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)
CULTURE OF CRASS, APATHY AND CYNICISM
Posts
kentona
View playlists
CloseYou guys rarely call me out on my overconfidence and ego. Maybe it's because I really am "The Greatest"
Kentona
You guys rarely call me out on my overconfidence and ego. Maybe it's because I really am "The Greatest"
I wanna be the very best
like no one ever was.
to make them is my real test
to balance them is my cause.
I will travel across the 'Net
searching far and wide.
teach myself to understand
the mechanics that's inside.
RPG Maker! Gotta make'em all!
Darken
3952
RPG MAKER!!
It's you and me!
I know it's my DEMO
RPG MAKER
Ooh you're my best tester
in a world we must argue!!
RPG MAKER
our chipsets so true
our eventing will pull us through
you play mine and I'll trash yours
RPG MAKER
Gotta make'em all!!
It's you and me!
I know it's my DEMO
RPG MAKER
Ooh you're my best tester
in a world we must argue!!
RPG MAKER
our chipsets so true
our eventing will pull us through
you play mine and I'll trash yours
RPG MAKER
Gotta make'em all!!
Volrath
2756
Hmm...I might be a little late. But oh well. I'm not as active as others who have weighed in on this, but perhaps the different perspective will help.
In terms of the problem the op describes, it's there, but it could certainly be a lot worse. I like a lot of people here, but there are a handful of very visible members who are antagonistic jerks and coat their assertions/insults with the worst kind of teeth-grindingly obnoxious dogma. None of them are staff, as far as I know...and no, none of them have written a bad review of MotW. :P Every forum has people like this, but if you want to imrpove the overall tone of RMN, this sort of "mean for the sake of being mean" stuff should be met with more pushback than it currently is. And I'd rather not name names.
I want to talk right to Legion/Max cause I feel like if I had less restraint, I could get into some of the same situations he tends to. But I've learned a fair amount about dealing with criticism, mostly through trial and error.
You seem to react to criticism by immediately suggesting the reviewer has it in for you. And it's easy to fall into this trap. Sometimes I feel like MotW gets targeted because someone out there doesn't like that it has a fanbase, and other times the complaints are so asenine and nitpicky that I can't help but feel there's ulterior motives at work. But even it's true, there's really no upside to trying to make a case for it. Comments like that almost inevitably make readers side with the reviewer, and the kind of attention these incidents draw isn't the kind you want. I remember when you brought Iron Gaia II to rmxp.org (now hbgames.org), it didn't take long before your foes from GW followed and basically restarted the arguments you were having there. The thread was ruined.
So what's the alternative? Respond by talking about the intellectual, not the personal. Did the reviewer make factual errors? (Not liking the game doesn't count. :P) Are the expectations unreasonably high? Are the viewpoints expressed inconsistent with other reviews this person has written? That's the kind of stuff that makes for good discussion.
I left rmxp.org a long time ago due to an overly nasty climate...and have basically lived in semi-seclusion in regards to the RM world, except of course for the MotW forums. I've been hedging on being more active here, though some of the behavior I've described makes me hesitant. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks it's worth discussing, though.
In terms of the problem the op describes, it's there, but it could certainly be a lot worse. I like a lot of people here, but there are a handful of very visible members who are antagonistic jerks and coat their assertions/insults with the worst kind of teeth-grindingly obnoxious dogma. None of them are staff, as far as I know...and no, none of them have written a bad review of MotW. :P Every forum has people like this, but if you want to imrpove the overall tone of RMN, this sort of "mean for the sake of being mean" stuff should be met with more pushback than it currently is. And I'd rather not name names.
I want to talk right to Legion/Max cause I feel like if I had less restraint, I could get into some of the same situations he tends to. But I've learned a fair amount about dealing with criticism, mostly through trial and error.
You seem to react to criticism by immediately suggesting the reviewer has it in for you. And it's easy to fall into this trap. Sometimes I feel like MotW gets targeted because someone out there doesn't like that it has a fanbase, and other times the complaints are so asenine and nitpicky that I can't help but feel there's ulterior motives at work. But even it's true, there's really no upside to trying to make a case for it. Comments like that almost inevitably make readers side with the reviewer, and the kind of attention these incidents draw isn't the kind you want. I remember when you brought Iron Gaia II to rmxp.org (now hbgames.org), it didn't take long before your foes from GW followed and basically restarted the arguments you were having there. The thread was ruined.
