Skip to Content

Putting negative reviews on a KS page

33 replies [Last post]
iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014

Is it a good idea to include links to negative reviews on a Kickstarter page?

It depends on the review I think. A totally negative review (to the point where they have nothing positive to say) might be a bad idea. I've got more balanced reviews in mind (ie still a negative review, but acknowledging good points too).

So in the case of a negative but balanced review, what are the pros and cons of including it?
Pros:
* Being up-front with backers and (if it's not an utterly hate-filled review) implies that the *worst* I got isn't that bad anyway
* Avoids a "too good to be true"-looking set of reviews
* Can help communicate positive attitude to criticism, shows that I take negative feedback on board and will fix problems and not get defensive about criticism
Cons:
* Telling them about flaws (especially when, in this case, some are known flaws that are already in hand to get fixed)
* I guess that's the only con, but it seems like a biggie

(I got a negative review for Nightlancer :/ need to work out what to do about it)

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
iamseph wrote:(I got a

iamseph wrote:
(I got a negative review for Nightlancer :/ need to work out what to do about it)

Review the issues, fix them and resend for another look?

Which reviewer was it?

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Discretion would be best

ElKobold wrote:
Review the issues, fix them and resend for another look?

Reviewers don't usually do game iterations. It is your responsibility for providing a product for their review and then "state" on your KS page or whatever the steps taken to "rectify a problem"...

It's not the reviewer who will re-evaluate the game, it's your backers.

For example, my Game Sets that were sent to reviewers had more "types" of cards. Then we realized that duplicate cards are good because with less it's easier to recognize the cards. Plus the time taken to produce artwork would be reduced.

So while the reviewer copies were different, the game is the same. You still play the same way you would.

I suggest you do the same, publicly state that the game is different in these "X" ways: A> We modified A, B> We added B, C> We removed C, etc. With a BIG warning that we modified "Y" because a reviewer felt this was an issue with the game.

That's personally as far as I would go. You're not hiding the matter. All I am saying is that there is a way to say how you've "fixed" your game from the reviewer copies. This might inspire more confidence than linking the actual "bad press".

Anyways best of luck with your game.

Update: I thought it was a "written" review. Video reviews will be harder to "ignore" or try to fly "under the radar"... Best thing to do is maybe "kill time"... Wait some time - to show that you took the time to make changes, improve on the graphic art, re-balance what was not correct, etc. And then playtest like crap and then do some more blind playtests.

This way you can say: "Yes we did get a negative review - but we spent "Z" months to address as many of the concerns as possible and we feel that we have a better game thanks to the critical review..." Something diplomatic at best.

Update #2: The only problem I see with the review is what the "components" look like: "He didn't like the board, nor the character sheets, nor the mission cards." You're going to have to review these aspects because they are very "visual". You can't get away from this - especially if you KS it. You're going to have to either go beyond your own personal boundaries and produce better looking components or hire someone to do a face-lift.

I know #2 is hard to accept... But if you do get a better looking game (and I'm not critiquing - I'm just referring to the reviewer) - which is relative - you might have to spend a few bucks. See what can be done - discuss it with a couple Graphic Artists, make up digital samples and have the GAs respond with how they could improve it...

Squinshee
Squinshee's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/17/2012
You absolutely want to

You absolutely want to address that review. I actually just googled it and it was the first thing that popped up. So it's out there and not all that tough to find.

Everyone likes when a developer is as open and honest as possible. By not addressing it, some backers will find the review, share it on the comments, and then you'll have to deal with backlash where backers will think you were trying to hide something.

Question: how much blind playtesting did you do? From that review, I got the impression that you didn't do a whole lot, but I could be wrong.

Soulfinger
Soulfinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/06/2015
Just let me write the

Just let me write the negative review, and then nothing else anyone says could possibly look any worse. I.e. "Just when I opened the box, the phone rang. It was William Gibson calling to ask for his toilet paper back." Then, you and I can have a boxing match to prove whose opinion is better, like Uwe Boll did with his critics. I'll throw the match, and viola!

