Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
WALKING THE LINE: DEVELOPMENT VS. PROMOTION
Posts
Max McGee
View playlists
CloseIn any case, I recommend never to do the kind of promotion attempted by this author posting 58 comments with quotes of his own novel to demonstrate that the mildly unconvinced reviewer was wrong about him not being Keats. He is now quite famous and strictly no one wants to buy his book (except perhaps to laugh at it).
B-B-BUTT WHAT DO YOU MEAN I'M NOT KEATS!?!!?!?!
I think you're pointing out an important problem of promotion.
As authors, we work on a game foremost because we love it and want to see it complete, if only for our own sake, so we should never do the sort of promotion that endangers its completion.
What this entails really depends on the personality of the author, but those who can afford to do a lot of promotion should neither be easily tempted into spending all their time on it, nor very sensitive to negative reactions (whether justified or toxic). Some people are able to shrug off any amount of negativity, like Peter Molyneux who continues to work on his grandiose plans no matter how much he is the laughingstock of the world; there's something admirable in that, but I certainly couldn't do the same.
So if a negative review can have this impact of you (and you're clearly not alone in that), that's simply a pragmatic detail to work around. There is no way to ask feedback and have the guarantee that it will be positive.
One solution is learning to dispense with feedback entirely. Once your game is complete, there will be positive and negative reviews (your target audience can never extend to the whole universe) but at least you will have done justice to your ideas and your talent.
The only other possibility is to learn to ignore what you cannot deal with. If you see a review with a bad score, just don't read it, in case its potential toxicity could discourage you. (In my experience, people often sound more harmful than they are trying to be, but it's a moot point if you realize that only once the harm is done.)
I want to make two important points here...
1) Leaving a scathingly negative review to a well paid and even famous professional is a completely different kettle of fish than doing so to an amateur dev who's grinding this shit out in his free time for no pay. I don't feel bad for Peter Molyneux if people are mean to him and his shitty games because he can cry himself to sleep on top of his heaping pile of money and groupies.
2) This is a more important point than the first. To be honest, I don't give nearly as much of a shit about whether I will find the mean words in a negative review discouraging. That's...whatever. To me, the larger issue is, whether or not I read it, whether or not I engage with it, a negative review, especially if it's the only review (or almost the only review) will discourage OTHER PEOPLE from trying the game. That's what I find demotivating. Not that one person really, really hates my game; that doesn't even phase me anymore except on a personal level--it doesn't effect the game. But that it might not reach the broadest possible audience because of negative buzz. (And let's be honest; as RPGMaker Amateur Devs, our "Broadest Possible Audience" is already a bit on the anemic side.) THAT makes a difference; it gives the feeling of "why should I even bother finishing, no one will play it anyway", which is harmful to motivation. And that's regardless of whether you read or engage with the review.
author=SnowOwl
I have actually got several of those kinds of reviews. One guy even puts up negative reviews on several of my games. Luckily I have the oversight to see that alot of the points made in a couple of my negative reviews are just nitpicking because the player doesn't like the genre or because there was some small thing that upset the player. I don't mean that they have no valid points at all, but some people seem to review games only to lower their scores and find faults with them.
Let me just say..."Indeed". I should probably say no more.
Hasvers
1298
author=Max McGee
1) Leaving a scathingly negative review to a well paid and even famous professional is a completely different kettle of fish than doing so to an amateur dev who's grinding this shit out in his free time for no pay. I don't feel bad for Peter Molyneux if people are mean to him and his shitty games because he can cry himself to sleep on top of his heaping pile of money and groupies.
Sure. But amateur communities are always caught in a tension between trying to act like pros (including a lot of their promotion maneuvers) and wanting to remain hobbyists. Some people manage to represent the best of both worlds, other people the worst.
author=Max McGee
2) This is a more important point than the first. To be honest, I don't give nearly as much of a shit about whether I will find the mean words in a negative review discouraging. That's...whatever. To me, the larger issue is, whether or not I read it, whether or not I engage with it, a negative review, especially if it's the only review (or almost the only review) will discourage OTHER PEOPLE from trying the game.
It can. But so far I don't think I've ever seen a good game ending up with a single scathing review and fading into oblivion. Plus, if you lose only players who can be turned away by a blatantly biased or nitpicking reviewer, basically you're just losing the fleeting attention of people who don't give a damn. If you were trying to make money off them, you might care about that, but you aren't.
