Dealing with criticism (aspiring VN creator)

[LiamExe]

I'm all for constructive criticism on things, since I feel it helps me grow as a writer and such, and I always make sure to listen to what people have to say.

But, I guess it's the less constructive criticism that sort of just turns to hate, or being pointlessly mean about stuff that scares me from taking the plunge and putting my stuff out for the world to see. I'm hoping one day I can just push past that and take the final step. I guess it's just in my tendency to worry about this sort of stuff, even though I know it's impossible to please everyone, and that there's always going to be some people that will no doubt not like what you're doing.

Though, I think, even in the supposedly 'destructive' criticism, there's probably still things to be learned, if you look past all the hate and see what it is they might be ranting about. Obviously it wouldn't apply to all of it though, like with 'lol sucks' comments.

[champignonkinoko]

Just gotta learn to take it on the chin. Nobody likes getting bad feedback about their stuff, but its something you'll have to deal with because as long as you're doing something creative, people will always have opinions on it. Good and bad. Criticism is like getting a present from a stranger, you just accept it at the time and then afterwards, if its good you keep it and if not throw it away.

I've learnt a new phrase and I'm liking it! [take it on the chin]
After sleeping on the criticism, I realised it's done more good than damage thanks to taking opinions from the lemmasoft community. So this present called criticism- I'll exchange it at the pawn shop for money I suppose?

That being said, there is ALMOST no such thing as bad feedback, and it is ultimately up to you what you want to do with it. Even the "most destructive" comment can result in a better end result, especially if some anons are hyperspecific about what they think will cripple your ego or ability to produce artwork. (obviously "you suck" is generic and unhelpful as you can get)
tl;dr: Either ignore it or try to refine criticism from the lemons you get.

I think if they were hyperspecific it would've been better, and it would've been negative but constructive feedback. You made a good point about refining criticism from the lemons I get! That I'll try

...But with that said, I also agree with RotGtIE that you should not label any criticism that's unflattering as destructive.

It's made clear to me by now that I did not understand what "destructive criticism" meant. I thought of it as an antonym to constructive criticism. In my head, destructive criticism = A criticism that is negative and unhelpful. Fixed that in the topic & initial post Thanks.

If you're posting early screenshots JUST to show art and absolutely don't want to reveal any plot at all, you're probably better off having the text say "Ipsum dolor" or "I am speaking in placeholder" or something to make it clear to the viewer that this isn't real dialogue and they shouldn't be evaluating it on those terms. Or even fake dialogue that's entertaining somehow. What you don't want to do is get the viewer setting up an instinctive mental connection between your game and boredom.

Thanks for the "Ipsum Dolor" tip. :] Whoa, but setting up an instinctive mental connection with boredom, that's definitely not something I want. I'll need to really think about the dialogues now.

Champignonkinoko, you should see a criticism as something which can't be destructive.
Why ? Because it's aimed not at you, but at your work, something that can be done and redone again if necessary.
Your story is never "destructed" as long as you still want to carry on.

You're right, the work can be redone, and that's what I'll be working on

For your second question, yes some of them are a bit strange, like the character going "...". I think screenshots should showcase the best of your game, they are marketing after all.
However I don't think the art is poor. Yeah some free VNs could have better art but that's a totally unfair comparison, since there are probably only a few free VN's with very high quality art.

Dialogue: Yes, I agree that I need to fix this! But this will take a while, I have placed writing fixes to the end of my timeline. Maybe I need to fix my timeline.
Art: Thanks, I have posted something on the art section looking for feedback now: http://lemmasoft.renai.us/forums/viewto ... 46&t=29503

I had to thank that guy. At first I had thought that writing a romantic story with the look and feel of a horror story was a good idea.
He showed me some horror fans would not agree.

You're the first person who showed me the example of negative feedback you received! Convincing me fully that I'm not alone on this, and that's very much appreciated! I'm beginning to understand now that having no feedback is worse, because it won't make you stop and think about where you could improve things.

1. Never ignore criticism.
2. Knowing when something is good enough is difficult.
3. Without that feedback I wouldn't have improved myself. If people just said my stuff was alright from the start, I'd have a hard time believing them when nobody comments on the game at release time.
4. Some VNs are just badly made, and people who inform you of what they don't like are doing it as a courtesy to help you make it better.
5. So I would suggest you use this experience to help you next time.

