Wither

My posts might seem harsh, but that's just the way I am - straight to the point. Anyhow - there's one thing I disagree entirely with some of you and this is the thing I believe is the most damaging to the community - the belief that all feedback is good feedback and learn how to handle criticism or GTFO.

I just can't begin to tell you how: a)wrong you are, b)negative a stance this is. First, there IS such thing as worthless feedback. When someone tells you your game is great, it's actually good feedback - you feel you've made something worthwhile, something that entertained someone for a few hours. You are motivated to work on your next game. When someone says your game sucks, it's not good feedback. All it tells you is there are douches in the world who don't enjoy your game. LIKE YOU DIDN'T EXPECT IT. You have no idea what to fix, if there even is anything to fix, and you feel demotivated. These are of course the most simplistic and extreme examples, but they do prove the "theory of equal feedback" wrong.

Now - if you still don't understand why saying someone's game is a POC and leaving it at that is wrong, I don't know what to say to you. You're a terrible person. There is, however, a fixation in this community I can't wrap my head around. The belief that every comment must be critical in nature to help the developer, well, develop. In theory this is good, in practice it legitimizes people being assholes and lifts the burden of having something, anything good to say about someone else's work. "Hey, we don't like games here, we're DEVELOPERS! We have to kick each other's games into oblivion *wink* in order to become better Pokeyman trainers developers!" It's destructive. Very destructive. It leads nowhere. It reminds me of a bunch of hyperrealists criticising each other's work to become true masters of photo-realistic paintings. The result? A faux photograph, but certainly not art. Same thing here - it's like RMNers don't want to make games that entertain people, maybe even express themselves through their games (yes, it is possible), but strive for that perfect game that doesn't exist, AT ALL COSTS!, which breeds frustration (many of you are so frustrated, it's very visible). Also - it's one thing when a fellow developer that has one or more games under his belt offers criticism for my game, but when a guy who never seems to produce anything goes around picking apart people's games, it's even worse... goddamn theorists.

And it's not just about what you think about the game, it's also how you say it. I estimate most of the people here, especially the most vocal ones, don't know how to voice their opinions without being offensive. Reminds me of RL people who tell their friend that she's fat and wonder why she feels hurt. It's kind of the same thing going around here, but with fewer (any) consequences, well, apart from the active part of the community getting smaller every year. This is a real problem here, guys! I get it that many geeks are not assertive, but come on! Learn how to write without hurting others, it's not that hard. Someone wise once said: "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". While this approach would not work in this community (it IS a developer's site after all, so we need criticassm), it's good to have it in mind before posting anything. Especially a review such as this one.

Finally, I just can't get over the fact that anyone might think that writing a review of a game of a genre you hate is a good idea. IT ISN'T. Really, even though I hate racing games I don't go around visiting video game sites and telling everyone how shitty this genre is. I could always write down a couple of reasons why I don't enjoy that particular genre and then copy-paste them into a series of "reviews" of racing games with the only thing differentiating them being the title, but what would be the point? To prove I'm not a fan of racing games? Whoop dee doo, who cares, and why should they? This is the case with this review. Yeah, we get it Craze is allergic to atmosphere, stories, well-developed characters, and the only think he cares about is the battle system. OK, nothing wrong about it. But is there any point to him stalking the site and spilling vitriol onto the games that don't conform to his ideal?

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE negative reviews, but they have to be reviews, not an entry in Craze's diary! The reviewer cannot be biased, they have to approach the game with a neutral stance (ideally). A good review, heck, any review, must contain reasons for why the game is not good (or good), it must be an attempt to deconstruct each of its aspects at least partially. And what do we have here? I don't like this game therefore it sucks, followed by some juvenile sarcasm. Want a good negative review? Read Brickroad's reviews. They are HILARIOUS, and yet not at all malicious (unlike Craze's).

I know, I know... I'm wasting my time here, you people will never change. I could go on about how people here don't want to discuss game development but instead make statements and expect everyone to agree with them (the notion of the exchange of ideas is alien to some). How inflated people's expectations are, with some having the gall to hold RPG Maker games to the same standard as commercial games (which is fucking ridiculous). Maybe some other time. At least I got this one thing off my chest.

author=DE
My posts might seem harsh, but that's just the way I am - straight to the point.

Which is exactly what Craze could say about his review.

And I don't think "people" don't know how to express themselves without being offensive; it seems to me "they" actually go out of their way in their desire to be as offensive as possible. As to why they do it, well, if you have tact it means you are weak, doesn't it?

from Cozzer
if you have tact it means you are weak, doesn't it?

It seems like people love to polarize between being complete venomous jackasses and sugarcoating everything they say. There's actually this wonderful point in between those two where you can say the things you need to say without being too mean or too nice about it. It's called professionalism. Oh, but that's hard to do. And as we all know...

from Craze
being a dick is fun

author=Hali
There's actually this wonderful point in between those two where you can say the things you need to say without being too mean or too nice about it. It's called professionalism

I call it "meeting the minimum requirements to be a funcional member of any kind of group of people". I mean, it's not an epic feat. It's normal.

It should be.

author=DE
Bottomline is - if you don't like a game, don't feel it can be improved in any way, it's just not your type of game - don't review it!

author=DE
As long as the staff not only approve of reviews such as this one, but also don't take steps to combat this mentality, this site, as I've already said, will be crap for feedback and other communities will treat it with well-deserved contempt. "But we're professionals here and other sites are for noobs!" my ass.

"Do as I say, not as I do" at its finest. Unless your first quote applies exclusively to games, I guess.

leave britney ALONE!!!!!

author=DE
You are motivated to work on your next game. When someone says your game sucks, it's not good feedback. All it tells you is there are douches in the world who don't enjoy your game. LIKE YOU DIDN'T EXPECT IT. You have no idea what to fix, if there even is anything to fix, and you feel demotivated. These are of course the most simplistic and extreme examples, but they do prove the "theory of equal feedback" wrong.

I would consider telling someone that their game sucks without offering any suggestions for improvement as worthless feedback. I am pretty sure most people would.

author=narcodis
This review is really fucking confusing. RMN's ideal of "all opinions are golden and to be respected" is kind of naive, IMO.

It's a poorly written review. Not very useful. Doesn't mean it should be denied. The same goes for crappy projects. Don't like it? Don't play it, don't read it, or make a comment.

I dunno if "all opinions are golden and to be respected," because certainly all projects are not golden and are often trashed. Hell, loads of people just came on and trashed this review. What I do know is that there's pretty much no censorship. That's not naive.

author=calunio

author=NewBlack
& yes I'm aware of the inherent hypocrisy of this comment.

Are you also aware of the irony in the "let's cut the drama" message?

I never said anything about cutting the drama at all. It would just be nice if other types of reviews could get a slice of the action too. There's obviously enough to go around considering things like DE's reply being longer than the review it's for and there being almost 60 comments etc.

I don't care if there's drama or not, I'd just like to see more non-drama-related activity also. It creates an environment where only controversy gets attention, which is probably not good for the "morale" of some would-be reviewers or contributors who'll expect to pretty much have their submissions overlooked by the majority of the regulars here because they're busy doing.. well. This.