People who can truly appreciate a quality game will read the review and judge for themselves whether the criticisms are sensible, and very often will try the game for themselves if they feel it might have something for them.
Negative buzz happens only if there's an actual trend, if a number of people try and all feel compelled to give negative reviews, and then maybe that means that you are not advertising it to the right people, or that your tastes do not overlap with those of a majority.
(And let's be honest; as RPGMaker Amateur Devs, our "Broadest Possible Audience" is already a bit on the anemic side.)
It's very possible that your actual audience is only a fraction of that. I don't expect that more than one person in ten or fifty on this site will be interested in what I have to offer. I cannot blame them for liking and wanting things that I don't care about. Perhaps the only reasonable way to go about it is to remark that if one thousand people play your game, you have the same audience size as the very best medieval authors in their time. If your cumulative downloads reach in the tens of thousands (and they do), your audience is that of Pericles or Bach over their lifetimes. That's not exactly bad.
But to get back on the topic of promotion, I think the bottom line of what I'm saying is that finding the right targets for your promotion is really the hardest part of the job, not convincing them (or saving them from being scared away by trolls).
author=Max McGee
it gives the feeling of "why should I even bother finishing, no one will play it anyway", which is harmful to motivation.
I actually feel this way all the time, too, and it's a fairly major contributor to why I rarely actually produce anything. This is regardless of the fact that most games I work on are generally pretty well-received and get a decent amount of attention by the anemic RPGMaker community's standards. We're an increasingly small pond.
Good to see you around again, Max.
Hasvers
1298
author=SolitayreWithout meaning to be sarcastic, I have been hearing this since 2001, and I have trouble believing it when I see To The Moon on Steam or the 700 games of the IGMC. We've never been a larger pond. Mostly, I think we have lost the sense of what numbers mean in this era of WoW and Gangnam Style.
We're an increasingly small pond.
You and Max have both received more attention in our pond than most creative people in this world will ever get. Perhaps deservedly so, that's not the question. But if you do not produce more, I really feel that it's your decision only.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
While the number of people making hobbyist games has definitely skyrocketed, I'm far less sure that the number of people playing them has increased proportionally. When I was making Double Trouble in 1999, it looked as good as some commerical games that had come out as recently as three or four years ago, and no one could imagine that I'd made it myself. It was a lot harder to reach people, of course, back then, with 33.6K dialup modems... but if you could reach them, and they'd ever enjoyed an RPG, they wanted to try your RPG Maker game.
Now they have so many other options. They have as many RPG Maker games to try now as they had total games to try back then.
I personally certainly get vastly more players now than I did ten years ago, because so many more people are actively looking for indie games, and because it's so much easier for those people to at least find RPGMaker.net, where I have a pretty solid presence. But if I were starting from scratch now? I'd be buried under a mountain of other RPG Maker games.
Meanwhile the number of people playing MUDs has been dwindling for a very long time, and it continually astonishes me that mine has even a single active player. Ain't no one wanna play that shit. Text-based combat? P'shaw. If it weren't for the blind community becoming able to use screen readers to play, I'm not sure MUDs would still exist.
Now they have so many other options. They have as many RPG Maker games to try now as they had total games to try back then.
I personally certainly get vastly more players now than I did ten years ago, because so many more people are actively looking for indie games, and because it's so much easier for those people to at least find RPGMaker.net, where I have a pretty solid presence. But if I were starting from scratch now? I'd be buried under a mountain of other RPG Maker games.
Meanwhile the number of people playing MUDs has been dwindling for a very long time, and it continually astonishes me that mine has even a single active player. Ain't no one wanna play that shit. Text-based combat? P'shaw. If it weren't for the blind community becoming able to use screen readers to play, I'm not sure MUDs would still exist.
author=Hasversauthor=SolitayreWithout meaning to be sarcastic, I have been hearing this since 2001, and I have trouble believing it when I see To The Moon on Steam or the 700 games of the IGMC. We've never been a larger pond. Mostly, I think we have lost the sense of what numbers mean in this era of WoW and Gangnam Style.
We're an increasingly small pond.
