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)
THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT - PERCEPTION OF DESIGNER & PLAYER "RESPONSIBILITIES" IN AMATEUR & COMMERCIAL VIDEO GAMES
Posts
Max McGee
View playlists
CloseEverything is as true as you think it is and everything you can get away with is permitted.
This is the interpretation I've always gone with, and yes I too learned the quote the smug over-educated college hipster *coolshades* non-ubisoft plebeian way. : )
(By which I mean, an (excellent) classmate's story I read in a Creative Writing workshop class from Hassan I Sabbah by way of William Burroughs. The story was about Hassan I Sabbah. And it was--and I say this with full understanding of what just I'm saying--probably a whole lot fucking weirder and squickier than anything Burroughs ever wrote.)
Tl;dr (though I read all of the first post) What I'm most worried about is how the extreme pressure can discourage people from sharing their works.. I mean from what I can tell, Celes has basically removed the FF ESSENCE page from the site because of all the negative feedback she's gotten. I seriously doubt that wrecking people's dreams is what we want to do in any instance.
Celes seems at a glance to be a big baby, but emmych is awesome at wrecking people's dreams so idk.
The truth is, this thread is about giving a game a chance, not "not saying anything negative about a game no matter what"--a LOT of people gave FFE a pretty big chance. If some of them still didn't like it...idk. I wasn't paying attention for that whole debacle.
I will say that nothing anyone ever says or does can MAKE you quit. They can certainly influence your willingness to continue, but the decision to go straight, to take your ball and storm off the field, is one you make alone.
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
author=BurningTyger
What I'm most worried about is how the extreme pressure can discourage people from sharing their works.. I mean from what I can tell, Celes has basically removed the FF ESSENCE page from the site because of all the negative feedback she's gotten. I seriously doubt that wrecking people's dreams is what we want to do in any instance.
If people can't handle their dreams being wrecked, they don't deserve to pursue them.
Edit: I should explain that.
If you're pursuing a dream, that means by definition that:
A) It's something you don't have now
B) It's something you've either never had, or only ever tasted for a moment
C) It's something that successfully getting is not easy or fast
So if you're pursuing something with those three criteria, and not getting what you're pursuing is enough to make you quit pursuing it, then logically you should have quit before you started.
(Also, if your dream is to never be cricitized, you're an idiot and you should bury your head in the sand and suffocate.)
(Also, if your dream is to never be cricitized, you're an idiot and you should bury your head in the sand and suffocate.)
LockeZ, please tone down the nastiness. Let's keep this thread nice and civil.
Killer Wolf
1235
author=Max McGee
I too learned the quote the smug over-educated college hipster *coolshades* non-ubisoft plebeian way. : )
Wasn't making an accusation. As for me, I actually caught it when I started getting into William S. Burroughs back in highschool. My friends would read these normal boring books for book reports, and I just went out of my way to find stuff that would make the teacher regret standing us up in front of the classroom.
Also, I used to have a bunch of Burroughs routines memorized that I would just recite while playing Spades, just to ruin everyone's concentration.
(By which I mean, an (excellent) classmate's story I read in a Creative Writing workshop class from Hassan I Sabbah by way of William Burroughs
This makes me want to dig up one of the papers I wrote in a college comp class. The professor actually started using it as part of the curriculum (as a model of what to do, not what to avoid, I'd hope). There goes my night, rifling through boxes of old notebooks and coursework.
Also, I used to have a bunch of Burroughs routines memorized that I would just recite while playing Spades, just to ruin everyone's concentration.
Well played.
/offtopic
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
author=Max McGee(Also, if your dream is to never be cricitized, you're an idiot and you should bury your head in the sand and suffocate.)LockeZ, please tone down the nastiness. Let's keep this thread nice and civil.
Okay, let me rephrase in a more polite manner that is also more obviously relevant to the topic being discussed.
I don't know if it's wrong to be more critical of something because you did or didn't pay for it. But I absolutely believe it's right to be more critical of something when the creator can hear you. If you are privately critical of something, that is not useful to anyone but maybe the people listening to you, who can avoid it or prepare for it. If you criticize something in a situation where the creator of it can hear your criticism, that is useful to the creator, who can improve his or her work, and by extension useful to everyone else who experiences the thing after you, who will be experiencing something better.
With indie games, due to the smaller audience, there is a massively increased chance that the creator will hear your criticisms if you post them in any sort of public place. Therefore, unless you're a writer for a major magazine or something, posting a scathing comment of Fire Kingdom is vastly more useful than posting a scathing comment of FF14.