If it's that YouTube video review then just dub over the audio so that there is a drum beat every time he wags those frantically gesticulating arms of his. The guy reminds me of a Mitchell and Webb sketch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwAioN2mtsA

Put your negative reviews in the designer's notes section of the KS with a discussion of how you changed or improved it since then. Make clear that he was reviewing a prototype. Don't put it on your front page. Keep that positive, because I imagine that most people are too lazy to read more than excerpts of reviews and very few people will sit through a video review.

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
So I've watched that review.

So I've watched that review, and based solely on what I've heard/seen in that video:

1)
I would strongly recommend hiring a graphic designer.

Your artwork is nice, but the rest doesn't look professional.
Lack of texturing. Gradients. Font choices. It all looks extremely raw and dated.

It's fine for a play-testing prototype, but it's not good enough for a final product or for showing it on a KS page.

I believe it will very likely impact the number of backers you'll get, unless you change it.

2)
Make sure you redo the rulebook and have it available for download once you launch KS.

3)
He mentions that it's possible to get to a state where you "can't win but stay in the game". Consider changing that. Player elimination works for games which last 20 minutes or less.
For a game with "120–240 Min" playing time it's a horrible horrible thing.

4) Always have text next to your icons. Something like "+1 < stat icon > stat name".

Please don't take this personally. I`m trying to help here.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
questccg wrote:So while the

questccg wrote:
So while the reviewer copies were different, the game is the same. You still play the same way you would.

I suggest you do the same, publicly state that the game is different in these "X" ways: A> We modified A, B> We added B, C> We removed C, etc. With a BIG warning that we modified "Y" because a reviewer felt this was an issue with the game.

That's personally as far as I would go. You're not hiding the matter. All I am saying is that there is a way to say how you've "fixed" your game from the reviewer copies. This might inspire more confidence than linking the actual "bad press".

Yeah some of the flaws he identified are already in hand to get fixed, but they were identified after the prototype was produced

I made a dumb mistake in sending my prototype around without fixing as much as I could when I had chance. I made some corrections on it but I could have done more, especially since they were quite easy fixes (mechanically speaking) even if they would have been a hassle to fix (in terms of changing components)

(lesson learned: NEVER make excuses to avoid fixing problems in a prototype before sending it to reviewers, then at least the flaws they find will be relevant)

questccg wrote:
Update #2: The only problem I see with the review is what the "components" look like: "He didn't like the board, nor the character sheets, nor the mission cards." You're going to have to review these aspects because they are very "visual". You can't get away from this - especially if you KS it. You're going to have to either go beyond your own personal boundaries and produce better looking components or hire someone to do a face-lift.

I know #2 is hard to accept... But if you do get a better looking game (and I'm not critiquing - I'm just referring to the reviewer) - which is relative - you might have to spend a few bucks. See what can be done - discuss it with a couple Graphic Artists, make up digital samples and have the GAs respond with how they could improve it...

You're dead right about that. But it is in hand.

I've been working with my artist and graphic designer to put together a couple of finished cards, so I can show the prototype quality and a sample of the finished quality side-by-side. BIG improvement already.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
Soulfinger wrote:Just let me

Soulfinger wrote:
Just let me write the negative review, and then nothing else anyone says could possibly look any worse. I.e. "Just when I opened the box, the phone rang. It was William Gibson calling to ask for his toilet paper back." Then, you and I can have a boxing match to prove whose opinion is better, like Uwe Boll did with his critics. I'll throw the match, and viola!

Are you escalating to see if there's actually a point where you can get a rise out of me? :P

Soulfinger wrote:
Put your negative reviews in the designer's notes section of the KS with a discussion of how you changed or improved it since then. Make clear that he was reviewing a prototype. Don't put it on your front page. Keep that positive, because I imagine that most people are too lazy to read more than excerpts of reviews and very few people will sit through a video review.

"Don't put it on your front page"
There's only one page to look at. Do you just mean don't put it at the top/right in front of the reader or am I missing something big?

My current thought on this is to include the video (possibly after the other ones), preceded by a quick summary of his criticisms and how I have rectified them.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
ElKobold wrote:1) Yeah I've

ElKobold wrote:
1)

Yeah I've got a couple of demo cards in the works to show off what the final artwork will be like. They should be done in the next couple of weeks.

