Indie game storeFree gamesFun gamesHorror games
Game developmentAssetsComics
SalesBundles
Jobs

JonSpencerReviews

239
Posts
9
Topics
111
Followers
19
Following
A member registered Nov 02, 2018 · View creator page →

Creator of

Recent community posts

Sure thing, have fun!

(1 edit)

No worries, I can make you a plain copy but the pictures will still be in there. This will allow you to print B&W with little issue but will use a little more ink than my other printer-friendly editions. I'd remove the pictures entirely but this rulebook was written with them in mind as reference for the competition so I don't have a better solution beyond rewriting the whole book itself. Anyway, keep your eye on the page and I can get this uploaded tonight (give me maybe an hour or so).

EDIT - Got to this faster than expected, please redownloaded the zip file and you should find the new BW rulebook :)

Thank you for your question. Currently there is not a printer- friendly version of the rulebook. I originally created this for a contest and at the time I wasn't permitted to make a printer-friendly edition.


That said, if you really need one, I can make one for you sometime tomorrow or the day after when I'm home. At the moment, I don't have access to my computer with this file, which is the only reason for the delay.

Wow, thank you so much! I'm glad to hear this one has become a staple for you and really appreciate you taking the time to leave a comment and review for me. I have some more planned for this project, so look forward to that when I can get around to it ;) Let me know if you have any ideas for the game too as I'd love to hear 'em!

Sure thing, and thanks for being open to feedback! If you do update the game, like I said, I'm always happy to take another look and update my thoughts :)

No problem, give yourself some more credit though. Anyway, have a nice day :)

Yeah, done. It messed up the formatting anyway on the page.

1. Just because I didn't physically write for all 10 games doesn't mean I wasn't playing along in my mind. Does that mean they aren't as strong of an experience as they could be? Probably. The additional games weren't meant to be play reports though, I was testing game length, content distribution, and overall feel. I understand that you chain events together and work to make sense of the prompts. Remember, I'm not new to this, I just don't think that the prompts always connected together well. This is subjective, my opinion, and reflected in my review. You are welcome to like the game and disagree with my review, again, a lot do.

2. I didn't? The game tells you it can. Everyone has different views on safety rules. I mentioned it for those who might care, I personally didn't think I needed them for this game, but again, it doesn't hurt that they are included. That's all I meant by it.

3. Sorry it didn't come across, I don't know what to tell you. I don't know what you want me to say. I've played a lot of journal games from English Eerie to Alone Among the Stars, some games hit better than others. I'm not trying to suck anyone's enjoyment out of this game, I even advocate that people try this one for themselves anyway because I didn't feel great about the negative review, I wanted to like it, I just didn't.

4. I don't think the game needs to add a ton of guidance, I'm being unclear here. I just think, as it currently stands, the moment-to-moment gameplay doesn't always necessarily help the player keep good forward momentum. This ties back into pacing. If nothing has happened to my character and a major event tells me that something dramatic has shifted in my character, it's hard to come up with and justify what that is. This is the core of the complaint here when I talk about "guidance". I'm saying that previous events,  or lack there of, don't always help to inform the current situation, which I think hurts the game.

I appreciate your compliment on my general writing. If you think what's missing, let me know. I mean, feedback is always valuable.

In regards to tweaks. A. ii. No, I understood, from a player perspective, in a game like this you don't want the player to have too much "upkeep" and depending on how the numbers are adding up, this requires the player to keep track of a lot of things at once. It's not difficult, but too much of it can be a barrier to a more general audience, which in this game's case, would likely hurt it. The exact number would need a lot of playtesting too, I just think there's a more elegant solution, but the concept of your idea here is sound.

To point B I mean to convey that the level of work that would be required to switch formats as you suggest would mechanically influence the game a lot. In that way it becomes a new game. Additionally, some of what you suggested would be a lot of additional work for this title.

Hope that makes more sense.

(1 edit)

Before I address your comments I just want to say I appreciate you taking the time to read my longer review and providing a response asking for further clarity. I'll do my best to address each of your comments in full here.

1. Yes, of course, you are correct here. Even in my own game where I visited the museum, had I gone back the next journal day and had the exact same prompt, I would have been able to make this a unique encounter. I did not mean to imply otherwise. My main point was that there isn't always a reason for why I'd be having repeat encounters (strictly prompt, not content), or very similar encounters, sometimes multiple times in a row. It's one of those things that doesn't always make sense narratively or breaks pacing. After simulating 10 games, where I did everything but the journal component, I was finding it difficult to always justify why the events were occurring in the way they did.