Thanks Kinjo, you've written a lot of good stuff so I will be addressing them one by one...
1. I think some criticisms can be ignored if it does nothing but damage. In the case of the ones I mentioned, I will not ignore them. While they aren't the most constructive criticisms out there, they could help me with developing the game.
2. I definitely agree with this point!
3. Again, a good point I agree with. Especially like "I'd have a hard time believing....at release time"
4. So far on lemmasoft forums, I do think when most people comment on games, it is courtesy. I don't think this is true elsewhere though. Sometimes criticisms are given by critics just to let it out of their system. But this does not change the fact that their criticisms could be useful.
5. Thanks for the advice. I'd be using this experience for next time.

There's nothing I can say that hasn't already been said, but I can add more emphasis to the part about being thick skinned as a creator and sometime just outright ignore comments.

Thanks! Short, sweet, straight to the point and more importantly, true.

But, I guess it's the less constructive criticism that sort of just turns to hate, or being pointlessly mean about stuff that scares me from taking the plunge and putting my stuff out for the world to see. I'm hoping one day I can just push past that and take the final step. I guess it's just in my tendency to worry about this sort of stuff, even though I know it's impossible to please everyone, and that there's always going to be some people that will no doubt not like what you're doing.

So true. It does scare me a little that anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack. I guess if we want to improve ourselves. that's a fact we can't change (or at least it is unlikely that we can).

[Caveat Lector]

It does scare me a little that anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack.

Me too! I'm of the unpopular opinion that this should be changed, but YMMV. Back on topic.

[TrickWithAKnife]

In an ideal world all criticism would be constructive, but that's extremely unlikely.

We need to filter the noise from the signal.
Sometimes people have valid points, but they're obscured by vitriol and posturing.
Some criticism will be completely irrelevant.

Pick and choose what you think is useful.

Try not to take the negative stuff personally (easier said than done, I know), and take note of what people responded positively to.

With time and practice it gets easier.

EDIT: I guess I just summarised what others have already said. No apologies!

[SundownKid]

It does scare me a little that anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack.

Me too! I'm of the unpopular opinion that this should be changed, but YMMV. Back on topic.

I think anonymous trolls suck, as do most people. But I would rather have anonymous trolls than force non-anonymity. That would make it way too easy to impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts.

[Caveat Lector]

It does scare me a little that anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack.

Me too! I'm of the unpopular opinion that this should be changed, but YMMV. Back on topic.

I think anonymous trolls suck, as do most people. But I would rather have anonymous trolls than force non-anonymity. That would make it way too easy to impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts.

What? How and why exactly would asking someone to sign in if they want to say something...impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts?

[MaiMai]

I think anonymous trolls suck, as do most people. But I would rather have anonymous trolls than force non-anonymity. That would make it way too easy to impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts.

What? How and why exactly would asking someone to sign in if they want to say something...impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts?

Orwellian is a huge exaggeration in my opinion, but there would be less people who would be willing to give feedback without the veil of anonymity. Anonymity in itself makes people feel as if they can be more explicitly honest without having to take responsibility of direct (so to speak) feedback.

That being said, as someone who has participated in or read anonymous comments, it's not as if being anon isn't its own echo chamber. Either way, there is a huge bias in terms of thought, identity or none (c'mon look at 4chan)

[Kinjo]

Thanks Kinjo, you've written a lot of good stuff so I will be addressing them one by one...
1. I think some criticisms can be ignored if it does nothing but damage. In the case of the ones I mentioned, I will not ignore them. While they aren't the most constructive criticisms out there, they could help me with developing the game.
2. I definitely agree with this point!
3. Again, a good point I agree with. Especially like "I'd have a hard time believing....at release time"
4. So far on lemmasoft forums, I do think when most people comment on games, it is courtesy. I don't think this is true elsewhere though. Sometimes criticisms are given by critics just to let it out of their system. But this does not change the fact that their criticisms could be useful.
5. Thanks for the advice. I'd be using this experience for next time.

Yeah, I agree with you. I always try to avoid making generalizations (no pun intended) but I would say it's better to accept too much criticism than to ignore too much of it. You can always read the criticism, think about it for a while, and then decide it's not something you want to change. Just getting your mind thinking about new things is the part that some people get stuck on, because they don't open up to criticism of their work. If someone is simply insulting you, then it should probably be ignored (as in, don't respond to it) so as to not feed the trolls. But it's difficult to distinguish insults from criticism sometimes, so that's why I said "never".

[RotGtIE]

What? How and why exactly would asking someone to sign in if they want to say something...impose an Orwellian control over people's thoughts?

If someone told you that you were welcome to share your opinion with them only after you first shared your real name, home address, and place of work with them in a public space, what would you conclude about their intentions?

[Caveat Lector]

Um...I haven't seen any kind of public commenting sphere that forces you to hand over your home address and place of work. Just a registered username or FaceBook account. Or twitter account. Or any kind of account.