ElKobold wrote:
2)
Make sure you redo the rulebook and have it available for download once you launch KS.

Good point. The one I've currently got available is the one he's critiquing, and it would help to show I've taken that on board.

ElKobold wrote:
3)
He mentions that it's possible to get to a state where you "can't win but stay in the game". Consider changing that. Player elimination works for games which last 20 minutes or less.
For a game with "120–240 Min" playing time it's a horrible horrible thing.

After he mentions that he immediately says you can get back in the game. It's only if you *end* the game in that state you can't win.

The problem at the moment (which he does also mention) is it's pretty hard to get back in the game at the moment. That will be in my fix list.

ElKobold wrote:
Please don't take this personally. I`m trying to help here.

I don't really take things personally. On the rare occasions when something does get under my skin, I don't take it out on others. :)

(though I am typically blunt and direct, which can be misunderstood as hostile)

Mike Atencio
Offline
Joined: 07/04/2013
Lol

Uh huh...
Soulfinger writing a negative will start a riot. JK, I agree. Do like politicians do. Trump has a spin team. No kidding. They take Hillary's negative criticism and make it positive. Where they shine is when Trump opens his mouth and they come on the news and say "His message is this".

The best thing you can do with a negative review is read it like it was a stranger, then begin you rebuttal with "I totally agree with you! I didn't see that before. As this is the prototype, naturally there will be changes right up to the last second before final production.

Regarding play testing. Of course we play tested it multiple times, just as you would. Then we count on people like you to ferret out the issues we didn't catch. I want this to be the best possible game and you've helped to make it better with your input. This review doesn't show my game in the truest light. I'll be happy to send you the updated version as that game you have is out of date due to many revisions.

Thank you for taking the time to review my game. Let's improve this together. Thanks

That's how you shut it down and turn it around. Avoid negative responses because it will make you look like you're hiding stuff. It's natural to want to punch them in the mouth, but, all publicity, positive and negative is good.

Positive can stand on its own, negative is better because it allows you an opportunity to personally respond. If people like you because you're an honest nice guy, they'll buy from you.

A last note, avoid discussing the details the reviewer has brought up. DON'T discuss them at all

Just my two cents but, I teach psychology and consult small businesses. Think about it this way. Have you ever had an argument with someone that agreed with you? Ever? No. If you agree with him, he has no where to go but inline with you. You now have control of your situation again. I charge $120.00 an hour for that advice. Today, I offer it free to everyone here hoping it will help with negative responses.

If you need my assistance, I'm here to help you out. In the meantime, fix those issues the reviewer caught.

Soulfinger
Soulfinger's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/06/2015
iamseph wrote:Are you

iamseph wrote:
Are you escalating to see if there's actually a point where you can get a rise out of me? :P

It kind of would be fun to do Triumph the Talking Insult Dog style reviews of products as a promotional. More like a roast than a review, and I bet it would go over very well. I'll be doing something like that for the game I'm working on. The example of play video is going to have everyone hating it, just like the game play examples in the book, which always end with "I hate this game."

iamseph wrote:

"Don't put it on your front page"
There's only one page to look at. Do you just mean don't put it at the top/right in front of the reader or am I missing something big?

Sorry, used the wrong terms. Don't put it in the list of excerpts on your campaign page. Save it as part of an update in the updates tab. If someone mentions it then you can point to it and how you went into depth there addressing the reviewer's concerns. Backer updates are where you blog about how the game as improved and the hurdles you've overcome. The project's campaign page is just the good news and self promotion.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
Soulfinger wrote:iamseph

Soulfinger wrote:
iamseph wrote:
"Don't put it on your front page"
There's only one page to look at. Do you just mean don't put it at the top/right in front of the reader or am I missing something big?

Sorry, used the wrong terms. Don't put it in the list of excerpts on your campaign page. Save it as part of an update in the updates tab. If someone mentions it then you can point to it and how you went into depth there addressing the reviewer's concerns. Backer updates are where you blog about how the game as improved and the hurdles you've overcome. The project's campaign page is just the good news and self promotion.