Exactly. To the Moon did well because it attempted to reach people outside of our 'pond' so to speak. There are several games here I feel like could do similarly well. Not many, but a few, if the creator is willing to take that next step.
You and Max have both received more attention in our pond than most creative people in this world will ever get. Perhaps deservedly so, that's not the question.
This is an interesting sentiment. Thanks for this.
But if you do not produce more, I really feel that it's your decision only.
I do not disagree with this!
Well dang, from reading this topic I realized that I still have the old mindset (screenshot bombing).
I gotta admit it was pretty nice though, having people comment on your screens, of course that means in-game actual screenshot not some mockups. As terrible as hyping is, it does give you a bit of boost of willpower (that someone give a damn about your game). I dunno, kind of like to showoff some sprites or map like that (hmmmm maybe a blog would work better)- but sometimes no one comments or anything so it can be a letdown too.
I kinda lost touch from the community since I live in a different timezone now than most of my peers, and no one in close proximity really like GAM MAKing. Having people give inputs/exchange ideas on the game would be nice to keep you going IMO.
I kind of operate with your #2 method though, so I never make any GAEM page. Sometimes I wonder if I should, since that means I get more exposure and credibility? In your case, I think you are an old player in the community so they'd know you got your things going; the newcomers? Well they gotta prove something and I guess that's what the page is good for.
(PS on unrelated issue, your game was nice but I have to cheat on most of them. Especially that Eldrich game thing, which actually got me HOOKED into the whole Eldrich horror genre. I dunno, I think it was pretty unforgiving.)
As for game page, it might be nice to make one if we finish 50% of the main focus of the game. The coding and all that jazz, which is usually about the battle system (I admit that's my favourite part of RPG) and the art/resources (another major thing I really scrutinize (?) about). That's one of the trouble with sideview battle, tons of sprites - which seems to become a relic with all the new First Person View games lately.
As for bad reviews, yeah sure that'd be troubling. But on the other side, I keep imagining that after all the work is done and the game is out, not a single soul give a damn/mostly get a meh reaction. That's... whew, good enough to make me procrastinate instead.
I gotta admit it was pretty nice though, having people comment on your screens, of course that means in-game actual screenshot not some mockups. As terrible as hyping is, it does give you a bit of boost of willpower (that someone give a damn about your game). I dunno, kind of like to showoff some sprites or map like that (hmmmm maybe a blog would work better)- but sometimes no one comments or anything so it can be a letdown too.
I kinda lost touch from the community since I live in a different timezone now than most of my peers, and no one in close proximity really like GAM MAKing. Having people give inputs/exchange ideas on the game would be nice to keep you going IMO.
I kind of operate with your #2 method though, so I never make any GAEM page. Sometimes I wonder if I should, since that means I get more exposure and credibility? In your case, I think you are an old player in the community so they'd know you got your things going; the newcomers? Well they gotta prove something and I guess that's what the page is good for.
(PS on unrelated issue, your game was nice but I have to cheat on most of them. Especially that Eldrich game thing, which actually got me HOOKED into the whole Eldrich horror genre. I dunno, I think it was pretty unforgiving.)
As for game page, it might be nice to make one if we finish 50% of the main focus of the game. The coding and all that jazz, which is usually about the battle system (I admit that's my favourite part of RPG) and the art/resources (another major thing I really scrutinize (?) about). That's one of the trouble with sideview battle, tons of sprites - which seems to become a relic with all the new First Person View games lately.
As for bad reviews, yeah sure that'd be troubling. But on the other side, I keep imagining that after all the work is done and the game is out, not a single soul give a damn/mostly get a meh reaction. That's... whew, good enough to make me procrastinate instead.
Unrelated to the promotion itself, but wouldn't it help to have some kind of partner/friend or small group of people you'd show your progress to?
Some guy who'd pester you with how it's going along and give more detailed feedback.
You'd have feedback, some reason to actually continue working, but without managing too many comments or questions.
I know we've got places to get feedback (like the screenshot thread) or help, so .. does that give any kind of boost? To have fellow peers judge it?
Some guy who'd pester you with how it's going along and give more detailed feedback.
You'd have feedback, some reason to actually continue working, but without managing too many comments or questions.
