Putting negative reviews on a KS page

Reviewers don't usually do game iterations. It is your responsibility for providing a product for their review and then "state" on your KS page or whatever the steps taken to "rectify a problem"...

It's not the reviewer who will re-evaluate the game, it's your backers.

For example, my Game Sets that were sent to reviewers had more "types" of cards. Then we realized that duplicate cards are good because with less it's easier to recognize the cards. Plus the time taken to produce artwork would be reduced.

So while the reviewer copies were different, the game is the same. You still play the same way you would.

I suggest you do the same, publicly state that the game is different in these "X" ways: A> We modified A, B> We added B, C> We removed C, etc. With a BIG warning that we modified "Y" because a reviewer felt this was an issue with the game.

That's personally as far as I would go. You're not hiding the matter. All I am saying is that there is a way to say how you've "fixed" your game from the reviewer copies. This might inspire more confidence than linking the actual "bad press".

Anyways best of luck with your game.

Update: I thought it was a "written" review. Video reviews will be harder to "ignore" or try to fly "under the radar"... Best thing to do is maybe "kill time"... Wait some time - to show that you took the time to make changes, improve on the graphic art, re-balance what was not correct, etc. And then playtest like crap and then do some more blind playtests.

This way you can say: "Yes we did get a negative review - but we spent "Z" months to address as many of the concerns as possible and we feel that we have a better game thanks to the critical review..." Something diplomatic at best.

Update #2: The only problem I see with the review is what the "components" look like: "He didn't like the board, nor the character sheets, nor the mission cards." You're going to have to review these aspects because they are very "visual". You can't get away from this - especially if you KS it. You're going to have to either go beyond your own personal boundaries and produce better looking components or hire someone to do a face-lift.

I know #2 is hard to accept... But if you do get a better looking game (and I'm not critiquing - I'm just referring to the reviewer) - which is relative - you might have to spend a few bucks. See what can be done - discuss it with a couple Graphic Artists, make up digital samples and have the GAs respond with how they could improve it...

Just let me write the negative review, and then nothing else anyone says could possibly look any worse. I.e. "Just when I opened the box, the phone rang. It was William Gibson calling to ask for his toilet paper back." Then, you and I can have a boxing match to prove whose opinion is better, like Uwe Boll did with his critics. I'll throw the match, and viola!

If it's that YouTube video review then just dub over the audio so that there is a drum beat every time he wags those frantically gesticulating arms of his. The guy reminds me of a Mitchell and Webb sketch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwAioN2mtsA

Put your negative reviews in the designer's notes section of the KS with a discussion of how you changed or improved it since then. Make clear that he was reviewing a prototype. Don't put it on your front page. Keep that positive, because I imagine that most people are too lazy to read more than excerpts of reviews and very few people will sit through a video review.

It kind of would be fun to do Triumph the Talking Insult Dog style reviews of products as a promotional. More like a roast than a review, and I bet it would go over very well. I'll be doing something like that for the game I'm working on. The example of play video is going to have everyone hating it, just like the game play examples in the book, which always end with "I hate this game."

Sorry, used the wrong terms. Don't put it in the list of excerpts on your campaign page. Save it as part of an update in the updates tab. If someone mentions it then you can point to it and how you went into depth there addressing the reviewer's concerns. Backer updates are where you blog about how the game as improved and the hurdles you've overcome. The project's campaign page is just the good news and self promotion.

I see you've decided not to follow the advice about not showing all the stretch-goals from the get-go?

The new captions look neat.

Consider replacing the photo of the game on the table.

Regarding the photo itself - take an image on either black or white background. Preferably cut out anything which is not a game component (i.e. do not show your table on the image).

It is better to take multiple photos if you can't fit everything in one shot.

Ideally, ask some friend who is into photography to help you out.

Are the components shown the ones you are going to start the campaign with?
I would suggest to redo the design of the board, cards and character sheets and then take a new photo.

Yup. I approve of openness.

I think I expressed myself poorly before. What I meant to say was more that the review suggests (to me) that the game is unfinished.