So what's the alternative? Respond by talking about the intellectual, not the personal. Did the reviewer make factual errors? (Not liking the game doesn't count. :P) Are the expectations unreasonably high? Are the viewpoints expressed inconsistent with other reviews this person has written? That's the kind of stuff that makes for good discussion.
I left rmxp.org a long time ago due to an overly nasty climate...and have basically lived in semi-seclusion in regards to the RM world, except of course for the MotW forums. I've been hedging on being more active here, though some of the behavior I've described makes me hesitant. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks it's worth discussing, though.
Most of the people here are actually quite pleasant once you get to know them. It's a certain vocal minority that creates the negative attitude here. It's little wonder most new members don't stick around long.
Yeah, Solitayre and Silviera, you need to tone it down. Your negative attitude is ruining the entire site.
A good portion of the feelings of animosity on this site come from misinterpretation of the content in the reviews. I've noticed that a lot of reviewers try to use humor in their reviews to appear clever. Usually, (I hate to break the news but) they fail at it. Their comments come off more as snarky and mean spirited than how the reviewer intended them to be.
I've often misinterpreted them too (I think?), and I'm talking about reviews for projects that are not mine. But I'm sure that the authors take much more offense to them than the outsiders. What makes it worse are the comments beneath that egg these reviewers on by saying "that was so funny, I'll never play this game ever!" and the like. In fact, I've read a lot of reviews on here, and never found one I considered 'funny', just rude or holier than thou. If someone would please point me in the direction of one that really IS funny, and not at the expense of the creator, it would be much appreciated.
Reviews should be constructive. We're not supposed to be actively warding people away from playing these games, we're supposed to be helping each other to improve. That's my take on it anyway. I've wasted my time with a ton of bad rm games through the years, and I'm not about to waste more of it just to hurt their feelings.
Another thing, remember that little kids often lie about their age to make themselves seem more professional or whatever. They're bound to go ballistic over anything they find to be too harsh, and I'm sure their feelings are easily hurt. That's one of the reasons I never released anything in my younger years. I knew I was no good, but I was always proud when I tried something new or finished making a game. Use caution.
I've often misinterpreted them too (I think?), and I'm talking about reviews for projects that are not mine. But I'm sure that the authors take much more offense to them than the outsiders. What makes it worse are the comments beneath that egg these reviewers on by saying "that was so funny, I'll never play this game ever!" and the like. In fact, I've read a lot of reviews on here, and never found one I considered 'funny', just rude or holier than thou. If someone would please point me in the direction of one that really IS funny, and not at the expense of the creator, it would be much appreciated.
Reviews should be constructive. We're not supposed to be actively warding people away from playing these games, we're supposed to be helping each other to improve. That's my take on it anyway. I've wasted my time with a ton of bad rm games through the years, and I'm not about to waste more of it just to hurt their feelings.
Another thing, remember that little kids often lie about their age to make themselves seem more professional or whatever. They're bound to go ballistic over anything they find to be too harsh, and I'm sure their feelings are easily hurt. That's one of the reasons I never released anything in my younger years. I knew I was no good, but I was always proud when I tried something new or finished making a game. Use caution.
You seem to react to criticism by immediately suggesting the reviewer has it in for you.
You are basing this I think on one or two incidents. Sorry if I am mistaken but I don't think this is really a fair generalization. : )
Silviera
2891
Humor is probably the single most important aspect of making a review interesting to read. It's definitely something you have to be careful with, push it too far and you sound like a jerk. Personally I think subtle humor is the best (won't cause you to fall out of your chair but you'll still enjoy reading), it is of course important to direct it at the game instead of the creator.
Droning on and on about the mechanics of a game with no attempts to make the content interesting means you're probably not going to get a lot of people to read to the end, or if they do they're going to be doing a lot of skimming.
http://rpgmaker.net/games/937/reviews/438/
http://rpgmaker.net/games/154/reviews/668/
http://rpgmaker.net/games/901/reviews/516/
Just my opinion of course, but I enjoyed all three of these reviews immensely due to the humor. I'd like to note that despite the fact that these reviews were blisteringly negative all of the creators responded favorably.
I think you're blowing this out of proportion a bit. Personally I have written 35 reviews for this site, most of which are comprised almost entirely of criticism (even for the games I loved!), and I've only ever had 2 of the creators respond negatively. And one of those people doesn't even hang around this site. I don't know the exact number for Solitayre's reviews but he has had similar experiences with the site's member base.