Oh I see.

But as Squinshee said, if it's not on the front page it kinda looks like I'm avoiding it. The only people who will get the backer updates are the ones who already backed, and if a bunch of people don't back *because* I don't address this review up-front then it doesn't matter what I put in the backer update.

I've added a link to the video on the KS page, preceded by acknowledging the criticisms I think are accurate. I think in terms of handling the review I've got the right content there. (there's also lots of shiny new graphics on there)

Nightlancer KS page

here's what I wrote before the video if you don't feel like looking through the KS page

Quote:
There are some important criticisms here that I have taken on board and will make a difference in the final game:

* I think he makes a good point about the order of the rulebook and I will correct that. You can see the revised rulebook (still with prototype graphics) in the following gameplay section.
* I am working with my graphic designer to improve the iconography. As you have seen in the above contents section the final graphics will be far better and less icon-dependant than the prototype.
* I agree that the event cards do not include enough choices and that this is a flaw. I will include more options during events including the option to lay low (by not taking a mission) and avoid the event entirely.
* I think Ideals are a little imbalanced. The balance of holding on to your Ideals in the face of pressure is part of the challenge, but it will be slightly easier to regain Ideals through Agenda cards.
* The Agenda cards were indeed imbalanced and overpriced. A small math error on that prototype had big consequences. They have been thoroughly rebalanced and will all be useful.


(the revised rulebook and example final graphics are not included on the page yet)

So the question here is really just: put it there on the front page, or put it in an update.
So is it that harmful on the front page? Or more harmful than not putting it there?

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
I see you've decided not to

I see you've decided not to follow the advice about not showing all the stretch-goals from the get-go?

The new captions look neat.

Consider replacing the photo of the game on the table.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
ElKobold wrote:I see you've

ElKobold wrote:
I see you've decided not to follow the advice about not showing all the stretch-goals from the get-go?

That's still the original "content test" image so I can get the feedback of the reach goals. Graphic designer is working on a replacement right now.

ElKobold wrote:
Consider replacing the photo of the game on the table.

Yeah I think I will (especially now, no-one had mentioned it before, so I wasn't sure if it was noticably bad).

I think the 3 main problems with that pic are:
* Slightly blurry
* Glare reflection
* Shows off the barren-looking game board, not desirable

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
iamseph wrote:I think the 3

iamseph wrote:

I think the 3 main problems with that pic are

Regarding the photo itself - take an image on either black or white background. Preferably cut out anything which is not a game component (i.e. do not show your table on the image).

It is better to take multiple photos if you can't fit everything in one shot.

Ideally, ask some friend who is into photography to help you out.

Are the components shown the ones you are going to start the campaign with?
I would suggest to redo the design of the board, cards and character sheets and then take a new photo.

polyobsessive
polyobsessive's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2015
Are you ready?

iamseph wrote:
There are some important criticisms here that I have taken on board and will make a difference in the final game:

* I think he makes a good point about the order of the rulebook and I will correct that. You can see the revised rulebook (still with prototype graphics) in the following gameplay section.
* I am working with my graphic designer to improve the iconography. As you have seen in the above contents section the final graphics will be far better and less icon-dependant than the prototype.
* I agree that the event cards do not include enough choices and that this is a flaw. I will include more options during events including the option to lay low (by not taking a mission) and avoid the event entirely.
* I think Ideals are a little imbalanced. The balance of holding on to your Ideals in the face of pressure is part of the challenge, but it will be slightly easier to regain Ideals through Agenda cards.
* The Agenda cards were indeed imbalanced and overpriced. A small math error on that prototype had big consequences. They have been thoroughly rebalanced and will all be useful.

I like that you have addressed the criticisms, but this response (and the fact that you feel you need to make it) suggests that the game is just not ready yet.

If nothing else, before you launch you should be at a point where you can change all those "will be..." items to "is now..." because you have now fully addressed the concerns and tested the changes.

Good luck!

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
polyobsessive wrote:I like

polyobsessive wrote:
I like that you have addressed the criticisms, but this response (and the fact that you feel you need to make it) suggests that the game is just not ready yet.