To provide some additional context, when I play games like these for review purposes, something I think Peter is aware of, I tend to write up bigger stories that make selling the game easier. I write professionally, so for me, this is the easiest way for me to showcase how the game can create a fun experience. I don't think San Sibilia is dreadful at this or anything, but I was finding an issue with the general nature of how/when events are triggered. Which takes me back to the issue of pacing, my primary complaint.

2. Just want to clarify, I am cool with safety tools. I said in my review it was a nice inclusion, I just didn't think this game in particular needed explicit safety tools. As you mention, you don't always feel a game needs this kind of thing, so I would hope you understand that I'm not condemning the game for having them. It's the opposite; didn't think it needed them, but cool that they are there.

3. I have tools like this and am well versed in these sorts of games. However, my reviews and play reports that are public facing ALWAYS demand that the game stand on its own with no outside assistance if that's how it's advertised. In San Sibilia's case, this applies. I want my thoughts and opinions to be honest and reflective of the general experience someone might have if they just picked the game up right now and played. I'm an avid solo player with a ton of GM experience, so I don't think that was the issue in this case.

From the review, I do mention that I might have gone outside the game's intended method of playing, however, the game owns some responsibility for that. I shouldn't need to use anything beyond what the book tells me and if playing x or y way hurts the game in a meaningful fashion, I would hope the gamebook would make a recommendation to guide the player in the right direction. I do acknowledge that I might have hurt my initial experience by how I framed my first game, and of course, this is on me. It's why I also "played" 10 more games, to ensure that this first game wasn't the only issue. Perhaps it is not obvious in the way the review is presented, but it's not like I did all of this in one sitting.

4. I agree with your sentiment and the intent here. However, there's a big difference in building tension that feels good and huge swings in variability. In my initial game, the play report one, the game went on for an obscenely long time. Had I played all 27 turns, I would have far exceeded the expected playtime which I was already over at just 8 entries. I gave up at this point because I wasn't jiving with this run of the game, but after seeing how much was left (something I thought might motivate me to continue), I just called it there because it was too much. Any tension had long melted away at that point, and I struggled to see why the heck this guy would just lounge about in this city for months and months.

On the other end of things, a game ending after 5 turns, where all but turn 4 is a MAJOR event feels equally bad. At this point nothing has happened, and as a result, the game has failed to provide any clear direction to me the player. "You change the city" as your first event, followed by "You change the city", followed by "A Change of Heart" tells me nothing. I have no frame of reference to work off of, even if I really flesh out my character. It's awkward and feels frankly terrible as a player.

This issue extends into the average length games though since these big events can occur any time. Even in those, I would often have major events occur once, or even multiple times, within the first few turns. Pacing is important, building that beginning, middle, and end in a game like this matters. Since there really isn't a "game" here, it's strictly a writing exercise, I expect the game to provide a bit more structure and consistency in how it paces out events at the very least. I'm not saying every game needs to be a set length, but a swing of 5-27 turns is way too big, with the big events occurring in a way that's simply too random.

It's all good, I hope I was able to clarify my thoughts a bit better for you here. San Sibilia just didn't come together for me, and that's a bummer, but that does happen. Obviously a lot of people disagree! So I'm in the minority. However, sponsored or not, my review reflects my honest and genuine opinions across the whole experience. For my readers, that's what they come for, so I don't want to betray that, which I hope you can appreciate. As for leaving reviews, I tend to only leave positive ones on this website, I feel terrible when I leave a negative one. That said, Peter asked me to, and I thought it would be dishonest if I didn't follow through on it. Still, I gave a final rating of 3/5 stars. I think there's a good game in here, but it just isn't quite put together enough for me to genuinely recommend it.

I'm a game designer and writer so I'd love to look at your game advice, so let's just do that real fast since I'm here anyway.

A. This is something I think really needs to be addressed from a designer prospective. Your solutions:

i. Absolutely, this is an easy solution but I do agree it hurts the tension you mention. Still, it wouldn't be bad to let players have this kind of control as an options, a variant way to play.

ii. I like the idea of this solution, but think it would be burdensome to manage as you have laid it out anyway. Still, something like this, a "fixed" interval system would help the game immensely. It would allow the major events to come at more paced times, but not in an overly predictable way. This would solve the pacing problem.

iii. Great idea but this would fundamentally change the game from a mechanical perspective. I think they could just get away with having an additional/alternative chart. That way you can mix and match a little to customize your experience. This has the added benefit of not being that much extra work either, whereas your idea would be a lot of work in this game's case. Better solution for B.

