One thing I’ve noticed as the forums have grown larger is feedback is rarer. I don’t believe this is a lack of feedback being given more so there are more posts and more who topics so you can post an update or a link and in a matter of hours its further down the page so feedback becomes further apart.
8 Likes
I’ve also found that the more “saves” are offered, the less feedback given as well.
1 Like
What do you mean by “saves”?
1 Like
Saves in the dashingdon demos
2 Likes
Ah literally meant saves…sorry its 1:46am here and I thought it was put in “” because it was something else lol
1 Like
I put saves in quotes because, usually, after updates, the saves are no good anyways, but it is a frequently requested feature and then you rarely see feedback based on multi-replays or alternative choices.
4 Likes
Kind of silly, since the vast majority of completed works don’t have saves.
The saves only serves to no single person will replay early chapters and see what changes everything so of course feedback become worse
I disagree, I think saves give you an incentive to try different routes that you wouldn’t normally try. For example, Diaspora is a long game, if I had to click through everything each time there are tons of routes I would have never have explored. All that no saves does is make me stay on the same linear path where I know the outcome or give up because I don’t want to click through everything.
For games like Wayhaven with no saves I generally only play once through each route and then go back and read through the code because the thought of clicking through the entire game again just to try a different dialogue option 2/3rds through is just exhausting.
Its even worse for games with premature deaths, at this point I won’t buy them.
22 Likes
Can we agree that the save system has changed the feedback process since being implemented more commonly?
Before, discussion of the various branches would occur within the thread as different people discovered differences provided by the choices, mechanics and changes made. In having that discussion, valuable feedback was provided to the author as they made their game. XoR is the poster-child of this.
Now, the common practice is to wait for an update, silently pick-up from where the author left off, make one or maybe two comments and then wait for the next update to pick up once more and repeat the cycle.
Sure, it lets the “tester” play a different path (or does it, if the tester only picks up where the last update left off?) and “experience the different choices available” but how much of this gets translated into actual feedback for the author?
I’m not saying the potential for greater feedback isn’t there. What I am saying is that prior to the save system being so popular, we had much more feedback on the games where people actually discussed the game.
Wayhaven is jumping with discussion about everything everyone discovers… the feedback gained by the author is a lot more …
14 Likes
In my opinion, it is a terrible idea as the author, because the reason an author makes the game public is for obtaining feedback to improve the final product and making the best game possible to publishing.
If you make up archetypes for an easy to use for testers… They won’t use the damn real intro with the damn real game balance. So their feedback will be pure useless
The betas now seem to be made for testers play free without giving zero input and games get released with an awful lot of bugs at the beginning of even the demos because no single tester do the damn debug testing anymore.
Sincerely, nowadays putting something in beta testing is at least for someone who is not popular like is my case, nothing useful and just a requirement for going to the queue.
Sorry, just curious, even though it’s out of topic;
What does it mean to be “popular” in this forum?
1 Like
I will say that saves are not all bad, they’re just a double-edged sword. They do lead to less feedback on early chapters. But they also likely lead to more and happier testers, because we have to remember them going through the early stuff over and over and over again is both time-consuming and ultimately monotonous no matter how well-written the story is, so saves do at least show the readers some respect and consideration in that regard. I can still definitely understand why some people do not use them, though.
21 Likes
I think this serie of messages should have their own thread as it is something really interesting and useful. My own view is radical and harsh about it probably because all my attempts of testing in a decade has ended in a critical burn failure with Absolutely Nobody giving feedback when i can see that people is entering in the games and reading them.
I have zero confidence in people is gona test my work I will do a beta because I am forced to do it but the utility will be as always zero.
1 Like
Saves are a godsend for when I’m testing. Quite often I’ll run over multiple branches or options in a set when testing (or bookmark the spot to go back to it) which allows me to test a lot more efficiently and thoughly than having to go back to the start each time in which case I’d probably run through it a couple of times at best and call it a day because of the extra time involved in testing individual parts.
The other thing I have a big problem with testing without save points is that if my internet glitches out (which it often does) or I leave the game to come back to as I get time here and there, it’ll often reboot and send me straight back to the start of the game which is super frustrating to the point that I often give up on testing long games that don’t have a save option.
Edit: I actually do get feedback on early parts of my games I’ve had up on here. The main downside to a save system is if I change stuff in early game, not everyone will go back at the end and test those parts. From a tester happiness POV I think it’s invaluable though and the pros usually outweigh the cons unless you’re dealing with a short game that it’s not big deal to start again.
25 Likes
As an author or reader, have you observed any changes in the CoG community? Has it grown over the years (in taste or in size)? Is the interactive novel niche as a whole going somewhere?
Certainly in size. There are a lot more people on the forum and reading/buying the books that there were a few years ago.
And as more and more people worldwide get into the habit of reading on a smartphone, there’s no reason that interactive novels shouldn’t grow to become a much bigger, less niche, market than they are today. It’s just a matter of making people aware of what’s here.
CoG’s expanded the market over the past year by linking itself to the VtM/World of Darkness fanbase. Getting the right IP deals can continue to bring new people into the interactive novel fold. It could really be turbocharged by some big deal with e.g. Marvel or the Potterverse (unlikely in CoG’s case due to acute values clash with Rowling, I know). But even less world-bestriding IPs could make a significant difference.
27 Likes
If COG should have any one more publisher to work with beyond WOD I would go with Bethesda. Heck I have a storyline for Fallout I would love to turn into a gamebook some day… 
Definitely would love to see games for Marvel though, especially my boy Spider-Man with his various romances or the X-Men with your own mutant OC.
3 Likes
You don’t want Disney’s grubby hands on CoG, trust me
16 Likes
I would rather avoid any established characters and interaction with them.
I have severe aversion to what my brain perceives as fanfiction.
6 Likes