It's true that when a person does take offense they can get pretty vocal about it, and that's pretty understandable and something any reviewer should expect when they deliver a low score. I hardly think that's an accurate representation of the site as a whole, though. Really that's the reason I enjoy writing reviews for RMN so much, people are generally extremely receptive to critique and are eager to improve their technique.
Edit:
It's true that reviews should be written with the intent of offering useful feedback to the creator. However, they are also meant for prospective players. You've said yourself you sat through plenty of bad RM games, if you'd been able to read about possible reasons to avoid a game you might have saved yourself some time. If you write 'only' to help the game's creator improve, maybe you should send your information through a comment on their gamepage or through a private message? Reviews are there for the entire site to read through.
That said, when you do plan to give an extremely negative review you really need to be detailed. Just saying you hated the game doesn't cut it, and if you describe the game's features in detail it is possible that someone reading your review might actually notice that something you described as extremely annoying is actually something they love in a game.
Droning on and on about the mechanics of a game with no attempts to make the content interesting means you're probably not going to get a lot of people to read to the end, or if they do they're going to be doing a lot of skimming.
If someone would please point me in the direction of one that really IS funny, and not at the expense of the creator, it would be much appreciated.
http://rpgmaker.net/games/937/reviews/438/
http://rpgmaker.net/games/154/reviews/668/
http://rpgmaker.net/games/901/reviews/516/
Just my opinion of course, but I enjoyed all three of these reviews immensely due to the humor. I'd like to note that despite the fact that these reviews were blisteringly negative all of the creators responded favorably.
A good portion of the feelings of animosity on this site come from misinterpretation of the content in the reviews.
I think you're blowing this out of proportion a bit. Personally I have written 35 reviews for this site, most of which are comprised almost entirely of criticism (even for the games I loved!), and I've only ever had 2 of the creators respond negatively. And one of those people doesn't even hang around this site. I don't know the exact number for Solitayre's reviews but he has had similar experiences with the site's member base.
It's true that when a person does take offense they can get pretty vocal about it, and that's pretty understandable and something any reviewer should expect when they deliver a low score. I hardly think that's an accurate representation of the site as a whole, though. Really that's the reason I enjoy writing reviews for RMN so much, people are generally extremely receptive to critique and are eager to improve their technique.
Edit:
Reviews should be constructive. We're not supposed to be actively warding people away from playing these games, we're supposed to be helping each other to improve.
It's true that reviews should be written with the intent of offering useful feedback to the creator. However, they are also meant for prospective players. You've said yourself you sat through plenty of bad RM games, if you'd been able to read about possible reasons to avoid a game you might have saved yourself some time. If you write 'only' to help the game's creator improve, maybe you should send your information through a comment on their gamepage or through a private message? Reviews are there for the entire site to read through.
That said, when you do plan to give an extremely negative review you really need to be detailed. Just saying you hated the game doesn't cut it, and if you describe the game's features in detail it is possible that someone reading your review might actually notice that something you described as extremely annoying is actually something they love in a game.
Indeed, I have read those reviews. Except the last one, I'm always turned away by negative sounding titles.
But at the same time, when I write an album review for my publication, I listen to the WHOLE album. I just don't think it's fair for someone to write a whole review of something they played 1/100th of. And that is where I take issue with much of the negative criticism on here. Sure, the game needs to grab you from the beginning, otherwise why waste your time? But don't write review about it. Offer some feedback in some other form instead of broadcasting it to everyone else. If people are that stingy about what games they're downloading, they shouldn't be downloading amateur games in the first place. Even if we're talking about a game breaking bug, message the author and simply say, "dude, your game's broken. Take it down and fix it."
This applies to professional games as well. If at any point while reading a review I get the impression that the reviewer did not play the entire game, I stop reading and ignore them. So maybe it really is just me, but I never thought so before. I think it's unfair to the creator, and unfair to a potential fan base. To demonstrate, there was a comment in the Blighted Venom review where someone felt it was a lot better past the point where the reviewer quit. I know I drifted from the whole humor thing, I just think measures should be taken to ensure that these reviews are being read constructively, and not just to have a laugh at the creator's expense, or to shatter their aspirations. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm biting anyone's head off, it's just something I feel very strongly about, and I'm glad there is a place to discuss it here.