I know we've got places to get feedback (like the screenshot thread) or help, so .. does that give any kind of boost? To have fellow peers judge it?
author=Hasversauthor=Max McGeeSure. But amateur communities are always caught in a tension between trying to act like pros (including a lot of their promotion maneuvers) and wanting to remain hobbyists. Some people manage to represent the best of both worlds, other people the worst.
1) Leaving a scathingly negative review to a well paid and even famous professional is a completely different kettle of fish than doing so to an amateur dev who's grinding this shit out in his free time for no pay. I don't feel bad for Peter Molyneux if people are mean to him and his shitty games because he can cry himself to sleep on top of his heaping pile of money and groupies.
author=Max McGee
2) This is a more important point than the first. To be honest, I don't give nearly as much of a shit about whether I will find the mean words in a negative review discouraging. That's...whatever. To me, the larger issue is, whether or not I read it, whether or not I engage with it, a negative review, especially if it's the only review (or almost the only review) will discourage OTHER PEOPLE from trying the game.
How negative is negative?
Big AAA devs dances in their pile of money and groupies to make more games too.
So far i know, some would even bring the tiny fights to gather attention.
I mean, how useful is a critic? Harsh or even good?
The only one that matters is the audience, your decision making with your games,
and your money and resource.
Because if there is anything wrong with games and its audience attitude, is that it seems people undercharge themselves in order to look good and does not oversell themselves.
But i am sorry, this kind of idea stops your from being professional.
People with harsh mouths and rough fists deserve a beating or two, hypocrites and ignorant too. But if you are using the basis of the richer you are, the harsher the critic you should get, that's helping nobody.
Harsh critic will always be there like bad pills and bad documentary games.
They just do. And it'll take care of itself with all its design, gathering bad opinions and backlash. And this is also partly the "nice ones" problem because the margin is so far away that the nicer people almost sound ignorant (some probably are as ignorant as the flippant ones) and simply avoid bad opinion because it's cut of their precious time.
Amateurs don't deserve a detailed, flippant and subjective critics because it doesn't help them as much as the normal, sugar-coated, constructive opinion.
It requires a timely education to lead them into the more elaborate essay about what's good and what's kinda bad. And even when they go pro, the game trends are like weather. Mood swings and shit.
But opinion is needed as a part of marketing.
You should probably pick your fans like choosing friends and girlfriends:
Only keep the ones who enjoys your work and wants you to keep doing it for a good trade.
My point is, harsh and flippant critics gather its own bees much like hypocrites do. But we all only get to keep a few as our loyal ones anyway. Like loud, intrusive street protests, marketing only get as much as 15% of its audience, as the real buyer. Plus maybe 25 more percent in the long run.
The idea is to keep the talk running, like this essay here, maybe the net can help expose largely undiscovered games with reviews, and various other things.
SnowOwl
5188
I don't think the point is that big companies have money, but rather that they can selectively listen to a group of people of their choosing and still get a large audience, which is in part because they have money, sure, because they can reach a larger market thanks to advertising.
We rarely have that choice, and most probably only get very sparse feedback.
Why wouldn't amateurs deserve detailed, subjective criticism? Because it would hurt their feelings and they wouldn't listen? This is probably the case for alot of them, but not all.
Also, you can't really choose your fans. They choose you.
We rarely have that choice, and most probably only get very sparse feedback.
Why wouldn't amateurs deserve detailed, subjective criticism? Because it would hurt their feelings and they wouldn't listen? This is probably the case for alot of them, but not all.
Also, you can't really choose your fans. They choose you.
author=Max McGee
Gibby, you're a rare case of a developer whose games thankfully find the audience they deserve on their own merits. Trust me that this is more the exception than the rule.
Shucks! I haven't actually finished a game for years and years.
author=sinnelius
Sure. But amateur communities are always caught in a tension between trying to act like pros (including a lot of their promotion maneuvers) and wanting to remain hobbyists. Some people manage to represent the best of both worlds, other people the worst.
In a way that's inevitable, as amateurs are often mimicking pros even if they don't have the resources to pull off the same stuff. In promotion techniques as well as in aspects of the games themselves. (Look at all the half-baked attempts at "romance" systems in the wake of Mass Effect.) But I think promotions are much more dangerous in this regard as trying to trump up an RPG Maker game as though it's of equal status with "real" current-gen games (re: cinematic trailers with epic orchestral music) just makes you look ridiculous.
