GxB Forum Separation (was: Post to Topic Ratio)

[Ren]

I don't see an adversity to critique; where is it?

I make a point of going around trying to give critique on games and art (mostly art, since it's what I feel more competent about), because I have been educated in an environment where critique wasn't seen as a bad or aggressive thing, and because I was trying to put into action what PyTom asked us to do - to set an example and try to comment on as many games as we can. I'm OCD like that.

However, I have been told on one thread where I gave a review (it took me a lot of time, two play-throughs and and effort to write it decently in English) on a game that I'm a "minority" and that the game was good as it was, essentially told that I should shut up and stop criticising it. I've spent at least an hour playing another game I which I didn't really enjoy (despite looking promising) only to have the author tell me not to bother leaving critique on the story, because anyway they're going to rewrite it... which puzzles me as I'd ask for more input on the story if I were rewriting it, but I'm starting to think I'm just crazy. Then I have to be told off and treated condescendingly for offering a rather mild bit of art advice and have it dismissed by another person with a "this is not an art class", or in another case, that because I was giving critique on one of the few completed illustrations that I saw on an art thread - that I must must be picking on them.

Don't take me wrong, some people here can take critique gracefully, but all the things I listed, with other things that didn't happen to me in particular, but I still had to see, give me the impression of adversity to critique.

... but I think actually organizing subforums better could help having both. Idk, that's what I think, at least =/

Not only do I wholly agree, but I don't see where it was suggested to make this a critique-only forum.

I also wholly disagree with the idea that we can only have critique or no-critique though... maybe on the singular sub-forums this could happen, if they were to be created, but on the whole, the two worlds could coexist, they just seem to clash with the current organisation.

[Jake]

Forcing this forum to be critique only

I don't think anybody is talking about forcing the whole forum to be critique only.

For my part at least, I'm talking about making critique acceptable. At the moment, this forum tends to react very badly to it, and it puts people off critiquing. Some people may not want critique - good for them, if they're happy that way they're welcome to carry on that way. But some of us do want proper feedback - useful feedback, to help us get better - and the growing anti-critique culture on this forum is a bad thing for a not-insignificant proportion of the forum population.

I think the seriousness of indie VNs is inflated.
...
But to what end? Let's be real: most are romance stories. Isn't that ridiculous? We're twisting ourselves silly over date sims, or at least what is traditionally a date sim media.

Personally, I think the idea that the VN medium is only a vehicle for romances is kind of sad. It's a rich medium and has the potential to be much more than that... and there have been people both on and off this forum who have done more with it, as well.

But this is a hobby. Outside of the few that do produce VNs for profit and for a living, this is a hobby. Something to do on the weekends and to fill time. Something to consume you when you need to be consumed. It makes life worth living. But it's like knitting. Or collecting coins. Not failed campaign promises or losing a war. It's fun.

Many famous painters throughout history - the kind of painters who now sell for millions - didn't make a living out of their art in their lifetime. It was a hobby for them.

The fact that it's a hobby doesn't mean that the people practising it necessarily don't want to improve themselves. Some people may be content to treat VN-making like coin-collecting, as an activity which occupies one's time but doesn't really build skill that can be used to grow one's hobby - and good for them, if they're enjoying themselves I wouldn't want to take it away from them. But it's not the whole of the forum by a long way, and it's also the case that those of us who aren't content to treat VN-making as a way of consuming time rather than a creative act shouldn't be discriminated against either.

Do unfinished game threads make you ANGRY? Like, VERY ANGRY? If so, you may need to reevaluate your sense of entitlement.
(Do you flinch at being called a hobbyist? Perhaps you should reevaluate your main source of income.)

No, and no. And I suspect nobody else in this thread could answer 'yes' to those accusations, either; they look a lot like strawmen.

They're free games. The least critique-able form there is. There can be little expectation for the developer to listen to you as it is clear they're doing it for reasons outside of winning you over (otherwise, they'd ask for money, too!). They're doing it for a personal motivation.

I strongly disagree that free games are 'the least critique-able form there is'. The point of critique is absolutely not, as you appear to suggest here, to get the developer to do what you want; the point of critique is to give suggestions to the developer that might help them improve. Critique is for the benefit of the creator, not the person giving the feedback.

As you state, the majority of creators on this forum are working for a personal motivation. And for those creators whose personal motivation is to tell stories well, to enthrall and entertain, and to do so as well as they can - those creators are often going to want to listen to critique, because it helps them do that better. There is equally as much expectation that a free-VN-developer might want your suggestions and your help as there is that a painter or a writer or a composer or an interior decorator might.