But at the same time, when I write an album review for my publication, I listen to the WHOLE album. I just don't think it's fair for someone to write a whole review of something they played 1/100th of. And that is where I take issue with much of the negative criticism on here. Sure, the game needs to grab you from the beginning, otherwise why waste your time? But don't write review about it. Offer some feedback in some other form instead of broadcasting it to everyone else. If people are that stingy about what games they're downloading, they shouldn't be downloading amateur games in the first place. Even if we're talking about a game breaking bug, message the author and simply say, "dude, your game's broken. Take it down and fix it."
This applies to professional games as well. If at any point while reading a review I get the impression that the reviewer did not play the entire game, I stop reading and ignore them. So maybe it really is just me, but I never thought so before. I think it's unfair to the creator, and unfair to a potential fan base. To demonstrate, there was a comment in the Blighted Venom review where someone felt it was a lot better past the point where the reviewer quit. I know I drifted from the whole humor thing, I just think measures should be taken to ensure that these reviews are being read constructively, and not just to have a laugh at the creator's expense, or to shatter their aspirations. I hope it doesn't sound like I'm biting anyone's head off, it's just something I feel very strongly about, and I'm glad there is a place to discuss it here.
Silviera
2891
I definitely agree that is it better to play the entire game to completion when giving a review. This applies both to positive and negative reviews. Mindless praise without going into the specifics of the game is just as annoying as someone bashing a game for no reason.
In those examples I listed the Quintessence review probably could have used a more detailed look, since it was in fact a very long game (though personally I thought Brick was spot on with his review of those 2 hours). The Forlorn Manor one was a lot more understandable since the game issues physically prevented him from playing it any further. The thing about Brick's reviews is that he tells you exactly how long he played, so both the author and the players know exactly what kind of feedback they're getting.
In any case, I'd definitely agree you should try to finish the game whenever physically possible. And if for some reason you can't pull that off you should mention it in your review, preferably up front.
It is worth noting that some people do request reviews, sometimes not realizing their game is broken at some stage. That kind of thing is responsible for a few of those types of reviews you see on the site (not to mention the staff do get assignments from time to time).
In those examples I listed the Quintessence review probably could have used a more detailed look, since it was in fact a very long game (though personally I thought Brick was spot on with his review of those 2 hours). The Forlorn Manor one was a lot more understandable since the game issues physically prevented him from playing it any further. The thing about Brick's reviews is that he tells you exactly how long he played, so both the author and the players know exactly what kind of feedback they're getting.
In any case, I'd definitely agree you should try to finish the game whenever physically possible. And if for some reason you can't pull that off you should mention it in your review, preferably up front.
It is worth noting that some people do request reviews, sometimes not realizing their game is broken at some stage. That kind of thing is responsible for a few of those types of reviews you see on the site (not to mention the staff do get assignments from time to time).
Nightblade
2723
Sure, the game needs to grab you from the beginning, otherwise why waste your time? But don't write review about it.
It varies from situation to situation. It is not unreasonable to have someone only be able to stand about half a game before either being stopped by a technical / balance issue, or simply not wishing to subject themselves to any further punishment.
Silviera
2891
One thing I forgot to mention that's very important regarding that: the status of the project. A cursory glance will usually tell you if the project is actively being worked on, is abandoned, on hiatus, or is a complete project that is never going to be touched again.
Unless the project is actively being developed then you really should inform people that it is basically unplayable. A review is a great way to do this (and if you're lucky the creator may stop by someday and care enough about their game to fix it).
Unless the project is actively being developed then you really should inform people that it is basically unplayable. A review is a great way to do this (and if you're lucky the creator may stop by someday and care enough about their game to fix it).
post=130722
It is worth noting that some people do request reviews, sometimes not realizing their game is broken at some stage. That kind of thing is responsible for a few of those types of reviews you see on the site (not to mention the staff do get assignments from time to time).
This is true. In fact, when I recently released my demo I asked for any feedback I could get so that I could see if there were any game breaking bugs. And I welcomed any reviews for it as I needed to see if it was worth finishing (it was never a very ambitious effort, admittedly lol). In that respect I'm glad the reviews are not limited by censorship of any kind. I even got a concise, detailed, and very well written review that urged me to keep going with it and make some of the noted improvements. It worked out very well. edchuy's new, as I understand it, but he/she is one dedicated member.
AznChipmunk
4613
post=130714
A good portion of the feelings of animosity on this site come from misinterpretation of the content in the reviews. I've noticed that a lot of reviewers try to use humor in their reviews to appear clever. Usually, (I hate to break the news but) they fail at it. Their comments come off more as snarky and mean spirited than how the reviewer intended them to be.
