Hi there! Thank you kindly for your review. We appreciate your feedback.
A bit of friendly feedback: you noted 15 problems (5x3), but there are actually 21 in total, so you may want to fix that. Second, you are 100% correct about the lack of inherent replay value, though I do think it's worth mentioning this type of game is more enjoyable if you play with someone else or watch someone else play. Unfortunately, I can't say much regarding the comparisons to Brain Age as they are very different games at very different price points, but we're grateful for you sharing your thoughts.
Most importantly, however, I am very concerned about your reports that the multiplayer is not working. It goes without saying that both our development team and Nintendo run many tests to make sure they work properly, and we found no problems with them in the final build, so if you have any time, I'd really like to get any kind of details on what happened. You can contact us on our site, on Twitter, or directly at admin [AT] xenohorizon [DOT] com—of course, we understand you have no obligation to help us, but if you can afford the time, we'd sincerely appreciate your cooperation.
@Quorthon I figured as much, I was just sort of pointing it out from an objective standpoint. I have nothing to gain by being slighted by anything, truths and constructive criticism the least of all.
As far as first impressions go: given the extremely limited audience my game has reached, I'm not particularly worried. I also like to think that people can judge a game on it's own worth, and not based on the developer's. Nintendo is famed as a great developer but they make bad games sometimes and companies that receive a lot of hate for their games (like Ubisoft recently) also put out good games. In my case, if I ever do make a hit, most of the people who play it will have never heard of XenoHorizon, haha.
Thanks for explaining the importance of meetings. As someone who hasn't gone to them, I can't pretend to fully understand their benefits. Like I said, it's not something that's possible for me right now due to various reasons (not just the obvious ones like "nothing is close"), but if my circumstances ever change, I will certainly keep my mind open to it.
Ah, fair enough (your "point" and all). I understand your concerns and on a side note, I agree about mobile.
I'd like to think my approach was/is similar to yours, but just isn't quite successful on various accounts, mostly due to my own shortcomings. Again, there's not much I can say here except that I intend to keep trying to improve. Actions speak louder than words, but in game development, it takes a long time for actions to come to fruition.
As gamers first, we like to focus on the gameplay first, though as I mentioned before, ATU fell short in that people found it too hard and unapproachable. Making the gameplay simple and easy to get into, but also have a layer of depth and the ability to be more than just a basic interactive experience, is something that will be a major focal point for the design of our bigger projects. (In some games, the gameplay is simple and straightforward without, and that's just how some games are—that isn't necessarily bad.)
Glad to hear you're open to people striving to make use of what they have. Honestly, if I were just in it to make money and not because I actually enjoy game development, forget making a clone of some game or something, I could have just gone into another business entirely. Most of us have visions of beautiful games we want to make, but the journey to making those a reality is tougher than most people out of the industry have any idea... and perhaps isn't for everyone. But like I said, I won't give up without trying first. If it's still not for me, consumers will let me know by not buying my games, and I'll respectfully walk out at that time.
I'll definitely keep an open mind and look out for any opportunities in my area. Just wanted to let you know your words haven't fallen on deaf ears: I may not be able to do a 360 and launch a game that scores 70 on Metacritic next, but I'm not content with putting out games that people are... well—to be blunt—disgusted at, either.
Lastly, thanks for the good luck wish and have a great weekend.
@Quorthon I'll answer paragraph by paragraph, since this is long. First, I understand what you mean. Again, we didn't mean to do that: I would have scratched the game and not released it if I didn't think it was fun (even if that meant losing even more money). But I think my biggest failure here (as the main person responsible in the team) is that I didn't refine and polish the game-play enough for it to be fun to everyone. (That and the graphics, despite being done by a professional, weren't very... enticing.)
Gotcha.
1. I understand. Some quality control (on Nintendo's part, probably) is needed, but at the same time it does hurt potential for developers. This is a bit arrogant of me to say, but I do think I have potential to make fun and successful games, but if I'm not selfish in trying to work my way up to that point, I'll never have the opportunity. In short, Nintendo is giving people opportunities, and there's going to be good and bad about that.