Furthermore, forcing a split between critique-only and dev blogs WIPs would see to more people choosing the "safe" route thus making giving critique less opportune. The non-Critique forum will become implicitly "no critique allowed." And this will also heavily encourage the duplication of threads (and I thought less posts is what you guys wanted?).

Maybe some people will choose to put their stuff in the non-critique forum - and I certainly expect that it would be de-facto no-critique - but 'safe' is a very personal interpretation. If someone is nervous of getting critique, then the non-critique forum is where they will be happier, and that's good - that's the entire point of having a non-critique forum. But critique is not automatically something to be feared - that's a very subjective notion - and a lot of people will be happier placing their work in the critique forum. Again - that's good, that's the entire point.

('Too many posts' was never the problem.)

If this forum was truly in such dizzying chaos that warrants twenty page discussions, wouldn't something have been done? The phrase "don't fix what isn't broken" is because you risk actually breaking it.

Except it is broken. Just because it isn't broken for you doesn't mean that there's not a problem for other forum members.

[DaFool]

Back when there were so few games, every post in Completed Games was important. There was no distinction between a short poetic 5-min kinetic novel made during a weekend or a short story made in one or two months.

Nowadays we have quite a few projects spanning many months and even many years. I think the effort put into criticism should be proportional to the size of the work. Larger works tend to be SERIOUS BUSINESS so the creators of larger works are more apt to take any feedback in stride and not shrug it off as "Well, I wrote it while I was in the loo, I don't really care other than it was a fun diversion, so F off."

(Personally, I would hire Ren as a beta tester)

The Featured Games was sort of the way to mark the 'bigger' games, I think there should be a more consistent way in both Completed and WIP sections to tag the more ambitious projects -- so more serious critical feedback can graduate towards those places. It's like having a Congress (Rule by Quantity) and a Senate (Rule by Quality) at the same time.

[lordcloudx]

I think adversity to critique is a hypothetical root to a host of perceived problems but with no proven connections to said perceived problems, which may not at all be problems but more like phantoms created by some stigma or personal inclinations towards something or other. Can I be any more ambiguous than that? Yes, I can, actually, but I hope the message gets through. Think about it and rationalize as much as you want. Provoking discussion is good, just don't be dismissive about it as I'm quite sensitive to unsavory remarks - even those which are not purely intended to offend.

Edit: I'd like to add that it might have been the push towards a more critical community that triggered the defense mechanism in some members to reject all kinds of critique, even those that may be perceived as helpful prima facie. Individuals are different so your helpfulness mileage may vary.

That said, I have no actual proposals for a resolution to said hypothetical root to these perceived problems except to maybe focus less on theory and more on substance.

[Aleema]

Not only do I wholly agree, but I don't see where it was suggested to make this a critique-only forum.

Yes you did, in the same place you were encouraged to write more critical posts. The original WIP changes thread was an extensive conversation on how "good game" posts are useless and are the bane of the forum. Meaning: stop making them. While I'm 100% behind having progress on your game before making a thread, I think what was listed as the only posts allowed ("on topic") in those threads is what I'm against. Since PyTom decided to encourage more critical posts rather than a rule making them the only ones allowed, I can see how you might have missed that, but I believe the sentiment is still alive and well.

My biggest fear is that a critique/non-critique WIP forum would make the non-critique forum NO critique, at all. Wouldn't a rule asking people to say whether they want critique more effective? Because right now it just seems like another way to segregate people and is not a solution to what makes the GxB separation awful. It's more snobby and not backed by statistical figures. Serious developers vs. those other people. I'd personally never vouch to be in such an "elite" forum, despite how much I want feedback. So I don't want to be limited to settling for no feedback. Requiring people to make 2 threads per game, rather than just picking one forum or the other, is giving the developer a chore for basic rights and suddenly two threads to manage and update, and a disjointing in the discussion of the game (fluidity and coherence is normally what people work towards in "improvements").

I'd suggest that there be a critique project forum for submission of work that needs to be judged, as per request of the author. Where it is understood that posting is applying for detailed examination and then we'll see a majority of critique posts per thread. This would only work with a set of critiquers/mods who are required to respond to whatever is posted there. So it's not just a what-I-like type of discrimination, making the "good game" posts significantly less likely because it's purely about improvement. If it's just critique, then you should be able to offer feedback on everything. Art is art whether it's a apple or an orange, you know? The set group of criticizers aside (perhaps one for each specialty), everyone would be allowed to post, of course. Maybe not! But only if critique is allowed in the other forum, too. But I think such a project already exists. We can ask them to make HQ here, perhaps?