Disagreed. There are quite a few reviews that have given me a chuckle, and even though you may not laugh, there are many members who would agree with me. Most people will not really read a dry review! Last year I spent a lot of my time constantly writing film reviews for a publication. You know what made people read them? They were funny. I had people come and tell me, "I enjoyed reading your scathing review of ____ film! It made me laugh!"
post=130714
Reviews should be constructive. We're not supposed to be actively warding people away from playing these games, we're supposed to be helping each other to improve. That's my take on it anyway. I've wasted my time with a ton of bad rm games through the years, and I'm not about to waste more of it just to hurt their feelings.
Also disagreed. Reviews are foremost for the players, detailing the positives and negatives for players to see if they want to play the game.
Have you ever been on a site like Amazon and read the reviews? Those are reviews, but they aren't for the author to improve. They are for potential customers to see if they are getting something good quality for their money. It's the same concept here. You read the review to see if you're going to get something enjoyable for the time it takes up. HOWEVER, as this is a game DESIGN site, yes, getting feedback to the author is important too, but that is secondary. First focus on presenting the truth about the game, then focus on feedback for the author.
post=130714
Another thing, remember that little kids often lie about their age to make themselves seem more professional or whatever. They're bound to go ballistic over anything they find to be too harsh, and I'm sure their feelings are easily hurt. That's one of the reasons I never released anything in my younger years. I knew I was no good, but I was always proud when I tried something new or finished making a game. Use caution.
"Little kids?" You do know there is an age limit to being on the site right? If you're not at least 13, you cannot sign up. It's part of the Terms of Service. If you're 13 or over, you're just being immature.
Also disagreed. Reviews are foremost for the players, detailing the positives and negatives for players to see if they want to play the game.
Have you ever been on a site like Amazon and read the reviews? Those are reviews, but they aren't for the author to improve. They are for potential customers to see if they are getting something good quality for their money. It's the same concept here. You read the review to see if you're going to get something enjoyable for the time it takes up. HOWEVER, as this is a game DESIGN site, yes, getting feedback to the author is important too, but that is secondary. First focus on presenting the truth about the game, then focus on feedback for the author.
"Potential customers"? Jesus. What is this, some sort of competitive entertainment market? It's amateur video game creation for shits sake.
Without question, in this community, reviews are primarily for the author of said game. Hell, most games that get reviewed aren't even complete games. This is why authors ask for reviews. Most reviewers give criticism to help them improve, which in turn help themselves improve.
It's a symbiotic relationship between the reviewer and the creator. Any third party on the outside can use the review to understand why the game is bad/good, and in turn help THEM improve with their own game-making skills.
This is a community. We're just creating things and sharing things, not trying to score a wicked Zagat rating to boost our stock options or anything.
AznChipmunk
4613
post=130782
"Potential customers"? Jesus. What is this, some sort of competitive entertainment market? It's amateur video game creation for shits sake.
Without question, in this community, reviews are primarily for the author of said game. Hell, most games that get reviewed aren't even complete games. This is why authors ask for reviews. Most reviewers give criticism to help them improve, which in turn help themselves improve.
It's a symbiotic relationship between the reviewer and the creator. Any third party on the outside can use the review to understand why the game is bad/good, and in turn help THEM improve with their own game-making skills.
hello, it's called a motherfucking analogy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Review
just why do you think most reviews on this site are all directed towards readers hmmm?
also don't say amateur, because that is irrelevant and might incite a whole other argument again
post=130721this has nothing to do with anything
This is a community. We're just creating things and sharing things, not trying to score a wicked Zagat rating to boost our stock options or anything.
post=130721The difference between an album and a game is that a game takes effort to play through, while an album lasts a set amount of time you can listen through. If you want to say "the game gets better after ___ of unbearable garbage" then write your own goddamned review.
But at the same time, when I write an album review for my publication, I listen to the WHOLE album. I just don't think it's fair for someone to write a whole review of something they played 1/100th of. And that is where I take issue with much of the negative criticism on here. Sure, the game needs to grab you from the beginning, otherwise why waste your time? But don't write review about it. Offer some feedback in some other form instead of broadcasting it to everyone else. If people are that stingy about what games they're downloading, they shouldn't be downloading amateur games in the first place. Even if we're talking about a game breaking bug, message the author and simply say, "dude, your game's broken. Take it down and fix it."