2. You bring up a good point. People want to start with something super small, sell a bit, then make enough money to make something better, etc., again in my case it wasn't my intention to do that because then I'd have just made a clone of some more popular game that would safely make money instead of going for a idea that ended up not scoring with critics (and to some extent, consumers) and losing money. Now, I know you already said you're not necessarily speaking about me here, but I feel the need to take what I can from criticisms, directed towards me or not.
In this case, I think I should go with the mentality of not just finishing a working game with a fair amount of content, getting it out there, and adjusting the price so it fits, but trying to make every game a great game AND making sure the price is good. Which is really tough and is partially why people fail: we don't have the funds, the experience, etc. to do things like that, which is why people are either unsuccessful in finishing a game at all, or they release games that end up... well, not being that good in the eyes of the public.
In response to IGDA: I'm aware of it, but it's not accessible to me. In fact, there's nothing around here that's really accessible to me, so going to conventions or meet-ups or whatever isn't an option, and that's just how it is. I'm sure one opinion is that someone who doesn't have various resources available to them shouldn't be trying to do this in the first place, but I don't like that mentality as I'm not one to give up just because I'm at a disadvantage: I'd rather make up for it with my own hard work, even if it takes longer or the end result is a little less than I'd like. If I keep trying and I keep failing, then fine, I can take a hint, but I won't let just one or two failures stop me.
I actually consider ideas/creativity my strong point, so it's funny you say that, haha. I try not to humor most ideas (on account of actually getting work done) so I only have half a dozen at most and I only work on a couple at once (at various stages of work). Also, I've been taking steps to improve my... work situation. I'm afraid there's little else I can say here. Your words are harsh and condescending in the sense that they show no faith in one's ability to improve and grow, but I appreciate what appears to be concern and willingness to share your own experiences if nothing else.
I don't expect congratulations just for releasing something, haha. It sounds as if though you think I may feel bad that I "worked so hard and long on my own only to get crushed", but that's not the case. Like I said before, I'm not really blaming anyone else or being offended or anything. I -am- a professional, I can and will take critique and move on according to my best judgment. ATU is just one game, and XenoHorizon's first one at that. Nintendo Life's score is just from one review, a review by a very specific individual based on a vague scale with vague criteria (no offense to NL, it's just like most reviewer's scales/rating systems: it is pretty much assigning an arbitrary value to their personal judgment of the game as the gaming industry, unlike other industries, does not have a proper and effective system for critically reviewing games).
Honestly, I'm not sure what the point of your post was, but I tried to be respectful and respond to everything, haha. Note that anything said here was not thought on very hard and should not be quoted as a representation of XenoHorizon's opinion. If anything, it's just my own thoughts as a member of XH at this time, and little more, and they are subject to change as I grow both as a developer and a person.
If you wish to discuss further, please feel free to contact us on our website. (I don't believe linking to a specific site or e-mail would be a good idea as sites usually frown on that for various reasons, e.g. it being considered advertisement.) Again, thank you for taking the time out to share your thoughts and experiences, and best of luck to you in your own endeavors.
@Quorthon I can't speak for any other developers here, but the update wasn't something we intended to put out from the beginning to fix issues we knew were there. We mostly used feedback that we didn't get during pre-release feedback tests.
Also, we weren't expecting high sales, but despite this game being a budget game, we did still put a lot into it. Just to put things into perspective, we didn't even make up like, 25% of the costs, not including the cost for the dev kit. That's our fault though and we get that. We mentioned the sales as reasoning for not supporting it any further when the game still has a lot of room for improvement: normally, companies might not support a game/series at all if it doesn't sell, but we put out a basic update anyway instead of just focusing on new and better projects. This is the best we can justify.
The sales are completely reasonable and justified (just look at the review scores) and we're not blaming anyone but ourselves. I do hope that people don't misunderstand that.
Anyway, thank you for your time and sorry if we frustrate you, but it is never our intention to release a "bad" game. I certainly hope no developer ever intends that.
@thaantman The changes are actually not very big. If you trust Nintendo Life's original review, then I honestly can't say the game will be any different than what they made it out to be. But for people who happen to pick it up regardless, we hope the game is slightly more approachable and enjoyable. That's all.
Comments 6
Re: Review: Test Your Mind (Wii U eShop)
Hi there! Thank you kindly for your review. We appreciate your feedback.