There's also blog components for forums like this. Instead of an offsite blog aggregate, you can give every damn person on this forum their own blog that is localized right here. I guarantee it would be immediately used, immediately more popular than EVN, and would immediately reduce the amount of "garbage" WIP threads/posts. As pointed out earlier in this thread, "junk" exposure threads are basically just dev blogs and their comments. Give everyone a blog, and presto! All neat 'n' tidy. Posting is suddenly for serious critique. A blog system would also allow for tagging, something we've all agreed is what this forum needs, not more subforums. Even Deji's "Critique Please" could be a tag. Well, that's fixed too. Damn! Why aren't we doing this phpBB blog idea?

[Jake]

Yes you did, in the same place you were encouraged to write more critical posts. [...] I can see how you might have missed that, but I believe the sentiment is still alive and well.

Could you do us a favour and make it clear when you're referring to something from months ago in a different thread, please? Otherwise it looks like you're responding to things people have said in this thread, which can be a little confusing and makes it look like you're misrepresenting people's positions.

You may personally believe that the sentiment is 'alive and well', but nobody in this thread is actually suggesting that non-critique posts be totally banned, so it's not really relevant...

My biggest fear is that a critique/non-critique WIP forum would make the non-critique forum NO critique, at all.

Also there are no WiP threads in the Completed Games forum, and Ren'Py Support stuff gets moved out of Game-Maker's Corner. This is pretty normal... if someone wants critique, they can post their project progress in the critique forum; if someone is - as you suggest happens - working on their project purely for personal enjoyment, like collecting coins, they can post it in the non-critique forum. Surely one person with one project will either want or not want some measure of critique?

It's more snobby and not backed by statistical figures. Serious developers vs. those other people.

This is a bit of an insulting strawman, to be honest.

Nobody here has suggested that people who don't want critique are lesser in any way - it's their choice, and if they're having fun they're having fun. All I want - and I think it's safe to say that the same goes for other people who are asking for critique - is a place where it's clear that critique is encouraged, rather than the present state of discouraged.


And IMO, if you don't want to promote an air of snobbishness in the critique forum, the absolute worst thing you could do would be to start some personal crusade against it and boycott it - all that will achieve is giving other people the same bad impression, and make it far more likely to happen.


(You're hardly backing your position up with statistical figures either; it's practically impossible, since 'critique' and 'fun' and so on are pretty unmeasurable qualities, so there's no point complaining about that. But I've brought up examples of current problems, Ren's brought up examples of current problems, we've seen incidents like Mikan coming along and then giving up on the forum again in short order quite recently...)

I'd suggest that there be a critique project forum for submission of work that needs to be judged, as per request of the author. Where it is understood that posting is applying for detailed examination and then we'll see a majority of critique posts per thread. This would only work with a set of critiquers/mods who are required to respond to whatever is posted there.

Firstly, I don't think your last statement here is true at all; there are plenty of creative communities where people get feedback without anyone having been forced to give it. The difference is that it is clear on those forums that critique is desired, through both explicit statements and actions by the forum administration and the general resulting culture, while on this forum one gets the distinct impression that critique is more 'occasionally tolerated'.

Secondly, though, wouldn't this actually be more snobby and elitist than the suggestion of just having separate regular forums? You're suggesting that we designate a selection of users as 'critiquers' (and who does this?), which seems to carry the connotation that they're somehow better at it or more worth listening to than other users.

If it's just critique, then you should be able to offer feedback on everything. Art is art whether it's a apple or an orange, you know?

This is an invalid generalisation, IMO; all things creative may be art, but that does not mean that one person is qualified to or could be reasonably expected to provide feedback on all things creative.

(Not to mention the more-obvious procedural problem that if there were to be a fixed panel of critique 'experts', the forum would only ever hear feedback from those people, with their personal preferences, opinions and prejudices; art is still fairly subjective, after all. And that's basically the current situation - there's a tiny number of people who do still give critique regardless of the forum's opinion, and that's all people hear a lot of the time.)



One thing that seems to run just below the surface of all of the things you're saying here is the apparent assumption that the proposed WiP-Critique forum is intended for savage and merciless total deconstruction of people's work - which simply isn't true. That kind of feedback is really only useful to a small proportion of any creative field, and most critique only consists of a couple of lines suggesting one or two things which could be improved.

(This is one of the two big fallacies about critique that seem to run around this forum; the other being that someone critiquing your work probably doesn't like it. To the contrary, if somone bothers to write critique about your game it means they've taken the time to play it, think about it and write however much text to try and help you; you should be flattered to receive critique from anyone, not feel slighted. A well-thought-out critique response is essentially an encouraging comment with extra benefits.)