B. Varity solutions. See previous. To address your primary comment though, I don't think the D6 context chart is a bad idea, though for this game a more universal chart with larger option selection (say a D12 or 2D6), would probably be better if implemented. Otherwise, again, I think that the game would be fundamentally different and Peter would have to undertake way too much work. In short, more than this and it would just be better for Peter to make a new game.

Anyway, thanks again for the comment and I hope this finds you well :)

(1 edit)

EDIT - The creator put out new rules to help with the game's pacing, one of my biggest complaints with the game. I've had a chance to give them a go and found it helped with the experience of the game. As such I gave a higher rating. I appreciate the creator taking my feedback seriously too. You can still find my original comments unedited below for reference. I know a lot of people really like this title, so keep on enjoying :)


The creator of the game reached out to me and asked me to do a review for my website. You can read that in full here. For those who don't want to, let me give you the TL;DR.

I was really excited to give this game a go. The rulebook looks great, the rules are pretty clear (provided you read the whole 12 pages in advance), and I could feel it sparking my imagination even before play. However, once I actually played it...

I recognize in my review I made some "mistakes" in how I framed my story and character, not that I broke any rules, but seemed to play in a way the game didn't anticipate. Putting that aside, the game went on for a REALLY long time, to the point where I quit part way through. Now, this was also an anomaly which isn't reflective of an average experience either.

So I did the sensible thing and simulated a bunch of games. I took care to read every prompt, but didn't write them all out like I did for my first game. I also noted when the "bigger" events occurred and game length. A clear issue emerged in game pacing. Either games were outstaying their welcome or were comically short, both resulting in a lack of general direction. On average, the game felt mostly fine, but the randomness of how journal entries work really holds the game back.

It's a shame, but I couldn't like this one as much as everyone else seems to. I don't expect perfection out of a game, though I have to be honest when something just isn't working for me. As a result, I couldn't give it the 5 stars I wanted to, but I still think the game is interesting enough to check out if you are curious. Wishing the best for the creators, hope they see their goal through and maybe even improve the game a bit alongside a print release.

(2 edits)

Appreciate the comment and question! There's a reason the Joker variant was a scrapped beta version, which I mostly included in here for fun. I'm not at all surprised it made the game a lot easier for you (though having the Jokers show up with any consistency is somewhat surprising, you must be quite lucky), but as long as you are having fun, great!

As for your actual question, please note the final sentence in its section (pg. 13 in the regular book):

"If the Joker should appear from your draw or in your reserves you get to reap all the rewards without any of the work! Choose any 2 bounty rewards, remove the Joker from the game, and shuffle the discard thoroughly back into the deck."

So if you have a Joker appear as a lead it's an auto clear, which is obviously stupid strong. You may choose to trigger this effect later if you have an open lead you want to just set it in, but that comes with its own pros and cons, I wouldn't recommend it personally.

Thanks again for taking the time, I hope that helped :) Please let me know if you have any other questions.

https://jonspencerreviews.itch.io/blackjack-bounty

Look forward to seeing how things shape up :)

I'm glad you enjoyed the game, thank you! What you've said is incredibly kind. Really appreciate you taking the time to comment and review as well :)

Thank you for the kind words! I'm glad you enjoyed the game and took the time to comment and rate :)

(1 edit)

Blackjack Bounty is Released!

ALL FREE COPIES HAVE BEEN CLAIMED - Thank You For Your Interest!

Blackjack Bounty

I've been designing games and releasing them on itch.io for some time now and I'm really happy to announce this latest project. I had a lot more help with the polishing phase than normal and think you'll be pretty impressed if solo games are your deal. What's more, the first 20 people to give the game a shot can do so FOR ABSOLUTLELY FREE by claiming a "Community Copy" on the game's page! Need a little more info?

Overview

You swore that you’d never return to that life ever again, but here you are. Forced between a rock and a hard place, either you hunt down the list of bounties placed in front of you or you’ll have one more hole in that ol’ head of yours when they lay you down for a dirt nap. Your past has finally caught up with you, and you can’t help wonder, has your luck finally run out?

Blackjack Bounty is a solitaire card game that uses Blackjack, or 21, as a base. In the course of the game you must hunt down several bounties or die trying. You’re an experienced bounty hunter though, and you still have a few tricks up your sleeve. That said, it still may not be enough, but if you’re lucky, you can finally return to the peaceful life you’ve almost gotten used to.

To win the game, simply capture all bounties by playing enough cards or by making enough 21’s (Blackjacks) without going over (busting). It may sound simple, but it’s actually quite tricky!

What's in the Box?

