not sticking to choice programming conventions.

To improve, you don't need criticism. You need criticism from someone who is skilled. More than likely, the person is already aware of the skilled users and is already talking to them. If not, they are listening to whoever, in their mind, is the skilled user, or seeking to find these individuals through public discourse. I guess those are the times to just let it all loose. People will admire each person for their unique skills. Hell, I've even been disrespected as an intellectual by people but respected as a troll. As I said, each person will view other people according to their perception of that person's skills.

Regardless, I don't really think there is a need for all that much criticism.
Research shows that positive words of encouragement, even when falsehoods, are more productive of progress than negative words, even when truthful.

It's the same obvious reason you can see more progress with someone by saying "You can do it!" over angrily screaming "You are pathetic!!! You can't do ANYTHING right!!!" Granted no one here is saying to berate others, but "Constructive Criticism" on the internet is rarely all that constructive, mostly because people lie and claim it's constructive to mask their aggression.
Constructive criticism is not always constructive either even when politely expressed, especially when stupid people state the obvious or gloss over the person who already admitted to the failing. How many times have I seen someone say "I know, not my best work." and then have someone reply "This sucks compared to your other work. You're a good artist though." Or the times when it's just a matter of opinion, but stated as a matter of fact: "That [AAA company game design, created over weeks by a full team of professionals] is nothing special. It's just like [insert crappy game design which never passed through a design phase in the first place]."


I might be a hypocrite sometimes, as I'm sure I've called more than my fair share of people idiots (with innocents getting in my crosshairs, I'm sure), but if I want to help people, I try to be honest while remaining positive. The honest part being the most important, because that is how we learn even when it hurts.

I completely agree with you that often people, especially here, are needlessly giving praise to others. Sometimes I wonder "WTF? That is so bad..." but I keep my mouth shut because it would not be helpful in any way.
I just wanted to share some thoughts on it, mostly to hear myself talk. I type fast, and I find typing (anything) to be a very relaxing thing for me.

 

Of course, ^ all of that is taking the perspective that people on the internet are typically vile, toxic individuals with significant failings in rational discussion or sensible thought OR are arrogant know-it-alls frothing with white privilege. Also that the vile toxicity or know-it-all-ism infects even professional websites or authors in some form or another.

Primarily because very often in the game dev scene you have people who have no education in psychology discussing things they cherry picked from a psych article or two. If I read one more article on gamasutra about "The Big Five" I think I am going to vomit.

I'm sorry, but I'd rather listen to a collection of professionals and counselors who know their Psychology than to listen to [insert successful game dev] when he pretends to talk about "The Big Five" as if it's all that awesome. Like I said: skilled opinion over opinion.

 

While I agree that you shouldn't take an unskilled person's words at face value... I don't agree that criticism (or praise) or opinions in general are worthless when they come from unskilled* people.

I can tell you when a movie is great / average / not so great / not a director's best work / etc. etc. without necessarily having to be a skilled filmmaker. What's more, I can also probably say a thing or two about why I felt that way. While that certainly doesn't mean that the director should work on precisely and specifically the things I mentioned it also doesn't mean my words are worthless. For instance, if I say "the scene structure was all over the place" that doesn't necessarily mean they should "change the scene structure". It does, however, illuminate the fact that if I am indicative of the target audience then they should investigate a) why I thought that and b) what the potential solutions may be.

So indeed I can't suggest effective solutions, which an expert may be able to do, but I'm not useless. To the contrary, input from your target audience is critical, otherwise you're just guessing about what will and won't work for them.

Also, consider: Input from experts helps you find better solutions to problems. Input from the target audience helps you identify the right problems to solve.

For instance, take the new Transformers movie. I haven't seen it, but I'll go right ahead and assume that it's got pretty average writing. After all, it's just a series of excuses to throw big robots at each other, right? With that in mind, is "average writing" really a "problem" that needs to be "solved"? Would getting a top tier science fiction or drama writer on board make the movie any better? Probably not. When I watch a Transformers movie that's not what I want. It's not the right problem to solve.

In other words, remember that it's those "unskilled*" people you want to like your game. Not some other developer or an art critic or your friends.

* Where of course "unskilled" is referring specifically and only to game development experience.

 

I put in a clause in my lengthy document, protecting myself from the use of pointing to Art in this debate!

LOL, but seriously I did

When it comes to someone's opinion on something like, oh idk, art (which movies would definitely be an art), I believe everyone's opinion has value.

Of course, I disagree with myself at this very moment. I guess I want to believe that, but don't actually. IMO, everyone's opinion on art certainly does not have value. I know people who have what I would consider one of the worst tastes in movies. I'm a movie buff, so I love those masterpieces. While everyone has their opinion, I can respect most even when I disagree. However, there are those people...that one guy you know who loves that one movie but not that other one. That guy you are like "Dude, note to self, the OPPOSITE of what he says is true from now on. Worst. Taste. EVER!"



AngryPenguin has a good argument, but I would like to provide a small rebuttal:

Even a tiny bit of skill, has value. Even if you are not a professional, if you have some skill at noticing something is off but lack the skill to identify the exact problem, that is still very helpful. I totally agree.

Input from a target audience helps you identify the right problems to solve, because the target audience has the skills you want. The audience is the TARGET for a reason. Their skill at playing [insert type of game], their taste in [insert type of game], their perspective and opinion with [insert type of game]. They are the target because of their skills not despite them.

 

So I can't talk about games in a discussion about games?

So then the whole thing about skill is completely academic and of no practical value? It seems to me that you're qualifying your whole skill argument with "anyone who has valid input is considered skilled".