[kinougames]

About the GxB split: Considering its popularity, it was a good thing and I think it should remain the way it is, and I think that the ideas here that it's "isolating" anything are rather egregious.

As far as critique on this forum:

I haven't had much time lately, as I am not really an artist and to make sure we get stuff out on time, I've been teaching myself a lot of art, but when I have a free day, I try to play completed games and leave detailed critique. The way I do it is what I believe to be one of the best ways, because I pause the game and leave critique as I go so that I don't forget anything, and then I sort of sum it up after I've played through the game to give my overall feelings.

I've left, I believe, 4-5 detailed critiques, and I've only gotten acknowledgment from 1 that I can immediately recall. That's honestly not what I would expect from a forum "open" to critique. I chose the games I chose because the people expressed interest in commercial ventures, and I believe they would have benefited the most from a really large set of details.

I agree with Jake (as usual) that you should absolutely not assume people who critiqued you didn't like your work. I am a native English speaker and critiques and playing games still takes me a few hours (that I could be using to teach myself how to draw xD). I try to pick only commercial projects, or people who expressed an interest in commercial projects because I think that people tend to be a little bit more open to the bad info when their money is involved. Should you take every word as truth from those people if they are NOT your target group? No. Critique is not about doing exactly what you're told. It's about taking what you can, implementing it as far as you can, and then moving along. In every worthwhile critique, you're highly likely to find the following parts:

-Something you didn't want to hear but know is true.
-Something that you should edit, but are not yet able to do effectively.
-Something that is done well and people like.
-Something you should edit, but don't want to edit.
-Something that you're told is great, but that you feel you need to edit.
-Something completely outside of what you're trying to do with your work and not really a focus or a concern for you.
-Something you're told to edit that you should not edit.

The hard part is that an artist usually can't tell what these are until receiving about a million critiques and learning for themselves, and by the time people feel like they want to take critique, they've likely missed a lot of useful information already.

Critique is a very vital part of the artistic process, and it should be more heavily welcomed, and while there are a couple of people who are very open, it's not as much as I would really hope.

[Aleema]

Warning: wall'o'text.

Could you do us a favour and make it clear when you're referring to something from months ago in a different thread, please?

The thread didn't start and revolve around around your posts only. I was responding to the call for an open discussion on the betterment of the forum. The thread in question was referenced on the first page, and by Ren, too. It's part of our forum's history now.

Also there are no WiP threads in the Completed Games forum, and Ren'Py Support stuff gets moved out of Game-Maker's Corner. This is pretty normal... if someone wants critique, they can post their project progress in the critique forum; if someone is - as you suggest happens - working on their project purely for personal enjoyment, like collecting coins, they can post it in the non-critique forum. Surely one person with one project will either want or not want some measure of critique?

I'm glad you clarified your position. Which is, when you make a new thread, you must choose to post in a forum marked "critique" or a forum marked "no critique". I much prefer Deji's interpretation where you post when you have something to get critique, on top of another thread you've already been managing. That version means there is not classification for your game or yourself.

Asking users to choose whether they want critique on their game before thread creation will do one or more of these things:
- See a reduction in the number of WIP threads (of all genres) because of a confusion as to where they should post, the vagueness of what represents "critique", and if they want it at this point in their game (AKA, the "safe" route)
- Number of WIP critique threads dwarf non-critique by a large number, because refusing feedback is something you don't think you'll do ahead of time. The line between "for fun" and "serious business" isn't clear, especially to the developer himself. Of course you want feedback, otherwise you wouldn't be posting on a public forum!
- Number of WIP non-critique threads dwarf critique because they're afraid of what "critique" means, if they're worthy, or that they simply don't "qualify" for it yet, and that previously mentioned confusion
- Critique threads will become identical to non-critique threads, and the divide is pointless.
- GxB threads will get weeded out again -- at least in the critique forum where it's obviously very important you comment on stuff you like, perhaps causing as many as 4 new forums (a GxB counterpart to each). Unless this is some way of saying GxB aren't likely to want critique, which I doubt, but it needed to be said. Because if this happens and GxB is merged again, then I'll have to ask why it happened in the first place and why this is the cure.
- People won't look at the non-critique forum as much or at all since it might seem that their input is automatically unvalued in that part of the forum, so why waste their time?

But that's all theory.

This is a bit of an insulting strawman, to be honest.

Like Crazy Susan? Absurd!