A bit of friendly feedback: you noted 15 problems (5x3), but there are actually 21 in total, so you may want to fix that. Second, you are 100% correct about the lack of inherent replay value, though I do think it's worth mentioning this type of game is more enjoyable if you play with someone else or watch someone else play. Unfortunately, I can't say much regarding the comparisons to Brain Age as they are very different games at very different price points, but we're grateful for you sharing your thoughts.
Most importantly, however, I am very concerned about your reports that the multiplayer is not working. It goes without saying that both our development team and Nintendo run many tests to make sure they work properly, and we found no problems with them in the final build, so if you have any time, I'd really like to get any kind of details on what happened. You can contact us on our site, on Twitter, or directly at admin [AT] xenohorizon [DOT] com—of course, we understand you have no obligation to help us, but if you can afford the time, we'd sincerely appreciate your cooperation.
Best,
XenoHorizon
Re: Update For Arrow Time U Improves Overall Game Experience
@Quorthon I figured as much, I was just sort of pointing it out from an objective standpoint. I have nothing to gain by being slighted by anything, truths and constructive criticism the least of all.
As far as first impressions go: given the extremely limited audience my game has reached, I'm not particularly worried. I also like to think that people can judge a game on it's own worth, and not based on the developer's. Nintendo is famed as a great developer but they make bad games sometimes and companies that receive a lot of hate for their games (like Ubisoft recently) also put out good games. In my case, if I ever do make a hit, most of the people who play it will have never heard of XenoHorizon, haha.
Thanks for explaining the importance of meetings. As someone who hasn't gone to them, I can't pretend to fully understand their benefits. Like I said, it's not something that's possible for me right now due to various reasons (not just the obvious ones like "nothing is close"), but if my circumstances ever change, I will certainly keep my mind open to it.
Ah, fair enough (your "point" and all). I understand your concerns and on a side note, I agree about mobile.
I'd like to think my approach was/is similar to yours, but just isn't quite successful on various accounts, mostly due to my own shortcomings. Again, there's not much I can say here except that I intend to keep trying to improve. Actions speak louder than words, but in game development, it takes a long time for actions to come to fruition.
As gamers first, we like to focus on the gameplay first, though as I mentioned before, ATU fell short in that people found it too hard and unapproachable. Making the gameplay simple and easy to get into, but also have a layer of depth and the ability to be more than just a basic interactive experience, is something that will be a major focal point for the design of our bigger projects. (In some games, the gameplay is simple and straightforward without, and that's just how some games are—that isn't necessarily bad.)
Glad to hear you're open to people striving to make use of what they have. Honestly, if I were just in it to make money and not because I actually enjoy game development, forget making a clone of some game or something, I could have just gone into another business entirely. Most of us have visions of beautiful games we want to make, but the journey to making those a reality is tougher than most people out of the industry have any idea... and perhaps isn't for everyone. But like I said, I won't give up without trying first. If it's still not for me, consumers will let me know by not buying my games, and I'll respectfully walk out at that time.
I'll definitely keep an open mind and look out for any opportunities in my area. Just wanted to let you know your words haven't fallen on deaf ears: I may not be able to do a 360 and launch a game that scores 70 on Metacritic next, but I'm not content with putting out games that people are... well—to be blunt—disgusted at, either.
Lastly, thanks for the good luck wish and have a great weekend.
Re: Update For Arrow Time U Improves Overall Game Experience
@Quorthon I'll answer paragraph by paragraph, since this is long. First, I understand what you mean. Again, we didn't mean to do that: I would have scratched the game and not released it if I didn't think it was fun (even if that meant losing even more money). But I think my biggest failure here (as the main person responsible in the team) is that I didn't refine and polish the game-play enough for it to be fun to everyone. (That and the graphics, despite being done by a professional, weren't very... enticing.)
Gotcha.
1. I understand. Some quality control (on Nintendo's part, probably) is needed, but at the same time it does hurt potential for developers. This is a bit arrogant of me to say, but I do think I have potential to make fun and successful games, but if I'm not selfish in trying to work my way up to that point, I'll never have the opportunity. In short, Nintendo is giving people opportunities, and there's going to be good and bad about that.
2. You bring up a good point. People want to start with something super small, sell a bit, then make enough money to make something better, etc., again in my case it wasn't my intention to do that because then I'd have just made a clone of some more popular game that would safely make money instead of going for a idea that ended up not scoring with critics (and to some extent, consumers) and losing money. Now, I know you already said you're not necessarily speaking about me here, but I feel the need to take what I can from criticisms, directed towards me or not.
