I released Chess Survivors over two years ago, and it was a huge milestone for me. Lately, the game’s been getting some negative reviews, and honestly, I agree with a lot of the feedback. It’s tough, but it also shows how much I’ve grown as a solo indie game developer. My game dev journey is about learning, improving, and becoming better with every project. Support me and my work by checking out my games on Steam: store.steampowered.com/app/3059390/Hexagod/
Excellent mindset to have: get whatever positive lessons you can from *constructive criticism*. Discard the trolling and feelings of self-doubt, as they won't help you with your goals for the project.
100% and for me that is easier said than done since my brain normally jumps being defensive. Which is why I have a rule to not respond to negative comments (Steam, YT, Twitch) and instead just try and take it in stride to see if I can learn something.
@@Aarimous It is indeed difficult. Call it our ego or pride, it can get in the way of learning, growing, and becoming a better version of ourselves. Also, it's not usually received well by third-party observers, at least if the person getting defensive is doubling down on a bad idea or behavior. I've witnessed plenty of conversations where I want the person unable to receive a valid criticism to just acknowledge the good points someone else makes. Many people think of having humility as "weakness" and stubbornly stick to their views even if they're in the wrong, but I think of it as a strength to not immediately react to something and consider if there's any truth to what was said. Anyway, you've got a lot to be proud of -- releasing a game that has had a mostly positive reception is by no means a small feat. I can only hope my first game(s) are as successful.
Switching to turn-based will please some people, but turn off others. Doing both is fundamentally building 2 different games, and as a solo dev you need to be conservative with your resources. "Not every game is for everyone" is a conclusion I came to recently in my last devlog, and i think it applies here too. Follow your gut and build the experience you are passionate about.
"Not every game is for everyone" is a key point some players just never consider. Instead they click the "this game sucks" button (lets be honest, that's what Not Recommended means), and write a pointlessly short, or far too long reason why. Some sanity checking it needed for feedback, the controller issues are worth investigating.
I've seen Early Access games messed with by fans of the game, "it's too easy" they cry, when they actually mean is "It's too easy for noobs to progress in this MP game". End result was 10 times the complaints from people who now cannot find things they need in the game, and devs that refuse to undo the changes.
It's just that the 91% positive is quite a bit above the average rating for an average game on Steam, some people have to fight to get through at least that 70% to get the rating blue and not orange, so there's absolutely nothing to worry about with it
Would it be possible for you to maybe change the game's name to "Bullet Chess Survivors" or something like that? Since you're mentioning that you wanted it to feel more like bullet chess, maybe that will help future players understand what the game is meant to feel like better!
This is great advicd. When a player says that they dont like a system, and x should be changed to get y result, as devs we should look at that and go "the player isnt having fun with the current z result of the system. They are probably right that it isn't fun. How do I make it more fun?" instead of focusing on the x part of the system that we may have spent a bunch of time on.
Only times i see the dev reply being worth the effort is when someone criticizes something that either kicked the dev/team into motion to fix a problem or they are talking about something that already is being worked on for next update. And even then you don't have to reply to everyone. As a player i have seen few replies like that when browsing thru indie games or from small studios that have funding (and they are almost the only types of dev replies i've ever seen) - and these types of dev comments are among the only ones that make me smile a bit. It shows that devs care and are still updating the game. They don't have to say "we didn't abandon the project". They aren't defending their game. They are just stating that there is going to be improvements. Which when that happens is more impactful to gain trust than This probably doesn't make the player come back nor does it cause more sales. This is just a very small trust, respect and reputation type of thing. But most of the time dev probably shouldn't reply to steam reviews. Even in this one event that i've seen repeat times it is arguable if that was worth the time and effort.
I think you're mixing some things up. If you get first 10 reviews, you get an uptick of visibility from Steam (it atarts to see you as a real game) but other than that, the amount of reviews do nothing. You just get more reviews when you get more players (and how much, depends on a lot of factors, including the genre). If you ask people for reviews a lot, you'll just get a lower sales-to-reviews ratio, because you get more reviews for the amount of sales. The ratio is more useful for people who want to estimate the amount of sales ypu got; but you know the exact number, so it doesn't matter to you, unless you want to create an appearance of being more successful by having more reviews. I think some people might just search for "chess" and not be aware of the Vampire Survivors craze and assume it to be more chessy than it is. You might want to check if more people got confused like that, and see if there is anything on your Steam page that gives the wrong impression, but other than that, negative reviews are always expected.