Nobody here has suggested that people who don't want critique are lesser in any way - it's their choice, and if they're having fun they're having fun. All I want - and I think it's safe to say that the same goes for other people who are asking for critique - is a place where it's clear that critique is encouraged, rather than the present state of discouraged.

If it feels like a slap in the face if someone doesn't want critique, and it classifies as something "broken" about the forum, it's something you have a problem with. If people want to destroy the WIP because there's not enough critique, if people need to write paragraph long posts on the importance of it, then it's being treated like the better side of a moral decision. "It's okay if you don't want critique, but, you know ... that's not right."

Critique is a basic right, and it should be common. Splitting WIP threads into allowed/not allowed is NOT working towards what you SAY you want. It's making critique out to be special for special people. If you want this to be a critique-friendly community, how about not sectioning it off? And we find ways to encourage it for everyone. A simple post at the top of the WIP forum: "New rule. If you're happy with your game and don't desire thorough feedback, please mark in your first post 'blahblahblah'" and that's solved. Instead, you guys are so perturbed with the rare occurrences of not-desired-responses to your critiques that it warrants an entirely new forum? Some of those cases were just a simple mistake (forgetting to remove "feedback wanted" from the title -- which clearly wasn't an adversity to critique, just the window was closed).

It does suck that hard work is thrown away, but it happens every once in a while. (Dropped projects are a bigger problem than this.) Ren asked me nicely if I wanted critique on a game, but I figured it was because she was perceptive to my lack of confidence in the game, rather than a distaste for the reception of feedback here in general. Do I WANT her to ask me nicely? No, it was completely unnecessary and I was perfectly open to it. I just thought she was being nice.

My point being: one person or two doesn't reflect the forum as a whole. There will always be that person who posts in the Critique WIP but only wants a certain type of critique. For instance, I don't want critique on my game's sprites because I'm not the artist and I don't have money to change them. This doesn't mean I have a thin skin, it's just useless to me. Instead of serious vs. for fun, critique should be based on whether the person in question is happy with their product. That way you could know if a person needs improvement. "Your ___ would be better if you ___." Isn't that purely a matter of opinion? If someone is happy with something, they're likely to not want that type of help. How happy someone is with their project varies over time. It should be perfectly acceptable to want critique one moment, but none the next. Locking threads into one state or the other would be a mistake.

Firstly, I don't think your last statement here is true at all; there are plenty of creative communities where people get feedback without anyone having been forced to give it. The difference is that it is clear on those forums that critique is desired, through both explicit statements and actions by the forum administration and the general resulting culture, while on this forum one gets the distinct impression that critique is more 'occasionally tolerated'.

Secondly, though, wouldn't this actually be more snobby and elitist than the suggestion of just having separate regular forums? You're suggesting that we designate a selection of users as 'critiquers' (and who does this?), which seems to carry the connotation that they're somehow better at it or more worth listening to than other users.

LemmaSoft is its own community. We don't need clones of other sites, we need our own for our special media. If you could link to such creative communities we could utilize them for what they specialize in. (Rather than simply hold them up as ideal and beat up our own community if it fails to compare.) Those communities most likely have a large population, or dedicated members. We can't instantly create a thousand active users, but we can assign dedicated ones. This is important because if we have a special critique forum, people should get critique. There should be little to no chance of threads getting 0 replies until it falls off the first page. If it's just a free-for-all "what I like" type of critique then you'll see one or two replies for every other thread, and I'll have to ask what the point was. Encouraging would certainly mean more than just tagging a forum "okay guys, be more critique-y, thanks". A post could do that. There needs to be people actually doing it, and a sure way to get that is for some people to take up the gauntlet. And that's how critique projects have worked in the past. You submit your material, and it is judged by a panel of non-biased critics (and whoever wants to join in). I would much rather that be a permanent institution of our forum.

And I don't think it would be snobby any more than accepting critique on a regular basis, as I would've happily elected you or Ren as said critiquers because you both seem to enjoy doing it. Sometimes the best way to get things done is to do it yourself. That's why I believe Ren'Py was created, and why I personally decided to make games myself. I wanted to play a type of game that was, then, very hard to find. If you want see more critique: critique more. And for a lot of different things. Not one or two things you really like. No one will see that and learn outside of that limited audience. Back when I modded a creative community where it was understood that posting was for feedback, my co-mods made it our duty to respond to every post. I had no problem doing so, learned a lot about the subject matter, gave everyone the reply they deserved, and instigated that valued creative collegiate atmosphere. If classes in college worked like Wikipedia, we'd all be screwed. There's got to be a teacher waiting for you so that new teachers can be taught. This goes along the line of PyTom's original plan to encourage through example.

