LUCIDSTILLNESS'S PROFILE

author=tpasmall
I remember reading an article about an indie games bundle that started at 1 cent, and you could pay what you wanted for it. It was one of the most pirated bundles (people weren't even willing to pay 1 cent for a bundle of games). That, I think is ludicrous. I think with the market the way it is, regardless of what you charge, indie games will never be respected the way they should be. (Look at the reviews of people complaining about how the game they bought for $1 on the android market should have better support and free upgrades).

This is rather true, but it is worth noting that a huge number of AAA commercial games are pirated every year as well, which shows that the kind of people who pirate stuff don't care if it's from an indy developer or a commercial industry:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-01-03-the-most-pirated-pc-wii-360-games-of-2011

I think that indy developers are better off either making games that appeal to a niche audience (what we do), or making games with a mass-market appeal that anyone can enjoy. Don't appeal to the 'hardcore gamers' crowd; they will demand free support, nothing less than perfection from presentation and gameplay, and many will just end up stealing the game anyway. Games for the mass market, which include games like Wii Sports, Angry Birds, and Tetris, are the really big sellers, far out-pacing games designed for more 'serious' players in sales.

As for niche games, I like to think that there is a certain sense of camaraderie; the same people who play the games are often the ones who make them, and since the stakes aren't high we're not inclined to screw each other over. At least I hope not.

@Gourd_Clae
I rather like the minimalistic look, and sprite reminds me of the protagonist of the video game Limbo. Prexus's criticisms are valid, and I would definitely change the floor texture to a solid colour to match the minimalist look of everything else. The texture is rather distracting and a bit hard on the eyes.

@Craze
Nice, but you mean to tell me you're not making a Mario in space title? Way to get my hopes up, jerk.

I really like the background by the way. The clouds look a bit strange, but it's fantasy so it's all good.

@Adon237
The map looks quite nice, and the sprites are all very lush and colourful. I'm not sure what is going on with that bridge or fence at the bottom, but it looks a bit awkward to me in that screenshot. I wouldn't worry about the big mailboxes; I imagine it's just the way your world's mafia sends stiffs to intimidate people.

Generally, I find presenting a concept is more interesting and intriguing for a prospective player than trying to summarize a story. You wouldn't summarize, say, Portal by giving a plot synopsis, but rather by explaining the concept and how that concept relates to the gameplay.

The article makes very valid points, but I have to say on a personal note I do get tired of the crass and bullying attitude towards creative projects that is adopted online. This article points them out, and suggests, wisely, that one should be prepared to deal with them. That doesn't change the fact, however, that 'ass' behaviour is considered normal and acceptable online, when it never would be in a public setting.

Granted, anyone acting like an ass is still obviously an ass the moment he opens his mouth or types on his keyboard.

I think that feedback during the design phase, whether it is positive or negative, is extremely useful for the designer, as it means that a) people care enough about your project to comment, and b) you have the chance to fix things or augment things before a project's release. Getting feedback from your game making peers is the best way to go; these guys know what they are doing, understand the complications and time involved in changes, and will respect your work because they know you respect their's.

Criticism of a finished project, however, isn't primarily for the designer, but for the general audience who might possibly play a game. A review which says, "stay clear of this game!" is of course going to be painful to the designer, who probably invested, at the very least, 100s of hours into making said game. If reviews are consistently bad, it can easily ruin the entire hobby for an individual, as it is very difficult not to be reminded of an earlier failure, especially if, in the worst case scenario, their work becomes infamous and results in them becoming stigmatized as a designer. That wouldn't happen here, but I'm sure I don't need to describe how brutally critical the general public can be on the Internet.

So, the conscientious critic has a twofold obligation; they must consider the work involved with a project and understand things from the developer's point of view, as well as being honest to the general public and not sugar coating a project's flaws. Not all critics are equally up to this task. For example, here is a review for the poorly received game Last Rebellion, which does the latter but largely ignores the former:

http://elder-geek.com/2010/03/last-rebellion-review/

In this review, there is clearly no respect for the designer, and no real depth to the analysis beyond the frustration the reviewer felt as a player. It's valid, but it's not an especially good review.

Below is a superior review, which offers a more in-depth analysis of the intentions of the designers and the shortcomings of the game:

http://www.destructoid.com/review-last-rebellion-164935.phtml

You'll notice right away why the second review, while also quite negative, is superior; from playing the game attentively, the reviewer shows insight into the creative process by extrapolating upon the mechanics of the finished game, allowing him to give a very well-reasoned and direct review which clearly explains to the designers and the players alike what the game's strengths and weaknesses are, all while acknowledging his own bias. This is, frankly, a great review, and a good example of what a game review should be.

If I had designed Last Rebellion, the first review would have left me feeling devastated. The second review, however, shows a respect for my work, even though the reviewer didn't particularly like it. It gives me a lot of feedback I can use for my next project. You'll also notice, too that the responses to the reviews respectively follow the tone of said review, demonstrating that critics have a definite sway over potential players.

So, in short, if you need to give negative feedback, be sure to back up everything you say, and respect the work in question. There is no reason anyone should ever disrespect hard work.

While I can't think of RPGs which have gotten rid of randomization entirely, things definitely do seem to be moving way from the Dungeons & Dragons inspired 'critical hit or miss' system, with less number randomization in more modern games. For example, in the old game Drakkhen, damage randomization was so great that it was possible to kill a major boss in one hit, and also possible to be killed by a lowly enemy with one hit, even with the best armor. You don't see that kind of thing in most modern RPGs.

Another aspect of combat randomness that everybody seems to hate are rare item drops. I recall Roo from Clan of the Greywolf, in the midst of his loving Earthbound retrospective, ranting about how ridiculously hard it was to get the Sword of Kings drop. Players seem to greatly prefer going out of their way to 'earn' rare items, rather than just getting lucky.