If your cumulative downloads reach in the tens of thousands (and they do), your audience is that of Pericles or Bach over their lifetimes. That's not exactly bad.
Whoa? Is that like...actually true? That doesn't...SEEM...right, but I don't know enough about history to refute it. Do you have any data to back that up?
Without meaning to be sarcastic, I have been hearing this since 2001, and I have trouble believing it when I see To The Moon on Steam or the 700 games of the IGMC. We've never been a larger pond. Mostly, I think we have lost the sense of what numbers mean in this era of WoW and Gangnam Style.
I agree with you I mean...it is easier to crossover from "incestpool" (that lovely coin of phrase owes its coinage to Craze, who described the RMN community as an "incestuous cestpool", which does NOT represent how I think of it) to the mainstream than ever.
Exactly. To the Moon did well because it attempted to reach people outside of our 'pond' so to speak. There are several games here I feel like could do similarly well. Not many, but a few, if the creator is willing to take that next step.
It's a lot more than you think that COULD make it, whether or not they "deserve" too (and what a loaded word!). The video game consumer base is way less educated and discerning than you think they are. Here's the thing; RPG Maker devs KNOW what amazing things people are always giving away for free that they made in RPG maker. People who buy retro video games? They don't know that AT ALL. That's why RM games that are clearly "meh" or "average" that go commercial still tend to do at least decently, and sometimes very well. Ignorance of the audience of superior free products available. Old example, pre-Steam greenlight: Laxius Power.
It has virtually everything to do with the willingness to take the next step and virtually nothing to do with the merits of the game. As long as it is like...a completed game and not, as is too often the case, a demo that will never be completed.
You and Max have both received more attention in our pond than most creative people in this world will ever get. Perhaps deservedly so, that's not the question. But if you do not produce more, I really feel that it's your decision only.
Well...this is true...BUT it was actually true before I ever joined RMN. Since joining RMN I have really not received all that much (new) attention. But back in the old days pre-RMN yeah...my stuff was kind of popular.
Also..I think you may have a slightly overly-pessimistic view of how much attention an average creative person can get, if they have the tenacity to stick with it, and their circumstances make that possible.
Meanwhile the number of people playing MUDs has been dwindling for a very long time, and it continually astonishes me that mine has even a single active player. Ain't no one wanna play that shit. Text-based combat? P'shaw. If it weren't for the blind community becoming able to use screen readers to play, I'm not sure MUDs would still exist.
haha I occasionally consider getting into MUDs goes to show my tastes are as timely as ever
author=Gibmaker
Shucks! I haven't actually finished a game for years and years.
You're not the only one. : )
(PS on unrelated issue, your game was nice but I have to cheat on most of them. Especially that Eldrich game thing, which actually got me HOOKED into the whole Eldrich horror genre. I dunno, I think it was pretty unforgiving.)
That "Normal" or even "EASY" difficulty for the game's creator (who knows every single mechanic intrinsically and in depth) is always going to be "HARD" or even "NIGHTMARE" difficulty for random players is a lesson that it has been taking me literally DECADES to learns. I always think I've gone far enough towards making my newer games "disgustingly easy" so much so it's impossible for me to enjoy playing them. It's NEVER far enough. When you have a game that's kind of MEANT to be pretty hard in the first place (i.e. Eldritch) then it gets even trickier for the creator to balance. Anyway, it's awesome to hear it got you into the genre. XD
Unrelated to the promotion itself, but wouldn't it help to have some kind of partner/friend or small group of people you'd show your progress to?
Thankfully, I have a girlfriend, and even more thankfully, she's a genuine nerd who will put up with my obsessive dorkiness. She's always "first reader" on my games, and provides this role for me.
(I don't think she always catches things other playtesters would catch: this isn't because she's trying to spare my feelings, I think it's more because like me she's been playing my games for the better part of a decade, and has learned to handle the depth/difficulty and take it as standard. But she's great for finding bugs and game-breaking things I had no idea existed. It's also a great relief to be able to watch her playtest a section rather than playing through it for the 9,000th mind numbing time myself.)