One thing that seems to run just below the surface of all of the things you're saying here is the apparent assumption that the proposed WiP-Critique forum is intended for savage and merciless total deconstruction of people's work

Nope. Wanna try again? Here's a hint: it's something about being against the division of projects and, in turn, the division of developers. There's one Completed Games forum. I have never, ever been against critique. I love it and give it openly, and like I previously mentioned, used to be a major hobby of mine.

[sake-bento]

Hey, gang. This thread is taking a turn that it probably shouldn't. Despite the fact that I haven't posted more than a few sentences here, I have been following this thread closely, and reading everything. Unfortunately, we're really testing the limits of Rule #1 here. This is a general thread reminder that everyone needs to play nice.

We've discussed several things that can be changed, and admins will be making changes based on your feedback sometime in the near future.

[Juxtaposition]

My thoughts on the forums:

I think the GxB split is working okay. It does make the WIP forums easier to navigate and I browse both forums. On the other hand, there are so many WIP threads that I don't even bother to investigate one unless I recognize the author's name, there's a demo or art assets attached, or if it has a lot of responses. I'm sympathetic to the idea of putting up barriers to entry, but I don't think it would change my behavior much. It's just an unfortunate consequence of growth.

I would like to see more posts about the craftsmanship of VN's. I think it would benefit the community to have people share their knowledge about things like their experiences in hiring artists or what sort of unexpected problems they ran into when they made their game. People post this sort of thing on their blogs from time to time, but it would be useful to have these things in a central location. And speaking of blogs, I think that outstanding blog articles like the one Deiji did on creating character sprites ought to have a permanent link on the OELVN wiki or something. It's a shame to see valuable resources like that hidden away.

I'm not exactly sure how one would go about encouraging more craftsmanship posts. It's probably not something you can force into existence by creating another forum section.

Prior to making any changes in the forums, I think it would be a good idea to collect data through surveys. Are you curious why people don't finish their projects? You wonder what's up with the drop in finished VN's? Are there other things about the community that puzzle you? Why not just ask people directly? Put the surveys in prominent place in order to ensure maximum participation and emphasize that the point of the surveys is to collect data and that any solutions that people might like to suggest should be saved for later. I think there are a lot of useful things that could be discovered through this technique.

And finally, some thoughts about critique:

A well-thought-out critique response is essentially an encouraging comment with extra benefits.

There's some truth to this, but I think it's important to maintain a distinction between critique and praise. A detailed critique provides artists with the means to improve their skills, but it's not the most effective way to motivate someone to produce more work. Direct praise is a far more powerful form of positive reinforcement. Knowing that your work made someone laugh, made them cry, made them think about the world in a new way, made them stay up all night reading your work, made them create art based on your work... that's a psychological kick of an entirely different magnitude. It's the difference between receiving a practical gift of socks and underwear for Christmas and receiving a pleasantly extravagant gift that you would have never considered buying for yourself.

I've noticed a tendency in critique-oriented communities to equate critique with praise and to denigrate true praise as being the mark of a gushing fanboy. As a result, you get posts that have 1-3 vague sentences of praise and 5 paragraphs worth of suggested improvements. That's not a problem in a forum populated with aspiring professionals who want to improve their skills in order to make their work more salable, but it's not the most rewarding environment for hobbyists that mostly offer their work for free. What's the point of all that critique if the artist decides that the ratio of effort to reward isn't worth the trouble of creating another work?

I don't have a problem with encouraging constructive critique provided that the more blunt-spoken posters are kept in line and don't end up transforming the forums into a public whipping post, but I think that direct praise -- which I define as giving an artist sincere and specific reasons why their work made you happy-- should be an honored part of the forum culture. No one here is advocating the abolition of praise, of course, but I think one of the risks of moving toward a culture of critique is that it could end up supplanting praise entirely in favor of comments that are more "useful" and something valuable would be lost.

[lordcloudx]

@Juxtaposition: Very well put. Your post, especially the elaboration on critique versus praise, echoes most of my sentiments about the whole issue in better words than I believe could have written.

I'd also second the idea of encouraging more craftsmanship posts. Aside from being helpful, these are also more interesting to read (personally) than say a barrage of "help me improve by providing me critique please," or "I will critique your work" type of posts," while craftsmanship posts such as:

...have people share their knowledge about things like their experiences in hiring artists or what sort of unexpected problems they ran into when they made their game.

I believe, would be more encouraging since these are personal experiences from people actually making games, which other people who are making games can actually relate with.

I'd propose to the people who are active in here, who have the spare time from their game-making endeavors, to take the effort to actually make these types of posts more often. It would also add more credibility to any critique that you do offer if the individual receiving the critique sees that this person really does care about game-making and it's shown in these craftsmanship posts.