The basis of this argument is that criticism cannot hurt you; it is physically impossible for it to hurt you. We learned about sticks and stones and words in kindergarten, right? But it is very possible for criticism to help you. You can learn things as a result of it. At the very least, you always learn at least one thing from criticism, which is that one person doesn't like what you did. And knowledge is always good. Therefore, being criticized is a good thing. No matter what.
author=LockeZauthor=BurningTygerIf people can't handle their dreams being wrecked, they don't deserve to pursue them.
What I'm most worried about is how the extreme pressure can discourage people from sharing their works.. I mean from what I can tell, Celes has basically removed the FF ESSENCE page from the site because of all the negative feedback she's gotten. I seriously doubt that wrecking people's dreams is what we want to do in any instance.
Edit: I should explain that.
If you're pursuing a dream, that means by definition that:
A) It's something you don't have now
B) It's something you've either never had, or only ever tasted for a moment
C) It's something that successfully getting is not easy or fast
So if you're pursuing something with those three criteria, and not getting what you're pursuing is enough to make you quit pursuing it, then logically you should have quit before you started.
(Also, if your dream is to never be cricitized, you're an idiot and you should bury your head in the sand and suffocate.)
I don't follow you; how do those three criteria impact what is needed and required to pursue a dream? What if a person's dream was to be a famous athlete and a car accident cripples him for life? Should he have just guessed that circumstances beyond his control would lead him to failure and never trained in the first place? And what does that have to do with 'deserving' anyway?
Besides that though, criticism is valuable, but if a person doesn't want it they can ignore it easily enough, especially if they are competent or exceptional. Lots of people go through life ignoring criticism. Look at the director Michael Bay; he gets non-stop criticism from critics, but at the end of the day his films make a great deal of money, which some would argue is the only real quantifiable indicator of success. Or hey, look at George Lucas, who flat out ignores critics and makes billions.
In my case, I just make games for fun, and I take people's criticism so I can become better at making them. At the end of the day though, I make the games I want to make; if people like them, great. If not, oh well!
I don't agree with this, there are special moments (and i'm NOT reff*erring to Celes ) in any one's life where you come out with something precious, and at that moment, any criticism is bad because it is a moment of importance but also of extreme fragility.
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
author=LucidstillnessYou're pretty completely misunderstanding what I was trying to say, but I'm not sure I can explain it any better. My three criteria weren't what is needed and required to pursue a dream; they were just the definition of a dream. My point was that if you're pursuing a dream, you need to expect failure and not be discouraged by it.
I don't follow you; how do those three criteria impact what is needed and required to pursue a dream? What if a person's dream was to be a famous athlete and a car accident cripples him for life? Should he have just guessed that circumstances beyond his control would lead him to failure and never trained in the first place? And what does that have to do with 'deserving' anyway?
author=chanaThe moment could be more precious if what you created were better. Criticizing the person's work at that point won't hurt their work, it will only hurt their pride. Sure, their pride is fragile, but egotism is bad and people should not indulge in pride. Feeling good and satisfied about stuff you've done will only lead to complacency and future failure.
I don't agree with this, there are special moments (and i'm NOT referring to Celes ) in anyone's life where you come out with something precious, and at that moment, any criticism is bad because it is a moment of importance but also of extreme fragility.
If a person stops striving to be better, they have died.
I also agree that criticism is not always a good thing, even though it often is. The true source of pain is not from physical blows, but from the mouth, and it is entirely possible to destroy people with the right words, especially if they are predisposed to depression and self-doubt. Every bit of criticism is going to shake a person's confidence, and even though criticism is a natural part of life too much of it can lead to an internal loss of self-worth.
But don't take my word for it; here is an expert's opinion:
http://www.dailynexus.com/2011-03-01/suicide-expert-warns-selfcriticism/
Again, I'm not saying that people should go around living with their head in the sand, but don't be critical for the sake of being critical. When you see something that is really wrong with someone's work, focus on that and let the little things go. Professional critics are professional for a reason after all; they know how to spot the most important flaws and when to keep their personal tastes out of the equation, and anybody giving responsible criticism should do the same. And for Pete's sake, say SOMETHING good about a person's work before you start tearing into it!
(Please note, I'm not referring to you specifically LockeZ, as you give quite good criticism).
Wait, you're not saying that feeling good and satisfied about ANY of your work is dooming you to future failure, are you? Without a sense of accomplishment, I think designers would devolve pretty quickly into a neurotic mess.
