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
CloseCaptain, 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.
If I never had an emotional response to criticism, my games probably would be more popular because I would be more popular. They might even be better because I would be more likely to incorporate harsh criticism.
Sadly I am not a Vulcan and never, ever will be.
Being objective and keeping emotions out of criticism is noble goal, though it requires that both the receiver of criticism and the critic be as objective as possible. Many criticisms are subjective in nature, and such criticisms say more about the opinions of the critic than anything else. This is useful, as it helps the creator understand his or her audience, but opinion should never masquerade as objectivity and the best critics acknowledge personal feelings and biases on their quest for objectivity.
A little off topic, but I've always considered controlled emotion to be very valuable; without an emotional investment in our creations there would be no will to create at all. We'd essentially be robots, only doing what is expected of us.
Hmm, this got very philosophical.
A little off topic, but I've always considered controlled emotion to be very valuable; without an emotional investment in our creations there would be no will to create at all. We'd essentially be robots, only doing what is expected of us.
Hmm, this got very philosophical.
This conversation is inherently philosophical, because there is no right answer.
And it seems to me that there's a good reason this conversation keeps coming up: people quit due to criticism.
In the end, I hope the critics remember what their goal is when they write their reviews. My basic assumption is that the goal of such reviews in this community is to help the dev improve their games.
If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED.
If I'm coaching and I bitch a kid out so much that he quits the sport, I haven't really done my job in making him a better player, have I?
Yes, yes. You never know how someone's going to react. But given that quitting is a pretty common response, it's not as though that reaction is unforeseeable. So do remember that someone might quit, because you were too harsh.
That is, of course, if you want to be helpful. If you just want to be a quality critic, fuck their feelings, go ahead. I don't like you anyways.
author=Sauce
This conversation is inherently philosophical, because there is no right answer.
And it seems to me that there's a good reason this conversation keeps coming up: people quit due to criticism.
In the end, I hope the critics remember what their goal is when they write their reviews. My basic assumption is that the goal of such reviews in this community is to help the dev improve their games.
If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED.
If I'm coaching and I bitch a kid out so much that he quits the sport, I haven't really done my job in making him a better player, have I?
Yes, yes. You never know how someone's going to react. But given that quitting is a pretty common response, it's not as though that reaction is unforeseeable. So do remember that someone might quit, because you were too harsh.
That is, of course, if you want to be helpful. If you just want to be a quality critic, fuck their feelings, go ahead. I don't like you anyways.
Yes.
author=Sauce
This conversation is inherently philosophical, because there is no right answer.
And it seems to me that there's a good reason this conversation keeps coming up: people quit due to criticism.
In the end, I hope the critics remember what their goal is when they write their reviews. My basic assumption is that the goal of such reviews in this community is to help the dev improve their games.
If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED.
If I'm coaching and I bitch a kid out so much that he quits the sport, I haven't really done my job in making him a better player, have I?
Yes, yes. You never know how someone's going to react. But given that quitting is a pretty common response, it's not as though that reaction is unforeseeable. So do remember that someone might quit, because you were too harsh.
That is, of course, if you want to be helpful. If you just want to be a quality critic, fuck their feelings, go ahead. I don't like you anyways.
I like this post.
physhal
0
author=Sauce
This conversation is inherently philosophical, because there is no right answer.
And it seems to me that there's a good reason this conversation keeps coming up: people quit due to criticism.
In the end, I hope the critics remember what their goal is when they write their reviews. My basic assumption is that the goal of such reviews in this community is to help the dev improve their games.
If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED.
If I'm coaching and I bitch a kid out so much that he quits the sport, I haven't really done my job in making him a better player, have I?
Yes, yes. You never know how someone's going to react. But given that quitting is a pretty common response, it's not as though that reaction is unforeseeable. So do remember that someone might quit, because you were too harsh.
That is, of course, if you want to be helpful. If you just want to be a quality critic, fuck their feelings, go ahead. I don't like you anyways.
I agree with this sentiment but I think its also important to note that if a developer quits due to negative criticism, they too have failed.
UPRC
5516
author=Sauce
If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED.
The fault could be with either the developer or the reviewer on that one though.
I don't agree, more fundamentally, imo, the truth is this
"If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED."
"If the dev quits because of your review, you have FAILED."
quitting is almost always the developer's fault
however, I'm saying that if the dev quit because of your review, you have failed in helping the dev improve their game
It is a question of choice, not of fault, and quitting is always the developer's choice--no one can literally make you stop working on something.
Can we move on? I am bored of this subtopic.
Has this topic as a whole convinced anyone to try and be a little more patient and open-minded when playing RM games in general?
Can we move on? I am bored of this subtopic.
Has this topic as a whole convinced anyone to try and be a little more patient and open-minded when playing RM games in general?