I've noticed that the threads that spark the most interest here are the controversial ones wherein people's various opinions clash (like this one) and it often degrades into a glorified flame-war where one side simply refuses to accept the other one's side (usually limited to 1-3 people posting back and forth) - except that it happens under an air of pseudo-civility, but with a lot of passive aggression from an onlooker's perspective.

While there are many things that one could possibly learn from these types of "debates," it can be a bit annoying to a passive observer's eyes if they happen much too often. One suggestion I'd make is to limit the back-and-forth posting to 2-3 posts by one individual on a given issue. I'm not suggesting this as a hard and fast rule, but rather, as a rule of thumb for the active posters in these types of discussions - I propose that you get all your points across as comprehensively as possible within these 2-3 posts.

which I define as giving an artist sincere and specific reasons why their work made you happy-- should be an honored part of the forum culture

This.

Perhaps, the critique-supporters haven't noticed it, but they have been implying for some time now based on their diction that critique = good, praise = bad. I won't try to support this with actual quotes, let's just say that's the impression I get after having distanced myself from these forums for some time.

[Jake]

A detailed critique provides artists with the means to improve their skills, but it's not the most effective way to motivate someone to produce more work. Direct praise is a far more powerful form of positive reinforcement. Knowing that your work made someone laugh, made them cry, made them think about the world in a new way, made them stay up all night reading your work, made them create art based on your work... that's a psychological kick of an entirely different magnitude. It's the difference between receiving a practical gift of socks and underwear for Christmas and receiving a pleasantly extravagant gift that you would have never considered buying for yourself.

Maybe I'm weird, but I stopped being excited about receiving pleasantly extravagant gifts around the age of 15, I think. And when I was 12 or 13, I stopped listening to my classmates who would tell me "you draw well, you're really good", because I knew that they didn't really mean that at all; I wasn't really any good, all they knew was that I could draw better than them, and if any of them put the year or so of practice in that I'd had, they could have done just as well. It's true that it's nice to find out that someone has really enjoyed something I've created, but I'm still happier when I finish something I'm happy with myself, which happens less often.

It seems to me that direct unfocused praise is a more powerful form of positive encouragement for some people, but those are generally the people who aren't really interested in improving. Good for them, they're happy where they are, but some of us aren't and don't just want people praising us, we want help and guidance and all that.

Again: nobody is calling for the forum to be critique-only. Those of us on the 'critique supporters' side, as Cloud puts it, aren't asking for people to be forced to accept critique or give critique or anything like that; we're asking for a part of the forum where critique is accepted, not discouraged, and where we can make it clear simply and easily that it's something we want.

What's the point of all that critique if the artist decides that the ratio of effort to reward isn't worth the trouble of creating another work?

Again: this is fine for an artist who gets their 'reward' in the form of people praising them. If that's what they're after, they're probably not after critique, so they don't have to post in a hypothetical critique forum.

Personally, I create stuff I want to myself, so I'm not going to stop because people don't tell me they like it... and I don't show my stuff around to get praise, I show my stuff around to get feedback as to what I could make better, what works and what doesn't, and so on. Which is why I barely show any art around on this forum, because this is a forum where people go into art threads and complain that this "isn't an art class" when someone's trying to give useful feedback.

I think that direct praise -- which I define as giving an artist sincere and specific reasons why their work made you happy-- should be an honored part of the forum culture.

And this I would totally agree with.

The point I get the impression you and Cloud are both missing (which is probably the reason he thinks that us 'critique supporters' are denigrating praise) is that this - sincere and specific reasons why an artist's work made you happy - is critique. Critique is "useful or analytical feedback", not "negative feedback, constructive or otherwise".

Praise is not critique if you just say "I really like this, it's awesome", but if you can say why you really like it, then it's equally as useful as saying why something didn't work in your opinion. And, equally, it's just an opinion, and the creator is equally free to ignore it or take it on board.

[Deji]

I think that direct praise -- which I define as giving an artist sincere and specific reasons why their work made you happy-- should be an honored part of the forum culture.

And this I would totally agree with.

The point I get the impression you and Cloud are both missing (which is probably the reason he thinks that us 'critique supporters' are denigrating praise) is that this - sincere and specific reasons why an artist's work made you happy - is critique. Critique is "useful or analytical feedback", not "negative feedback, constructive or otherwise".

Praise is not critique if you just say "I really like this, it's awesome", but if you can say why you really like it, then it's equally as useful as saying why something didn't work in your opinion. And, equally, it's just an opinion, and the creator is equally free to ignore it or take it on board.