(If we're talking about news sites that ask for a subscription for you to comment--they don't, or aren't supposed to, publicly publish your address or anything like that; that information is usually kept private for the company's benefit.)

Maybe a username doesn't necessarily guarantee you're going to be honest with any info about yourself you choose to give out or be any less vicious, but it's better than giving people a chance to be vicious anonymously. Back on topic...

Something else came to mind about dealing with criticism, from my experience: Sometimes, even if the harsh bit of criticism does help in the long run and you later find yourself agreeing with it, you're going to feel "attacked" even if you actually weren't. You're going to feel defensive. You're going to either self-reason that the critic was being irrational, or interpret the comment as "YOU FAIL AT EVERYTHING". And you know what? That's okay. It's okay to feel affronted even if the comment wasn't meant to be an attack. We all have a right to our feelings.

However, in that case, it's probably best to resist the temptation to immediately reply to a comment while you're still feeling affronted. It's best to step away for a short while, maybe a few hours or days, and give yourself space to calm down and breathe. Don't pull off a "Candace Sams" and threaten to unleash the FBI onto your critic for just saying "I don't like this book". Once you feel a bit calmer, you can reply if you wish to either defend yourself or try to see eye-to-eye with the critic.

tl;dr: It's okay to feel offended even if the comment wasn't attacking you, just don't go overboard and give yourself enough room to breathe and think before responding.

[MaiMai]

If someone told you that you were welcome to share your opinion with them only after you first shared your real name, home address, and place of work with them in a public space, what would you conclude about their intentions?

Yeaaah, that's not quite how it works on the Internet. Even without the "Anon" aspect, you still have a username to go by so no one's asking for those things you mentioned. In spaces like Tumblr, people go anonymous so that other users won't send them nasty messages when they comment on a post using their url.

Now, having a username makes it EASIER to track someone down by internet sleuthing, so is that what you meant?

[Enigma]

It does scare me a little that anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack.

Me too! I'm of the unpopular opinion that this should be changed, but YMMV. Back on topic.

Just gonna point out that it's the way this response to the quote above is worded is what has people confused. It reads like"no anonymity" which is a lot different than saying "have a username". A username is still pretty anonymous IMO and I know at least I myself have never been deterred from speaking my mind by having one, and on most sites I use the same username (this is an exception because I made this account before I made that handle for myself) then again I don't try to troll people and my most contentious opinions tend to be talking game balance so maybe I'd care if I were more maliciou, but that's my two cents on this topic (sub topic?) and I'mma stop derailing.

[RotGtIE]

Now, having a username makes it EASIER to track someone down by internet sleuthing, so is that what you meant?

What I meant was that it is not an exaggeration to suggest that the desire to hold people accountable for freely offered words of criticism is an Orwellian one. Especially when the imagery used to describe that critic's anonymity is that of a shield. This imposes a dark implication: what exactly did that person need anonymity to shield himself from?

When statements of intent like that are being thrown around and seconded, the situation calls for a much-needed prescription of chill pills. Because if the goal is to never receive any criticism ever again, then veiled threats of that nature are a great way to accomplish it.

[champignonkinoko]

Here I come meddling with the debate even though no one asked Sorry, just itching to reply...

What I meant was that it is not an exaggeration to suggest that the desire to hold people accountable for freely offered words of criticism is an Orwellian one. Especially when the imagery used to describe that critic's anonymity is that of a shield. This imposes a dark implication: what exactly did that person need anonymity to shield himself from?

Hi RotGtIE! To address this, let's bring up the sentence again... "Anyone can hide behind the shield of anonymity to launch an attack."
Anonymity is only a shield when the person using it is launching an attack. The sentence is to be read as a whole. If bits and pieces are picked out it will be misunderstood.

When statements of intent like that are being thrown around and seconded, the situation calls for a much-needed prescription of chill pills. Because if the goal is to never receive any criticism ever again, then veiled threats of that nature are a great way to accomplish it.

Whose goal is this? And what exactly is the threat?

[Caveat Lector]

Anonymity is only a shield when the person using it is launching an attack. The sentence is to be read as a whole. If bits and pieces are picked out it will be misunderstood.

Yes, exactly! I can completely understand someone wanting to remain anonymous if they are terrified of being sent death threats for speaking out against, say, an unwise government decision or a major controversy. It's people who use anonymity to attack others (or send said death threats) that I am against--which has happened far too often than it should.

Whose goal is this? And what exactly is the threat?

It's the threat to spam this topic with pictures of bunnies with pancakes on their head.