I want to add one thing : I've seen sincerely hard working enthusiastic devs quit after very negative feedback, it's not always a question of objective choice.
Might I remind you all that there are reviews on this site with the clear message of "please stop making this, move on, or start over from scratch because your game sucks". There are people here whose objective in writing the review is to TRY to make the developer quit, so when the developer does quit, we can't really say the reviewer failed. It's an awful thing that people try to make themselves feel all high and mighty by doing this, but it happens.
The only advice I could give in those situations is to power on. No one should give up on their project because of someone else, especially if they are proud of what they've accomplished.
The only advice I could give in those situations is to power on. No one should give up on their project because of someone else, especially if they are proud of what they've accomplished.
rpgmakers don't play rpgmaker games properly anyway.
We're too busy trying to figure out how things were done or we could have done better rather than just playing them.
There, I said it.
Edit: Also, sometime we end up making things that are only meaningful or significant in the context of other rm users and would be totally lost on non-rmer players.
We're too busy trying to figure out how things were done or we could have done better rather than just playing them.
There, I said it.
Edit: Also, sometime we end up making things that are only meaningful or significant in the context of other rm users and would be totally lost on non-rmer players.
Which brings up another question; why don't more people in the "audience" stance who don't have this awful bias post on these forums? I mean, they're obviously using the site, otherwise where are all of our downloads coming from?
(Answer: Kentona. He just wants to make everyone feel better.)
(Answer: Kentona. He just wants to make everyone feel better.)
I heard he has a van-sized pile of discarded, full, external HDDs he's burned through downloading everyone's games thousands of times.
author=Max McGee
Has this topic as a whole convinced anyone to try and be a little more patient and open-minded when playing RM games in general?
No. No one has any obligation to be patient and open-minded when playing RM games. There is a reason I brought up that subtopic. REVIEWERS have an obligation to be more patient and open-minded when playing/reviewing RM games.
author=sbester
Might I remind you all that there are reviews on this site with the clear message of "please stop making this, move on, or start over from scratch because your game sucks". There are people here whose objective in writing the review is to TRY to make the developer quit, so when the developer does quit, we can't really say the reviewer failed. It's an awful thing that people try to make themselves feel all high and mighty by doing this, but it happens.
I said what I said, because even those mean spirited reviewers "defend" themselves by saying they're only trying to help. Which you know is total BS.
In the case of people who actually are being critical for the sake of setting a standard for RM quality - I say let me remind you that they might quit. As an unintended consequence.
No. No one has any obligation to be patient and open-minded when playing RM games. There is a reason I brought up that subtopic. REVIEWERS have an obligation to be more patient and open-minded when playing/reviewing RM games.
1) For 90% of the time this topic has existed, you weren't even a part of this site, unless I'm mistaken, so what do you mean "no". : P
2) This is a really confusing sentence. Don't "REVIEWERS" belong to the set of "everyone"? Hence they'd be excluded by the phrase "no one".
author=NewBlack
rpgmakers don't play rpgmaker games properly anyway.
We're too busy trying to figure out how things were done or we could have done better rather than just playing them.
There, I said it.
Edit: Also, sometime we end up making things that are only meaningful or significant in the context of other rm users and would be totally lost on non-rmer players.
You bring up a really good point here. I've seen and played RPG Maker games that would probably be poorly received on a hyper-critical site like this one, but which nevertheless have a number of fans who praise and legitimately enjoy them in the communities where said games originated. Many of those people had never played an RPG Maker game before, and so were a lot less jaded on the default content and less aware of the games' flaws. The developers just made the games for fun, not caring too much about polish.
I guess it's hard to find the right balance; we're all here on RPG Maker.net because we want to make the best game we can, and there are a ton of talented people here to help us do just that. Projects that go through the rigors of peer review are almost guaranteed to be superior to ones made in isolation. Even so, it's useful to take a step back if you're getting frustrated and ask yourself, "do I really need to impress anybody? Has the joy gone out of this project?" If the answer is yes to either question, I suggest taking a step back and reevaluating your motivations. Listen to the advice people give you, but don't let them tell you you're wrong to make the kind of project you want to make; they're your critics, not your bosses.
And hey, if you're getting really discouraged, try showing your game to a friend who knows nothing about RPG Maker and see what he or she thinks. If they find the game fun, you must be doing something right!
author=Max McGee
1) For 90% of the time this topic has existed, you weren't even a part of this site, unless I'm mistaken, so what do you mean "no". : P
2) This is a really confusing sentence. Don't "REVIEWERS" belong to the set of "everyone"? Hence they'd be excluded by the phrase "no one".
Poor explanation on my part. Reviewing a game should be different from just playing a game. That's the distinction I wanna make.
And besides, when did this start? 2011? I somehow doubt user/reviewer behavior has changed drastically in a few months.