So, sure, I'm not going to track down my local underwater basket weaving guild to ask for their input on my game... but I wasn't going to do that anyway.

 

More along the lines of, it is entirely based on what skill you want.

If the "skill" is their personal taste, then nearly everyone would have value. Your target market is everyone and anyone. No one person would have greater sway than the other.

If the "skill" is artistic taste, then everyone with good artistic taste would have value based on how proficient they are in that skill (how artistic they are). Some people would have more sway than others.

It does indeed have practical value, as it's the measurement of whether or not you want someone's advise. How hard you think about what they said, how much time you invest reading their drivel.
I'll provide 3 examples, using different things (art, technical, etc.)


Example1: Art
Skill Desired: Movie Art
Person Desired: Film Critic, Movie Buff, Film Majors
People not Desired: Casual movie watcher, know-nothing movie lover who never looks at it from an artistic lens, the average person, film critics on your ban list of "Awful Film Critics".

Obviously everyone has a skill in movie taste. However, movies from an artistic perspective? Not everyone has that skill, let alone has it refined. Obviously, you would hold your perferred movie critics as highest priority opinion, followed by other film critics / film majors, and be very wary and skeptical of movie buffs as they may or may not give valid input.



Example2: Niche Game Genre
Skill Desired: Target Niche Market (People with strong opinions about Roguelike)
Person Desired: Hardcore Roguelike Gamers, Roguelike fans, Gamers who are not roguelike fans but have played roguelikes before, People who hate roguelikes.
Person Not Desired: Average gamer with neutral stance on roguelikes.

Obviously you would want to include your target market. However, You'd also like to include people who HATE roguelikes. Perhaps they can give you incite as to the weaknesses of your game. What it could do better to reach a wider audience. Perhaps even find a way to convince EVERYONE the game is great despite permadeath. After all, if you can convince the haters to love your game, you won't have a problem grabbing everyone else.

The skill is "strong opinion about roguelikes". Most people probably do NOT have a strong opinion one way or another. Those outside your target audience are not people you'd want to know about because your strategy is to appease your fans.



Example3 could be a technical skill, where the "Skill" is an actual Skill.


The point isn't anyone who has a valid input is considered skilled. Instead, anyone with your target skill has valid input. You FIRST determine what that skill is, so THEN you can weed out those you don't want to hear from and those who have the strongest input.

If you say anyone with valid input is skilled, then...well that honestly makes no sense when approaching it in this way. Still, it seems backwards. Why would you first categorize the PEOPLE before categorizing the skill you're looking for? That makes no sense at all. That is like picking 20 random people in Nebraska and then finding out the only thing they have in common is breathing, so your target skill is "breathing with your lungs". That is contrary to the intended research of "Do people who love or hate roguelikes, like my alternative roguelike design?"

Obviously if the skill is technical, you ignore most user's input based on their competence. Even common skills have groups and subgroups to listen to more or less. "Gamers" is usually not what we research. It's "Casual Gamers" or "Hardcore Gamers". Two entirely different groups. There will almost always be people you can and should ignore, using this approach. Not using this approach means reading a lot more and having your judgement clouded as casual gamers influence your hardcore game, or vice versa.

 

In other words: The individual's skill is extremely important when considering their criticisms. Not just one skill, but many of them. You can measure their skill in relation to their criticism, and decide the value of it. More than likely, it will be of little value unless that is your market or they are competent in their analysis.

The more the skill, the greater the value. So skill being important doesn't diminish simply because a tiny bit of skill has value. It's just that a "tiny bit of skill" has a "tiny bit of value".

That is why people often ignore what idiots and trolls think, while listening far more to well respected intellectuals.

If the person's target skill is film as an artform, your uneducated opinion is worthless to them. No matter how much you believe you're good at telling someone if a movie is good / okay / bad. If your target is "people like me" then perhaps your opinion does have value because they know you watch movies as often as they do, with the same perspective.

 

Only the best/most popular games are going to get played anyway so i dont really see the harm. Once you release your game on the appstore or kong you are going to see just how badly it does.

I guess the problem for games that are not good enough to go viral but not craptacular either and that they would be overlooked because there are too many bad inide games and no one is willing to take a chance anymore because they are "burnt out".

 

I will say that in my limited experience, getting honest feedback from friends or family or even other developers is extremely tough. There's an assumption I think that you're looking for validation, when you really do want them to call your baby ugly. You want to iterate and improve. Worse, there's this huge gulf between that set of people and the real outside world.

I once published a simple XNA game just for fun that wasn't great, but wasn't THAT bad. I didn't do any marketing, I just liked the idea of publishing a game on the Xbox. I did put together a quick YouTube video just for fun, which somehow managed to get posted as an article on indiegames.com. It got several comments from folks assuming that it was a funded commercial release by a game studio. The vitriol was amazing, and that was just from a video. Though I did post what the real situation was and people calmed down.

After I published it, I got two overly gushing reviews from some Xbox Indie Games sites and one nasty one. The nasty one was more helpful, but the tone was just mean. And of course *after* you publish is a little late for honest feedback. It's one extreme or the other. It seems that one of the biggest advantages in actually having a budget for a game is the ability to pay real gameplay testers.

 

@Steve Tack

I'm not so sure, my other half has walked past and said "That looks ****" then walked on.

 

LOL, well that'd be honest feedback, though maybe not enough detail to dig into. Your "what to improve" list could have a "make it less ****" I suppose.

 

Really, sometimes that is what you really do need to do.

I've had times when something I draw is crap. Someone says its crap. I then know its crap as it becomes clear. I remake, and realize I could do better and do. No longer crap, lol.