SLASH'S PROFILE

author=Deckiller
Perhaps. I'm mostly talking about people arguing about things such as random vs. touch encounters. People like both. If a game does it either way, it's not a "fault" - it's a design choice, and criticizing a developer for such a neutral design choice is just wasting time.

I like these sorts of debates because of the reasoning behind the choices. For every step of the game design, people need to analyze why they're including or removing an element.

All too often people add pointless systems to their RPG because "every RPG has them", a short list being:
Elemental weaknesses, status effects, random battles, touch battles, 2+ member party, shops, healing potions, towns, dungeons, skills, basic attacks, MP...

The list goes on and on, and of course some of this is influenced by the engine, but most often the best games are the ones that analyze all of these elements and only include them if they make the game better. As an example, Visions & Voices breaks a lot of these standards and (mostly) only includes mechanics that improve the basic exploration gameplay.

oh max, why do you get to reserve the right to be a dick, but only you? that just makes no sense :<

What...where...what....are you even construing as this?

COUGH

Saying fuck you to critics is sometimes a valid response, and is sometimes the morally right thing to do. Especially when it's a bunch of trolls vehemently defending their right to troll under the thinly veiled excuse of "criticism".

Max, please tell me you're at least partially aware of how unapproachable a post of that size is.

Do not phrase a comment or review you make on anyone else's game in a way that you would not like to be talked to yourself. (And be truly and emotionally honest when evaluating how you'd like to be talked to; don't mistakenly overestimate how thick your own skin is, and if you ARE unusually thick-skinned, then base your behavior on how an average person would like to be talked to instead. )

If we all followed this golden rule, we'd treat each other with respect, more games would get made faster, we'd all be happier and there'd be less of these fucking topics.

I do that and people still get hurt. Like I said before, even mildly innocuous comments like "stop posting in all caps, it's obnoxious" (like myself) strike some people to the bone, even if I'm aware that the other person has a point.. It really is completely subjective. You posted a lot of great examples of useless comments, or comments that had potential to help the creator, but were never fully evaluated on, and I agree with you there.

However, there are cases where someone will post a well thought-out opinion with logic and reason to back it up, and the subject of the review will STILL be upset. This is also undeniably true and proof that the whole process is subjective.

Should everyone be nicer? Yes.
Should everyone be less serious in general? Yes.
Should developers be aware that not everyone will like their game as much as they do? Yes.

"Say something nice, or don't say anything at all" doesn't really fly when you put your work up for review.

Eh, I guess I'll just agree to disagree. I wrote my example as an example of a major problem (because a 10-second transition is a major problem when you have as many battles as a typical RPG does) but that's just how I work. Your example is an even more major-er problem and I think your approach works as well, although it is a bit harsh.

EDIT: Honestly, when I was a newbie developer, I would've been personally offended by both my and Lockez's example... hmm.

author=LockeZ
Any polite approach makes the problem sound less serious. I can say "This game has good points, but if it were me I'd fix this problem" but that doesn't accurately convey how serious the issue is. The person is likely to think, "Well, one person dislikes it, he didn't word it strongly though and he didn't seem to dislike the game as a whole because of it, so it's not worth fixing." But I did dislike the game as a whole because of it! I strongly believe it needs to be fixed or the game will suck!

I think the confusion is that when you say harsh, it sounds like if the kid's not crying by the end of your review you weren't direct enough. You can make direct, honest points without being harsh. Honestly, even better than being harsh is giving simple, logical reasons for your opinions.

Example: "Your game's battle system is really engaging, but the 10-second transition screen before every battle is unnecessary and it kills flow. When a battle starts, I want to jump into the action immediately and start killing things, but every second I have to wait at a transition screen is another second I'm not having fun. Focus on the gameplay and keep the player in control of his character as much as possible."

BOOM. You're not insulting, but you're direct and honest. Hopefully it gets the point across. Saying "your game will suck if you don't do this" is just as likely to get an easily-frustrated dev to keep a feature in due to spite, or just make him give up. It's not really promoting clear reasoning and logical analysis.

@kentona: Wow, I've never seen that intro page before - that's awesome. And it links to all the best articles. I wish it had been here when I joined :)

@LockeZ: Fair enough, I just don't want to perpetuate the idea that people who give you their honest and blunt opinion are some kind of hateful, evil sewer monsters.

If you put your game on this site and I review it, I'm going to tell you my personal opinion. It's not going to be insulting or sugarcoated, it's just my thoughts.