That said, would I like a slightly larger circle of people who are more involved in game development as "first readers"? Definitely! I think that would benefit anyone.
sinnelius: I am seriously not saying this to be flippant or dismissive, but it seems to me that English is your second language? There's nothing wrong with that, and your English is very very good, but your points seem to be really complicated and nuanced, so I think I am actually having trouble understanding exactly what points you are making. Sorry.
author=Max McGeeIf your cumulative downloads reach in the tens of thousands (and they do), your audience is that of Pericles or Bach over their lifetimes. That's not exactly bad.Whoa? Is that like...actually true? That doesn't...SEEM...right, but I don't know enough about history to refute it. Do you have any data to back that up?
The classics were not accessible to public at the time.
Most of those great musicians were personal musicians for aristocratic courts - not considered much more than their cooks. Outside of those, nobody could affort to listen to it, except a very few rich people and those with access to a larger church which could afford to have music written and performed for them as well.
We've touched it in music class, but my parents studied music, so I can definitely second that. You should consider it an honor to even be able to listen to all that stuff.
I can't find any articles for the contemporary exposure as opposed to the modern on the fly, though. I'll perhaps try a bit later.
We're becoming used to the all-world-presence over the internet, and it's something we with our communal sense can't properly keep up with.
Who cares if you aren't reaching millions? If you reached more than whole towns or small cities, then I'd say that's rather impressive.
author=Max McGee(PS on unrelated issue, your game was nice but I have to cheat on most of them. Especially that Eldrich game thing, which actually got me HOOKED into the whole Eldrich horror genre. I dunno, I think it was pretty unforgiving.)That "Normal" or even "EASY" difficulty for the game's creator (who knows every single mechanic intrinsically and in depth) is always going to be "HARD" or even "NIGHTMARE" difficulty for random players is a lesson that it has been taking me literally DECADES to learns. I always think I've gone far enough towards making my newer games "disgustingly easy" so much so it's impossible for me to enjoy playing them. It's NEVER far enough. When you have a game that's kind of MEANT to be pretty hard in the first place (i.e. Eldritch) then it gets even trickier for the creator to balance. Anyway, it's awesome to hear it got you into the genre. XD
I think your eldrich game actually just suffer from limited Rm2k3 Mechanic to be honest. Reloading (arms) is cool, I am alright with wasting turn to reload but I think the damage was rather miniscule? The idea with sanity is cool (using MP) but I think i'd be better if you can separate them to three parts instead HP/MP/SN. To be fair though, during those days, it was rather unheard of to modify the DBS - it takes another two years?
In the end, the strategy that I used was : Spamming the uh, squelch? quench? Shiver? Something along the line of rot I think but I forgot the magic name (sorry). Basically that magic is the only one (during those days, I admit I wasn't much of strategist) I used alongside with "calm" command since it does respectable damage aside from other methods (like I said, I am not much of a strategist! In retrospect, perhaps drown spell would be better against humans? I really didn't check the database). I'd shoot all my magic, go insane, hope that my partner is still alive and calm me down (up!) to 50 MP. Repeat. Worked until before the star spawn too! Can't win against that though.
As for IG:V, it was neato, but the dice roll was kind of skewed, though you kind of knew that already (I think you suggested post release with limiting it to d20 instead of d100). The final transformation skill (again with Rm2k3 limitation ahoy!) actually made me lose the bonus fight! Not sure how that happened but I got chainsaw-ed since I can't heal/defend (command removed?) or due to loss of turn (due to transform command activation). Or was it another game? Hmm, I am not too sure now.
Ok, enough with offroading
I am actually fine with HARD game these days to be honest. Over the past few years, I appreciated Etrian Odyssey (1&2 the more...unforgiving (and slow) and dark souls - kind of games a bit more (In the past, I'd have throw the game right to the bin). And I agree, a degree of difficulty is necessary to make a game interesting; and while I am sure many would disagree, I really like battle with close (sometimes within a sliver of health) victory. Sure, you can make the boss cheat-y, but let the player able to counter/mitigate it too (not faux difficulty where you hit with a force of a stick, while the boss hit with a force of a meteor; and have a meteor sized health. Repeat ad infinitum). I remember these battles more in the end.
Also yeah, having someone as FIRST! reader is neato. Definitely would help in discussing your ideas, especially since creator oversight is a real thing. Someone that can help to point these plotholes beforehand is a boon.