Do you think having a dedicated TH-cam channel that releases weekly videos to build hype around a game could influence its reviews on Steam? Since marketing efforts can shape expectations, could this impact how players perceive and evaluate the game, similar to how unmet expectations affected some reviews of Chess Survivors? And if so, will you shape your marketing for Hexagod differently?
Personally I do look at all the graphs and stuff on steam when I'm deciding to buy a game. If I had more disposable income I'd probably be less diligent about researching my purchases. I also read what the reviews say on why they liked/disliked the game. For that specific review for me personally, I use mouse not controller, I know the game isn't turn based and the fact they only played 0.3 hours would make me weigh there review less then other with more time. And even if a game has mixed reviews I'll still research if a game looks interesting to me. Just because a lot of people don't like a game doesn't mean its not for me. I would think getting negative feedback would be more beneficial in the long run, but tricky to not take it personally. I'm trying to learn how to code so I can make games and I'm not looking forward to that part, lol.
I think that having timed turns helps avoiding analysis paralysis and keeping the playing sessions short, so while I get the point of the review I can't really agree with it
Trying to please everyone, or mostly everyone, will just end up alienating a lot of your customers. Stick to your vision of what your game should be and it will work out.
Personally, I think Chess Survivors is a great game. The gameplay is clear, and the steam page describes it well. I think the recent bad reviews are silly. Changing anything about chess makes it less like "chess". (Still hoping for an eventual console release, fingers crossed)
Couldnt help but notice the "its nothing like chess" review, I would personally think about replying to that one and asking them to reconsider with a reasonable explanation of the name choice because I dont think thats a fair review. The Brutal Orchestra dev has a good system of replying to negative review where its not really a negative about the game and explaining (not in a condescending way) how reviews affect the developers livelihood and it seems to have a decent rate of getting them to reconsider
I released Chess Survivors over two years ago, and it was a huge milestone for me. Lately, the game’s been getting some negative reviews, and honestly, I agree with a lot of the feedback. It’s tough, but it also shows how much I’ve grown as a solo indie game developer. My game dev journey is about learning, improving, and becoming better with every project. Support me and my work by checking out my games on Steam: store.steampowered.com/app/3059390/Hexagod/
Excellent mindset to have: get whatever positive lessons you can from *constructive criticism*. Discard the trolling and feelings of self-doubt, as they won't help you with your goals for the project.
100% and for me that is easier said than done since my brain normally jumps being defensive. Which is why I have a rule to not respond to negative comments (Steam, YT, Twitch) and instead just try and take it in stride to see if I can learn something.
@@Aarimous It is indeed difficult. Call it our ego or pride, it can get in the way of learning, growing, and becoming a better version of ourselves. Also, it's not usually received well by third-party observers, at least if the person getting defensive is doubling down on a bad idea or behavior. I've witnessed plenty of conversations where I want the person unable to receive a valid criticism to just acknowledge the good points someone else makes. Many people think of having humility as "weakness" and stubbornly stick to their views even if they're in the wrong, but I think of it as a strength to not immediately react to something and consider if there's any truth to what was said.
Anyway, you've got a lot to be proud of -- releasing a game that has had a mostly positive reception is by no means a small feat. I can only hope my first game(s) are as successful.
Switching to turn-based will please some people, but turn off others. Doing both is fundamentally building 2 different games, and as a solo dev you need to be conservative with your resources. "Not every game is for everyone" is a conclusion I came to recently in my last devlog, and i think it applies here too. Follow your gut and build the experience you are passionate about.
"Not every game is for everyone" is a key point some players just never consider.
Instead they click the "this game sucks" button (lets be honest, that's what Not Recommended means), and write a pointlessly short, or far too long reason why.
Some sanity checking it needed for feedback, the controller issues are worth investigating.
Great video
I've seen Early Access games messed with by fans of the game, "it's too easy" they cry, when they actually mean is "It's too easy for noobs to progress in this MP game".
End result was 10 times the complaints from people who now cannot find things they need in the game, and devs that refuse to undo the changes.
It's just that the 91% positive is quite a bit above the average rating for an average game on Steam, some people have to fight to get through at least that 70% to get the rating blue and not orange, so there's absolutely nothing to worry about with it
Would it be possible for you to maybe change the game's name to "Bullet Chess Survivors" or something like that? Since you're mentioning that you wanted it to feel more like bullet chess, maybe that will help future players understand what the game is meant to feel like better!