In this case, I think I should go with the mentality of not just finishing a working game with a fair amount of content, getting it out there, and adjusting the price so it fits, but trying to make every game a great game AND making sure the price is good. Which is really tough and is partially why people fail: we don't have the funds, the experience, etc. to do things like that, which is why people are either unsuccessful in finishing a game at all, or they release games that end up... well, not being that good in the eyes of the public.
In response to IGDA: I'm aware of it, but it's not accessible to me. In fact, there's nothing around here that's really accessible to me, so going to conventions or meet-ups or whatever isn't an option, and that's just how it is. I'm sure one opinion is that someone who doesn't have various resources available to them shouldn't be trying to do this in the first place, but I don't like that mentality as I'm not one to give up just because I'm at a disadvantage: I'd rather make up for it with my own hard work, even if it takes longer or the end result is a little less than I'd like. If I keep trying and I keep failing, then fine, I can take a hint, but I won't let just one or two failures stop me.
I actually consider ideas/creativity my strong point, so it's funny you say that, haha. I try not to humor most ideas (on account of actually getting work done) so I only have half a dozen at most and I only work on a couple at once (at various stages of work). Also, I've been taking steps to improve my... work situation. I'm afraid there's little else I can say here. Your words are harsh and condescending in the sense that they show no faith in one's ability to improve and grow, but I appreciate what appears to be concern and willingness to share your own experiences if nothing else.
I don't expect congratulations just for releasing something, haha. It sounds as if though you think I may feel bad that I "worked so hard and long on my own only to get crushed", but that's not the case. Like I said before, I'm not really blaming anyone else or being offended or anything. I -am- a professional, I can and will take critique and move on according to my best judgment. ATU is just one game, and XenoHorizon's first one at that. Nintendo Life's score is just from one review, a review by a very specific individual based on a vague scale with vague criteria (no offense to NL, it's just like most reviewer's scales/rating systems: it is pretty much assigning an arbitrary value to their personal judgment of the game as the gaming industry, unlike other industries, does not have a proper and effective system for critically reviewing games).
Honestly, I'm not sure what the point of your post was, but I tried to be respectful and respond to everything, haha. Note that anything said here was not thought on very hard and should not be quoted as a representation of XenoHorizon's opinion. If anything, it's just my own thoughts as a member of XH at this time, and little more, and they are subject to change as I grow both as a developer and a person.
If you wish to discuss further, please feel free to contact us on our website. (I don't believe linking to a specific site or e-mail would be a good idea as sites usually frown on that for various reasons, e.g. it being considered advertisement.) Again, thank you for taking the time out to share your thoughts and experiences, and best of luck to you in your own endeavors.
Re: Update For Arrow Time U Improves Overall Game Experience
@Quorthon I can't speak for any other developers here, but the update wasn't something we intended to put out from the beginning to fix issues we knew were there. We mostly used feedback that we didn't get during pre-release feedback tests.
Also, we weren't expecting high sales, but despite this game being a budget game, we did still put a lot into it. Just to put things into perspective, we didn't even make up like, 25% of the costs, not including the cost for the dev kit. That's our fault though and we get that. We mentioned the sales as reasoning for not supporting it any further when the game still has a lot of room for improvement: normally, companies might not support a game/series at all if it doesn't sell, but we put out a basic update anyway instead of just focusing on new and better projects. This is the best we can justify.
The sales are completely reasonable and justified (just look at the review scores) and we're not blaming anyone but ourselves. I do hope that people don't misunderstand that.
Anyway, thank you for your time and sorry if we frustrate you, but it is never our intention to release a "bad" game. I certainly hope no developer ever intends that.
Re: Update For Arrow Time U Improves Overall Game Experience
@Zodiak13 Thank you for the perhaps undeserved bit of kindness and understanding.
Re: Update For Arrow Time U Improves Overall Game Experience
@thaantman The changes are actually not very big. If you trust Nintendo Life's original review, then I honestly can't say the game will be any different than what they made it out to be. But for people who happen to pick it up regardless, we hope the game is slightly more approachable and enjoyable. That's all.