Your game sucks! (and how to respond)

So did you hear about Duke Nukem Forever?  After twelve years of development hell, it finally arrived on store shelves to the fanfare of almost universally negative reviews.  And how did the PR firm behind the game spin this development?  By throwing a childish, angry hissy-fit.  Suffice to say, this was bad news for PR firm Redner Group, who was dropped like a hot potato by game publisher 2K Games.

It was a facepalm moment, but one that made me think about all the times I've been tempted to do the very same thing.  This might be shocking to hear, but there are people out there who don't like my games and will eagerly declare their feelings on reviews and public forums.  The desire to leap into the fray and defend your work is great, but is it a good thing to do so?  Well, it depends.

Keep your dignity

As an indie game developer, the best weapon in your arsenal is your reputation.  If you get the reputation of being a prima donna who can't take criticism, then you will never be taken seriously.  So if there's a nasty message on an internet forum (or negative review about your game) and you wonder if you should respond, think carefully about how it will effect your reputation.  Remember, once it's out there, you can't take it back. You don't want to be this guy.

You won't change their mind

Seriously.  Don't even try.  I know it's tempting.  Maybe they are playing it wrong, or they are approaching it with the wrong mindset, or they just don't "get it."  It doesn't matter.  Nobody likes being told what to do or what to think, and your customers are no exception.  Don't believe me?  Try debating politics sometime.  No matter how logical your response, no matter how well thought-out and persuasive you might be, it is not going to matter.  You're not going to make a person "see the light" and magically love your game.  It just won't happen.  If anything, it will just cement their belief further and make you look defensive and insecure.  And on a public forum, that is magnified tenfold.  So don't do it.

Reply when it benefits you

Here's a hypothetical example.  A customer buys your game, installs it, and gets an error.  Pissed off, the customer goes to their favorite game forum and rants about how your game doesn't work.  They call your game cheap and you a rip-off artist.  You, the developer, see this post.  The customer's problem is a very common one and you know exactly how to fix it.  So what should you do?

This is the only situation where I'd advocate responding publicly.  There is no better opportunity to show potential customers that you can remain dignified under pressure and give great customer service at the same time.  Keep cool, respond politely, and explain how to fix the problem.  Congratulations, you've kept a customer, and probably made a few more to boot.

As for reviews, the only time I'd advocate responding is when they get something factual wrong.  For me, this usually happens when they spell my company name wrong! (it's spelled with a J, darn it)

Remember, it's the internet

People who are otherwise normal, functional adults will say hurtful and stupid things simply because they can.  Folks who enjoy something aren't as inclined to jump on the internet and rave about it as those who hate something.  Remember that you can't please everybody, and you'll be fine.

-Dave

P.S. I know I said I'd write more about demos in this post, but with the whole Duke Nukem thing happening I wanted to remain topical!  Next time.  Promise.

Coming up short?

Once in a while, a big indie game comes out to fantastic reviews but ends up being criticized for one specific something.  Then I take that specific something and talk about how it applies to my own work.  Last January I wrote about VVVVVV and how it was criticized for being $14.99, which led to my own thoughts about indie game pricing.

If you follow indie games, you might have heard of Limbo, a recent platform game available now on Xbox Live Arcade. It is deliciously atmospheric - you play a lonely little boy jumping his way through a minimalist black and white world that manages to be hauntingly beautiful without being pretentious.  Limbo has been universally praised by reviewers, but there has been one universal criticism: it's a little on the short side.

Like VVVVVV, this is a criticism that has been leveled at my own games more than once.  "The game is great - but it's too darn short!" the critics say.   To which I can only respond... "Well, you're right."  There's no denying it.  A typical Blackwell game can take you from 2-4 hours to complete if you are a hardcore adventure gamer.  Maybe 6-8 if you are more casual.  There are those who even play with a walkthrough handy on their first go-round, and they zip through it in no time at all - often faster than me!

So yeah, my internal games tend to be on the short side.  Why is that?  There are a lot of good reasons for short games - they don't overstay their welcome, people don't have as much time to play games these days, or simply because the game is better served by being a smaller experience (Portal is the game that is usually used as the best example of this).

But for me, the reason is simpler than that.  I am a trembling abject coward.

Read any indie developer blog and you'll often hear that they are "one flop away from going out of business."  As an indie developer, and an indie adventure game developer at that, I don't like those odds.  Adventure games are a tough sell even for mainstream AAA companies, and they have bigger marketing budgets than I do.  If I spend a year or more on just one game, spending lots of money and man-hours on it, only to have it sell poorly... well, that would be the last you hear of me. 

So... I tread carefully.  To make a game, a developer can spend money to pay someone to do the work, or spend time doing it him/herself.  If I spend more money, I will have to earn that money back.  If I spend more time, it's time that the game is not earning any money (which I will still have to earn back).  As a result, I tend to keep my games tight and lean - making them deep instead of broad.  So if I screw up and the game bombs, then it won't be too much of a financial burden for my little studio to bear.  I can just make another game and move on.

This is not to say that my games can't be long, epic works of grandeur..  It's just that they won't be long, epic works of grandeur yet.  As I've gained more customers and fans I have slowly increased the length of my games.  Convergence was easily longer than Unbound or Legacy, and the upcoming Deception is shaping up to be significantly longer than Convergence.  Baby steps, kids. Baby steps.

So to answer the question of "Why are my games on the short side?"  The simple answer for me is because I want to keep making games.  I love making these games. And, for some strange reason that I am eternally thankful for, enough people like them enough to spend their money on them so I can continue to do this full time and make more (even during these crazy economic times).  It's a great way to live, but there is always that little ever-present fear that it could all end if I am not smart.  I'd have to - gulp - get a real job.  And we can't have that.

-Dave

P.S. 
This blog post is one in a series of posts for what we've called "Size Doesn't Matter Day."  For other blog posts on this topic, check out:

http://positech.co.uk/cliffsblog/?p=810
http://24caretgames.com/2010/08/16/does-game-length-matter/
http://2dboy.com/2010/08/12/too-short/
http://blog.wolfire.com
http://brokenrul.es/blog
http://gamesfromwithin.com/size-matters
http://macguffingames.com/2010/if-size-doesnt-matter-where-do-you-get-the-virtual-goods
http://mile222.com/2010/08/a-haiku-about-game-length/
http://retroaffect.com
http://the-witness.net/news
http://www.copenhagengamecollective.org/2010/08/17/size-does-matter/
http://www.firehosegames.com/2010/08/how-much-is-enough/
http://www.hobbygamedev.com/
http://spyparty.com/2010/08/16/size-doesnt-matter-day/