This.
When we man critique, we mean just what Jake said: useful feedback.
Useful feedback not only covers what is "bad" or "wrong" that needs to be fixed in our work, it also includes what is "good" or "inspiring", "fun" etc! Knowing what you did right and why people like what you do is not only encouraging, but also helpful!

You may find that most critiques have more words dedicated to what could be fixed/improved than to say what's good, but that's because normally the person giving the critique is also trying to give advice and even instructions on how to fix/improve those things rather than just pointing them out.

[lordcloudx]

Clarification post:

The point I get the impression you and Cloud are both missing (which is probably the reason he thinks that us 'critique supporters' are denigrating praise) is that this - sincere and specific reasons why an artist's work made you happy - is critique. Critique is "useful or analytical feedback", not "negative feedback, constructive or otherwise".

No.

As I stated before, the reason that I think you, the critique supporters are denigrating praise is that you've demonstrated it multiple times from your diction. If it is, as you say, that citing sincere and specific reasons why an artist's work made you happy qualifies as critique in your criteria, then that simply means that you've been doing a poor job of showing it, in my book. Not that I don't believe you. I don't believe in anyone but myself, but that's just me being self-contradictory. I'm consciously insane that way.

- Which is why I made the suggestion of making more "craftsmanship posts," as Juxtaposition put it, that actually show people how much you care about game-making in particular. In my opinion, this would help your cause for more acceptance on forum critique rather than any structural changes. Remember that these are people inside this forum and not mindless drones. You can't suddenly force people to be "more accepting of critique," if the status quo, is, as you seem to perceive, that critique is not openly accepted. The rules may say one thing, the actual people frequenting the forums may do otherwise.

About diction, I get the impression from your last post, Jake, that you think that anything that is not useful = automatically bad (according to you). I think we've talked with each other quite a bit in the past and I know that this pragmatic attitude is probably a part of your personality, but when you seem to be speaking for a majority of the critique supporters, it gives me the impression that all of you think that way, and that what you are actually asking for in splitting the forums more is to separate the "elite people who actually have the desire to improve" from those who "are JUST hobbyists who have no desire to improve." This is all well and good, but it gives the wrong impression if LSF is indeed as open to all classes of creators as it purports to be

It's heavily insinuated that the people who are willing to improve are better than those who don't. Even the choice of words of "willing to improve" and "not willing to improve" gives off this impression. Yes, I'm suggesting using euphemisms if necessary so that you don't give off the impression that you are against one thing or another.

Then again, if you really want to lobby for structural changes, I'm not stopping you. I just think it will make the forum, which in my opinion, has already splintered into specific cliques, even more so - which is not very community-like, in my opinion.

You may find that most critiques have more words dedicated to what could be fixed/improved than to say what's good, but that's because normally the person giving the critique is also trying to give advice and even instructions on how to fix/improve those things rather than just pointing them out.

Perhaps individuality should be taken into account too, so that these self-improvement critiques that you are offering would be taken more openly.

For example, if you give me critique (I'm a hypocrite, yes), I believe I would be more open to it, albeit, I will try to defend my work as well, rather than some nubcake posting in these forums for the first time, whom you have had no prior contact with.

It depends a lot on the person taking the critique, (and any of his/her support groups) just how well they will take said critique. I don't believe that any structural changes will change their attitudes. However, getting to know them, before making any "harsher" critique might help. It's not sugarcoating; it's simple courtesy.

AGAIN, I know that someone will probably say that that's not how a creative community with pride works, but again, this is the LSF creative community, as someone else has stated (I believe Aleema?) and not any other community.

[Mirage]

It seems to me that direct unfocused praise is a more powerful form of positive encouragement for some people, but those are generally the people who aren't really interested in improving. Good for them, they're happy where they are, but some of us aren't and don't just want people praising us, we want help and guidance and all that.

Hmmm, I'm not sure where you get the idea that people who want praise generally don't want to improve. My teacher told me that what artists need the most is actually encouragement. In school, teachers usually tear their students work to pieces and show them the "reality" of art world. And what these teachers ended up doing is making their students lost all hope and the ability to enjoy the process of creating arts.

Why encouragement? Because I believe artists are their own worst critics. True artists rarely satisfied with what they have and always ended hating their own work. I always see this as unhealthy, because I'm sure many people started drawing because they enjoy it. Where did the joy go to?

I feel wrong that we lost this because we are in blind pursuit of improvement, because I believe that those that truly enjoy what they are doing will improve the fastest.

(I'm not against critics though lol)