But don't take my word for it; here is an expert's opinion:
http://www.dailynexus.com/2011-03-01/suicide-expert-warns-selfcriticism/
Again, I'm not saying that people should go around living with their head in the sand, but don't be critical for the sake of being critical. When you see something that is really wrong with someone's work, focus on that and let the little things go. Professional critics are professional for a reason after all; they know how to spot the most important flaws and when to keep their personal tastes out of the equation, and anybody giving responsible criticism should do the same. And for Pete's sake, say SOMETHING good about a person's work before you start tearing into it!
(Please note, I'm not referring to you specifically LockeZ, as you give quite good criticism).
Wait, you're not saying that feeling good and satisfied about ANY of your work is dooming you to future failure, are you? Without a sense of accomplishment, I think designers would devolve pretty quickly into a neurotic mess.
@LockeZ :You don't understand what I'm saying. Normally, the better the creation, the more fragile the creator is at this moment.
Well, certainly a person who spent years on a sculpture is going to be more vulnerable than Bob who drew a comic for a company's product.
I did enjoy this article about how to handle criticism though:
http://www.copyblogger.com/how-to-handle-criticism/
Criticism can be good or bad, but at the end of the day it's just someone's opinion; enjoy it, use it, love it and try not to take it too seriously. The critic isn't necessarily smarter than you.
I did enjoy this article about how to handle criticism though:
http://www.copyblogger.com/how-to-handle-criticism/
Criticism can be good or bad, but at the end of the day it's just someone's opinion; enjoy it, use it, love it and try not to take it too seriously. The critic isn't necessarily smarter than you.
Right. I was answering LockeZ : "The moment could be more precious if what you created were better". The question is not of better or worse, the more some one put in a work, the more delicate that moment, of course, it depends a lot of where the criticism comes from : in a community like this one, the criticism is very direct and thus felt very violently.
Criticism that focuses about what is wrong with a project is useful, but honestly focusing on what a person does well is pretty useful too, as it can help a person build on their strengths and minimize their weaknesses without them becoming discouraged.
For example, suppose someone created a pretty generic but complete RPG, and two different critics reviewed it. The first says,
"The game was pretty tired and derivative; I'm sorry, but we've been down this road a hundred times, and this game is just nothing new. The story is bland, the systems are dated, the art is a mish-mash from different commercial games, and there is just nothing to recommend it at all. Nice effort, but you really need to go back to the drawing board and come up with something better.'
The second says,
"This game uses a number of classic RPG tropes competently throughout its full-length adventure, and while the game doesn't take risks one can appreciate the time and effort that went into making it all work. I found the story to be rather predictable, and I would have liked more variety in the way the game systems were implemented. You may want to consider branching out from the traditional systems and exploring the possibility of more custom-tailored content for this game. I also thought that the art lacked consistency and could use some more polish. Overall, a good effort that could stand to be improved."
They both said the same things, but think about how they said them. Which is more likely to discourage the developer, and which is more likely to encourage him to be better? Just a careful choice of words can make all the difference.
For example, suppose someone created a pretty generic but complete RPG, and two different critics reviewed it. The first says,
"The game was pretty tired and derivative; I'm sorry, but we've been down this road a hundred times, and this game is just nothing new. The story is bland, the systems are dated, the art is a mish-mash from different commercial games, and there is just nothing to recommend it at all. Nice effort, but you really need to go back to the drawing board and come up with something better.'
The second says,
"This game uses a number of classic RPG tropes competently throughout its full-length adventure, and while the game doesn't take risks one can appreciate the time and effort that went into making it all work. I found the story to be rather predictable, and I would have liked more variety in the way the game systems were implemented. You may want to consider branching out from the traditional systems and exploring the possibility of more custom-tailored content for this game. I also thought that the art lacked consistency and could use some more polish. Overall, a good effort that could stand to be improved."
They both said the same things, but think about how they said them. Which is more likely to discourage the developer, and which is more likely to encourage him to be better? Just a careful choice of words can make all the difference.
Of course, one is just bashing a game he doesn't appreciate, the other is trying to help while being fair at the same time. Actually it can be also a question of maturity, a more mature person will be aware of the maker behind the game and of his feelings, a less mature one will just criticize mindlessly.
emmych
817
author=Max McGee
Celes seems at a glance to be a big baby, but emmych is awesome at wrecking people's dreams so idk.
author=Max McGee
LockeZ, please tone down the nastiness. Let's keep this thread nice and civil.