If the game changes to address those criticisms, then you probably don't need to make a big thing about this review, though acknowledging it somewhere (even if it is in an update) and saying that the game has been "fixed" would be worthwhile. However, where does that leave your other reviews? They are now not of the final game.

It's good that these things have been caught, but it's a pity it took a reviewer to tell you and not a playtester.

The biggest downer I see here is that you have used up this reviewer; I don't imagine you would be able to persuade him to redo, unless you can figure out the correct number of beers to buy to jump ahead of the rest of his review queue.

I agree with the recommendation to let a decent amount of time pass... Who cares if some early prototype got a bad review? A delay would also allow more playtesting.

What struck me in the negative review was the possibility that the game did not offer a lot of meaningful decisions. That could entirely be the reviewer's fault, for not discussing the decisions thrown up, but it would concern me as a potential backer. I think the game's strategic/tactical decisions need to be emphasized to offset the impression created in the video.

I think there is also some confusion about what you should be asking from "Reviewers". Since this is a for a Kickstarter (I believe?) well then you should be asking for a "KS Preview". This is a short video explaining/showing the game's components (like an unboxing), a introduction to what the game is all about, a short how-to play, and maybe a quick comment about the game.

"Reviews" are reserved mostly for games that have already been released.

Once you get a couple "KS Previews" under your belt and your game is known to more people, then you might consider a "Review" (which is generally an opinion about the game according to the reviewer).

But "Reviews" are entirely optional.

Why do you NEED as "KS Preview"??? Well it's supposed to sum up what your game IS. So people can be better prepared for what it is they are supposed to be backing...

Some "KS Previews" are FREE, others charge between $50-$200 per preview...

Well from when I was seeking reviews, "reviewers" told me that "KS Previews" are for KS campaigns. And that there purpose is to present the game, what it's about, how to play the game and a brief synopsis of the game. Most reviewers have told me that they do NOT do reviews of KS games.

That includes most of the well-known reviewers such as Undead Viking, Purple Pawn, The Dice Tower and others.

This is from MY experience dealing with reviewers. Some reviewers said that if they did NOT like the game, they would NOT do the "KS Preview". So this means that a "KS Preview" is subjective to the fact that the reviewer thinks your game is "worthy" of a preview.

Again just MY experience... Others may have gotten different feedback from other sources. But I've dealt with the very popular reviewers and I did get a very positive review from "Father Geek" who gave us the "Father Geek Approved" seal, which means the game is "kid-friendly", "fun for Parents" and can also be enjoyed by "gamers"...

But generally speaking most reviewers do not "review" (based on my communication with them) KS games... and most charge for the services of doing a paid "KS preview".

Note: And if you do want a "review", you need to submit the game and it goes in queue - until the reviewer has the time to play the "published" game. And games can be submitted for review by "anyone" not just the game's designer.

But this probably doesn't apply to all reviewers... From the one's I have spoken with and dealt with, that seems to be the general process. You can of course "get lucky" if a reviewer truly likes your game and he gives you a vote of confidence or a few kind words about your effort - because reviewers are generally good people too...

Hi Seph,

Cool. A few comments on the video...

It's really long. It might be worth splitting it into two separate videos: the main pitch, and a gameplay overview, posted somewhere else on the page.

The gameplay overview part is quite useful, by the way. Just I think it should be separate.

The voiceover is thin and indistinct. You might need to talk to someone about how to get better sound quality. While it is great to hear the creator talking too (the personal thankyou is a definite positive for me), it might be worth getting a voice actor to do the opening section.

I'm not sure you need the section at the end about comments, messages and the competition on the video, as it just seems to clutter the message and make the whole thing run long.

Finally, it is great to see footage of the game in play, but at this stage I can't help but focus on the graphic design on the components, which look unattractive to me. I know that this is a prototype being played and that you plan to make improvements, but that is not clear to the viewer, and in a genre like cyberpunk, where style is so important, it may be worth addressing at least some of this before you launch.

Just my two credits. :)

Rob