If nothing else, before you launch you should be at a point where you can change all those "will be..." items to "is now..." because you have now fully addressed the concerns and tested the changes.

Good luck!

Ah yes, good catch. Especially since I *have* fixed many of them (or at least, will have done by launch day). I have some bad habits around how I type/speak. I'm prone to being vague/uncertain about things I'm actually sure of.

I think I need to say *something* about the video, otherwise what am I telling people?

What would you think if you were going through a KS page, watched a critical review, and there was no comment on the criticism?

I Will Never Gr...
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/23/2015
Keep it off the KS page - Use an update to address it.

iamseph wrote:

But as Squinshee said, if it's not on the front page it kinda looks like I'm avoiding it. The only people who will get the backer updates are the ones who already backed, and if a bunch of people don't back *because* I don't address this review up-front then it doesn't matter what I put in the backer update.

So the question here is really just: put it there on the front page, or put it in an update.
So is it that harmful on the front page? Or more harmful than not putting it there?

Backer updates can be made public or for backers only. Only backers will receive a notification of the update via email, but if you make it public anyone and everyone can read it when they go to your page.

Put it in an update. Do not put negatives on your KS page. It's all about promotion, not detraction.

Those who look for negatives will find them, no matter where they are. If you've already addressed the negative review, you're ahead of those people and there is little they can say or do about it. The rest of the people who look at your KS won't even go looking for things outside of what's there and perhaps a few trusted sources.

polyobsessive
polyobsessive's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2015
Openness

iamseph wrote:
Ah yes, good catch. Especially since I *have* fixed many of them (or at least, will have done by launch day). I have some bad habits around how I type/speak. I'm prone to being vague/uncertain about things I'm actually sure of.

I think I need to say *something* about the video, otherwise what am I telling people?

What would you think if you were going through a KS page, watched a critical review, and there was no comment on the criticism?

Yup. I approve of openness.

I think I expressed myself poorly before. What I meant to say was more that the review suggests (to me) that the game is unfinished.

If the game changes to address those criticisms, then you probably don't need to make a big thing about this review, though acknowledging it somewhere (even if it is in an update) and saying that the game has been "fixed" would be worthwhile. However, where does that leave your other reviews? They are now not of the final game.

It's good that these things have been caught, but it's a pity it took a reviewer to tell you and not a playtester.

The biggest downer I see here is that you have used up this reviewer; I don't imagine you would be able to persuade him to redo, unless you can figure out the correct number of beers to buy to jump ahead of the rest of his review queue.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
As time goes by...

Best thing to do is to have a SPAN of time (X months) to go by ... after this video review.

This will be good - because the OLDER that video review - the better! If it was a year ago, what would you tell us: "Hey guys I got a bad review of the game - but it was a year ago... Since then I have had time to address all of the issues and now my game is better because of it."

That's what you want it to seem like. Because quite honestly if people see it's old, they'll want to know what has been done to rectify some of the issues. Or what are the differences between that version and the one currently being crowdfunded...!

Things like that. The goal is to turn a negative into a positive with time to reflect and correct known issues.

Best of luck with your game...

Update: Also like the other designers - DON'T put this on your KS page. You may want to address the issue in an EARLY update (like 2 or 3)... Which will show that because it was OLD - it gave you the opportunity to improve upon your game. But since it is OLD, you didn't want to display old prototypes that are no longer what the current version is... Something along those lines.

Arcuate
Offline
Joined: 02/05/2016
I agree with the

I agree with the recommendation to let a decent amount of time pass... Who cares if some early prototype got a bad review? A delay would also allow more playtesting.

What struck me in the negative review was the possibility that the game did not offer a lot of meaningful decisions. That could entirely be the reviewer's fault, for not discussing the decisions thrown up, but it would concern me as a potential backer. I think the game's strategic/tactical decisions need to be emphasized to offset the impression created in the video.

Mike Atencio
Offline
Joined: 07/04/2013
Like I said before...

questccg wrote:
Best thing to do is to have a SPAN of time (X months) to go by ... after this video review.