This is great advicd. When a player says that they dont like a system, and x should be changed to get y result, as devs we should look at that and go "the player isnt having fun with the current z result of the system. They are probably right that it isn't fun. How do I make it more fun?" instead of focusing on the x part of the system that we may have spent a bunch of time on.
Only times i see the dev reply being worth the effort is when someone criticizes something that either kicked the dev/team into motion to fix a problem or they are talking about something that already is being worked on for next update. And even then you don't have to reply to everyone.
As a player i have seen few replies like that when browsing thru indie games or from small studios that have funding (and they are almost the only types of dev replies i've ever seen) - and these types of dev comments are among the only ones that make me smile a bit. It shows that devs care and are still updating the game. They don't have to say "we didn't abandon the project". They aren't defending their game. They are just stating that there is going to be improvements. Which when that happens is more impactful to gain trust than
This probably doesn't make the player come back nor does it cause more sales. This is just a very small trust, respect and reputation type of thing.
But most of the time dev probably shouldn't reply to steam reviews. Even in this one event that i've seen repeat times it is arguable if that was worth the time and effort.
Thanks for always keeping it real!
Really great advice. I think it’s important to remember that the reviewers are not taking shots at you as a person.
I think you're mixing some things up. If you get first 10 reviews, you get an uptick of visibility from Steam (it atarts to see you as a real game) but other than that, the amount of reviews do nothing. You just get more reviews when you get more players (and how much, depends on a lot of factors, including the genre). If you ask people for reviews a lot, you'll just get a lower sales-to-reviews ratio, because you get more reviews for the amount of sales. The ratio is more useful for people who want to estimate the amount of sales ypu got; but you know the exact number, so it doesn't matter to you, unless you want to create an appearance of being more successful by having more reviews.
I think some people might just search for "chess" and not be aware of the Vampire Survivors craze and assume it to be more chessy than it is. You might want to check if more people got confused like that, and see if there is anything on your Steam page that gives the wrong impression, but other than that, negative reviews are always expected.
Wise words
Do you think having a dedicated TH-cam channel that releases weekly videos to build hype around a game could influence its reviews on Steam? Since marketing efforts can shape expectations, could this impact how players perceive and evaluate the game, similar to how unmet expectations affected some reviews of Chess Survivors? And if so, will you shape your marketing for Hexagod differently?
Personally I do look at all the graphs and stuff on steam when I'm deciding to buy a game. If I had more disposable income I'd probably be less diligent about researching my purchases. I also read what the reviews say on why they liked/disliked the game. For that specific review for me personally, I use mouse not controller, I know the game isn't turn based and the fact they only played 0.3 hours would make me weigh there review less then other with more time. And even if a game has mixed reviews I'll still research if a game looks interesting to me. Just because a lot of people don't like a game doesn't mean its not for me.
I would think getting negative feedback would be more beneficial in the long run, but tricky to not take it personally. I'm trying to learn how to code so I can make games and I'm not looking forward to that part, lol.
Would you like some help on your next game?
I can make sure players will enjoy it
Must be better than no reviews. I entered early access just over a week ago now. No sales. Fair amount of emails asking for free keys though.
well i love the game ! ive played it for almost 9 hours ^-^
Great grind! Did you get a chance to play POE2 over the weekend? Or are you going to wait for the full release
Oh I've played a ton of POE2. I think I'm 30hrs in already. How about you?
I think that having timed turns helps avoiding analysis paralysis and keeping the playing sessions short, so while I get the point of the review I can't really agree with it
Trying to please everyone, or mostly everyone, will just end up alienating a lot of your customers. Stick to your vision of what your game should be and it will work out.
Personally, I think Chess Survivors is a great game. The gameplay is clear, and the steam page describes it well.
I think the recent bad reviews are silly. Changing anything about chess makes it less like "chess".
(Still hoping for an eventual console release, fingers crossed)
Thanks! I agree not every game is for everyone and that's ok.
Couldnt help but notice the "its nothing like chess" review, I would personally think about replying to that one and asking them to reconsider with a reasonable explanation of the name choice because I dont think thats a fair review. The Brutal Orchestra dev has a good system of replying to negative review where its not really a negative about the game and explaining (not in a condescending way) how reviews affect the developers livelihood and it seems to have a decent rate of getting them to reconsider
you re mumbling
Great video