You are just adorable. <3
Inability to see the big picture for some peoples, imo. One review does not represent the overall opinion of the entire audience. If 100 people like your game and 10 people vehemently don't, the dev should pack it up and call it a useless project? C'mon people. At the end of the day, the most critical voices are also the most active voices.
If your aim is to please everyone, it won't happen.
author=emmychauthor=Max McGee
Celes seems at a glance to be a big baby, but emmych is awesome at wrecking people's dreams so idk.author=Max McGee
LockeZ, please tone down the nastiness. Let's keep this thread nice and civil.
You are just adorable. <3
I aim to please.
Inability to see the big picture for some peoples, imo. One review does not represent the overall opinion of the entire audience. If 100 people like your game and 10 people vehemently don't, the dev should pack it up and call it a useless project? C'mon people. At the end of the day, the most critical voices are also the most active voices.
Yeah, I completely agree as far as FFE is concerned. However if 20 people, 15 of which haven't played your game hate it, and 4 or 5 who have played it don't, that's a much more discouraging scenario.
But I absolutely believe it's right to be more critical of something when the creator can hear you. If you are privately critical of something, that is not useful to anyone but maybe the people listening to you, who can avoid it or prepare for it. If you criticize something in a situation where the creator of it can hear your criticism, that is useful to the creator, who can improve his or her work, and by extension useful to everyone else who experiences the thing after you, who will be experiencing something better.
But this is fallacious bro. I mean, if this were true, you'd be morally obligated to send an open letter to the developers of every single console game you found any serious faults in. It's not and you don't even though they CAN hear you. It's not like they CAN'T hear you.
I don't agree with this, there are special moments (and i'm NOT reff*erring to Celes ) in any one's life where you come out with something precious, and at that moment, any criticism is bad because it is a moment of importance but also of extreme fragility.
I agree with this strongly. I mean, tell me about it!
If a person stops striving to be better, they have died.
Striving to be better is something people never stop doing, but once you have become a master (Stephen King, Tiger Woods, or Miyamoto) improving is no longer your primary goal. Doing is.
author=Lucidstillness
I also agree that criticism is not always a good thing, even though it often is. The true source of pain is not from physical blows, but from the mouth, and it is entirely possible to destroy people with the right words, especially if they are predisposed to depression and self-doubt. Every bit of criticism is going to shake a person's confidence, and even though criticism is a natural part of life too much of it can lead to an internal loss of self-worth.
But don't take my word for it; here is an expert's opinion:
http://www.dailynexus.com/2011-03-01/suicide-expert-warns-selfcriticism/
Again, I'm not saying that people should go around living with their head in the sand, but don't be critical for the sake of being critical. When you see something that is really wrong with someone's work, focus on that and let the little things go. Professional critics are professional for a reason after all; they know how to spot the most important flaws and when to keep their personal tastes out of the equation, and anybody giving responsible criticism should do the same. And for Pete's sake, say SOMETHING good about a person's work before you start tearing into it!
(Please note, I'm not referring to you specifically LockeZ, as you give quite good criticism).
Wait, you're not saying that feeling good and satisfied about ANY of your work is dooming you to future failure, are you? Without a sense of accomplishment, I think designers would devolve pretty quickly into a neurotic mess.
I'm pretty sure lucidstillness has everything figured out you guys. Let's listen to him!
author=chana
@LockeZ :You don't understand what I'm saying. Normally, the better the creation, the more fragile the creator is at this moment.
Again I...completely agree with this.
TOO LONG; DID NOT READ:
This site focuses too much on its expectations of "how to take criticism" and not nearly enough on its expectations of "how to give good critique".
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
It's hard to explain my beliefs about accepting criticism without sounding like a vulcan, so... I won't even try.
Captain, to the extent to which your human emotions can be considered anything other than destructive, it is necessary that you be in control of them, and not they in control of you. If you wish to seek happiness for yourself or others in ways that do not intrude upon your duties, that is your prerogative. However, if, in the absense of any emotional response, a situation would have a correct and incorrect response, it is imperative that you do not allow the addition of emotions to the equation to dictate your choosing the incorrect one.
Captain, to the extent to which your human emotions can be considered anything other than destructive, it is necessary that you be in control of them, and not they in control of you. If you wish to seek happiness for yourself or others in ways that do not intrude upon your duties, that is your prerogative. However, if, in the absense of any emotional response, a situation would have a correct and incorrect response, it is imperative that you do not allow the addition of emotions to the equation to dictate your choosing the incorrect one.