This will be good - because the OLDER that video review - the better! If it was a year ago, what would you tell us: "Hey guys I got a bad review of the game - but it was a year ago... Since then I have had time to address all of the issues and now my game is better because of it."

That's what you want it to seem like. Because quite honestly if people see it's old, they'll want to know what has been done to rectify some of the issues. Or what are the differences between that version and the one currently being crowdfunded...!

Things like that. The goal is to turn a negative into a positive with time to reflect and correct known issues.

Best of luck with your game...

Update: Also like the other designers - DON'T put this on your KS page. You may want to address the issue in an EARLY update (like 2 or 3)... Which will show that because it was OLD - it gave you the opportunity to improve upon your game. But since it is OLD, you didn't want to display old prototypes that are no longer what the current version is... Something along those lines.

Completely agree. Like I said before, turn a negative into a positive

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
I Will Never Grow Up Gaming

I Will Never Grow Up Gaming wrote:
Backer updates can be made public or for backers only. Only backers will receive a notification of the update via email, but if you make it public anyone and everyone can read it when they go to your page.

Ah thanks I didn't know that.

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
So, on the issue of delaying

So, on the issue of delaying a few months.

Why not launch, and if a review tanks it and I flop, I just launch again later? It's not unusual for a game to go through multiple KS attempts before success. After all, most of the prep work is done anyway, and in terms of time lost there's no difference between "delay a few months" and "fail, then try again in a few months".

Have games that have launched and failed had it harder on their repeat attempt because of the failure?

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
iamseph wrote:Why not

iamseph wrote:

Why not launch, and if a review tanks it and I flop, I just launch again later?

Probably not the best attitude. Some backers will make an opinion of your game from that first launch. It won't be that easy to create a first impression the second time,

iamseph wrote:

It's not unusual for a game to go through multiple KS attempts before success. After all, most of the prep work is done anyway, and in terms of time lost there's no difference between "delay a few months" and "fail, then try again in a few months".

There's a difference of running a campaign an extra time. Which is MASSIVE stress and time investment. Expect zero sleep and not being able to think about much else while it runs.

iamseph wrote:

Have games that have launched and failed had it harder on their repeat attempt because of the failure?

Depends on how different it will look like on the second go.

Dravvin
Dravvin's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/29/2016
Michael was at the UK

Michael was at the UK Tabletop Jam yesterday. There was a panel with several reviewers, including Michael and one of the things discussed was what to do with bad reviews.

They said don't feel that you have to use their review on your KS page. They won't be offended! Of all of the reviewers, Michael did the most playthroughs before a review - minimum 10 (2 for each player count or 10 play throughs, whichever is greater) so he acts like a playtester in many ways. I'd therefore suggest you need to ensure you address his comments and get a higher ranking video review on google before launching so the first thing people watch about Nightlancer isn't his review: The video is 15mins long and the good stuff is at the end - that means you have to go through the improvements first and many people may give up before reaching it.

The art will be easy to address on your KS page to show you're improving it. Perhaps just get one or two good examples and don't show the rest if they will be improved with the funds raised from the KS.

If you think you can/have addressed all his concerns I guess there's no need to delay your KS but if you haven't then probably delaying is best: were you hoping to make use of Essen? If not perhaps delay until after Essen giving you a bit more time to do the updates.

Just to double check - I saw you've got free shipping to UK and US - I assume you have done all the tax/customs calculations etc. and you have plenty to spare for shipping? Getting this wrong terrifies me and is one of the things stopping me going for a KS at the moment! (Not that I'm quite ready yet anyway!)

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
Looking for the wrong thing (I believe?)

I think there is also some confusion about what you should be asking from "Reviewers". Since this is a for a Kickstarter (I believe?) well then you should be asking for a "KS Preview". This is a short video explaining/showing the game's components (like an unboxing), a introduction to what the game is all about, a short how-to play, and maybe a quick comment about the game.

"Reviews" are reserved mostly for games that have already been released.

Once you get a couple "KS Previews" under your belt and your game is known to more people, then you might consider a "Review" (which is generally an opinion about the game according to the reviewer).

But "Reviews" are entirely optional.

