SINN'S PROFILE

author=Hasvers

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.

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.