Why do you NEED as "KS Preview"??? Well it's supposed to sum up what your game IS. So people can be better prepared for what it is they are supposed to be backing...

Some "KS Previews" are FREE, others charge between $50-$200 per preview...

ElKobold
ElKobold's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/10/2015
questccg wrote:"Reviews" are

questccg wrote:

"Reviews" are reserved mostly for games that have already been released.

False.

Many backers are wary of "paid previews" and expect exactly that - in depth review of your game. Especially since it's not released and there's little way to figure out if it's worth pledging for.

questccg
questccg's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/16/2011
This is only MY experience...

ElKobold wrote:
questccg wrote:

"Reviews" are reserved mostly for games that have already been released.

False.

Many backers are wary of "paid previews" and expect exactly that - in depth review of your game. Especially since it's not released and there's little way to figure out if it's worth pledging for.

Well from when I was seeking reviews, "reviewers" told me that "KS Previews" are for KS campaigns. And that there purpose is to present the game, what it's about, how to play the game and a brief synopsis of the game. Most reviewers have told me that they do NOT do reviews of KS games.

That includes most of the well-known reviewers such as Undead Viking, Purple Pawn, The Dice Tower and others.

This is from MY experience dealing with reviewers. Some reviewers said that if they did NOT like the game, they would NOT do the "KS Preview". So this means that a "KS Preview" is subjective to the fact that the reviewer thinks your game is "worthy" of a preview.

Again just MY experience... Others may have gotten different feedback from other sources. But I've dealt with the very popular reviewers and I did get a very positive review from "Father Geek" who gave us the "Father Geek Approved" seal, which means the game is "kid-friendly", "fun for Parents" and can also be enjoyed by "gamers"...

But generally speaking most reviewers do not "review" (based on my communication with them) KS games... and most charge for the services of doing a paid "KS preview".

Note: And if you do want a "review", you need to submit the game and it goes in queue - until the reviewer has the time to play the "published" game. And games can be submitted for review by "anyone" not just the game's designer.

But this probably doesn't apply to all reviewers... From the one's I have spoken with and dealt with, that seems to be the general process. You can of course "get lucky" if a reviewer truly likes your game and he gives you a vote of confidence or a few kind words about your effort - because reviewers are generally good people too...

iamseph
iamseph's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/02/2014
I've now got an intro video

I've now got an intro video up on the KS page.

Dravvin wrote:
The art will be easy to address on your KS page to show you're improving it. Perhaps just get one or two good examples and don't show the rest if they will be improved with the funds raised from the KS.

I've got the first of the "final art preview" images up on the page now too.

Dravvin wrote:
Just to double check - I saw you've got free shipping to UK and US - I assume you have done all the tax/customs calculations etc. and you have plenty to spare for shipping? Getting this wrong terrifies me and is one of the things stopping me going for a KS at the moment! (Not that I'm quite ready yet anyway!)

Yes I've done lots of checks on this. I talked to all the fulfilment companies I'm using about it, a lot of them have partners for bulk shipping and can cover import taxes (and pass the costs on to me of course, but at least they know about the taxes).

polyobsessive
polyobsessive's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/11/2015
Video

Hi Seph,

Cool. A few comments on the video...

It's really long. It might be worth splitting it into two separate videos: the main pitch, and a gameplay overview, posted somewhere else on the page.

The gameplay overview part is quite useful, by the way. Just I think it should be separate.

The voiceover is thin and indistinct. You might need to talk to someone about how to get better sound quality. While it is great to hear the creator talking too (the personal thankyou is a definite positive for me), it might be worth getting a voice actor to do the opening section.

I'm not sure you need the section at the end about comments, messages and the competition on the video, as it just seems to clutter the message and make the whole thing run long.

Finally, it is great to see footage of the game in play, but at this stage I can't help but focus on the graphic design on the components, which look unattractive to me. I know that this is a prototype being played and that you plan to make improvements, but that is not clear to the viewer, and in a genre like cyberpunk, where style is so important, it may be worth addressing at least some of this before you launch.

Just my two credits. :)

Rob

Syndicate content


forum | by Dr. Radut