Depending on if you download the full color version or the stripped down black and white version, you are getting a rulebook approximately 15 pages long. The rules fit on about 4 of those pages with the rest being dedicated to a detailed play example, optional variants (including a scrapped beta version of the game), and a full glossary of every keyword in the entire document. Additionally, the PDF has built in bookmarks for easy navigation.

As a separate document you can optionally download play sheets (color and B&W as a single PDF) which allow for easily tracking your skills using a coin as well as setup guides for how the cards should be positioned at game start. This is completely supplemental and therefore not included in the primary document.

What You’ll Need

To play Blackjack Bounty you need the following:

  • A basic understanding of the game “Blackjack”, sometimes referred to as “21”
  • A standard deck of 52 playing cards (jokers removed)
  • Some dice, several tokens, or a sheet of paper (recommended are 2 four-sided dice or 2 six-sided dice as well as a ten-sided die. It’s less wasteful than paper and easier to manage. My examples will assume you are using dice.)
  • This rulebook

The Making of Blackjack Bounty

If you want to learn more about how and why I made the game, please read the devlog I posted. You can find that here.

Check the Game Out Here!

You can view more information and download the game via its page here. I would greatly appreciate any and all feedback via a comment or rating if you have the chance. Thank you for your time and consideration :)

I'm glad this feedback found you well, I was worried about how this might be received to some extent. That said, it's great news you are receptive to feedback and eager to actually make some changes. If you want to run anything by me, please feel free to reach out. I have several contact methods mentioned on my stuff, so don't hesitate :)

Helping out was no trouble! I just happened to see your project and thought it was cool, sometimes that's all it takes. Since I just had a bunch of folks help with my project, I was also in the mood to help someone else. It sounds like I was able to do so.

Wishing you all the success,

-Jon

A Good Death Review

Alright, so I know I told you I'd write a comment and rate the game tomorrow but some plans fell through for tonight so I decided to give this a go instead. I played a few games, and have some feedback for you as a result. Let's start by getting the boring stuff out of the way.

All of my comments are for the game's initial release after zero revisions on 5/25/21. Some, if not all, of my comments may be rendered redundant or unnecessary after any updates. Future readers please consider this carefully before deciding if this game is for you or not, as well as for your overall rating if you give one (if these things are addressed, you should definitely rate higher).

Some Revisions Needed BUT... (Boring Designer Stuff, You Can Skip This if You Want)

As I said on your original posting, I really like the way your game looks and how it's laid out. It's also pretty easy to get the idea of your game, there's some great appeal there. However, when I actually jumped into the game I noticed a few things that should be addressed.

First, there are a few spelling/grammar mistakes. It's all very minor stuff like:  "A notable figure in the annuals of your people." where you meant to use "annals". Not a big deal, but the few mistakes there were jumped out at me. I'm certainly guilty of this happening even when I have multiple people run edits for me, so this is a "boring" comment more for your info than anything else.

I also feel like you could simplify and clarify the phrasing:  "...cannot be contested or escalated, nor cost glory to accept." This is wordy and caused some confusion on an initial reading, as in I had to read it over a few times to ensure I was following your instructions well. If I had to suggest an alternative I would maybe use:

"Automatically accepted but does not cost glory."

Lastly, you half mention this, but some clarity on what happens if you go negative glory would not be missed. I often would purposefully let my glory drop to the negative values since it seemed that there was no penalty as it would just count as "0", meaning I incurred no risk for many turns of the game. It's the one aspect that just needs stronger reinforcement rule-wise.

Overall, the clarity of the document is there and you certainly have a good level of polish for a 2 page game. I think you did a great job, especially for your first time at this!

Points of Praise

Now that we've gotten the boring stuff out of the way, I want to go over what I think "A Good Death" does well. It's always nice to hear some positive stuff before any negatives after all.

Beyond what I've already said above, the biggest success here is the theme and presentation. You are killing it here. I loved setting up the character and really felt the creative juices flowing when it came to inspiring the narrative component of the game.

Finally, the game is pretty quick to setup and play for the most part (more on that shortly). I was able to play the 2 games I did in about an hour, answering the questions posed each turn to myself before proceeding with the next turn. There's a level of cinematic flow that exists here, which I liked.

Problems

Unfortunately, here's the part nobody really likes to hear. I want to stress that I think you have a GREAT foundation but there are some flaws that really put a damper on the experience for me.

  1. Setup
  2. Mechanics Vs. Theme
  3. "Difficulty"

Setup

The first issue I have is with the game's setup. The whole "Ace of Spades" thing feels convoluted. I would almost rather it were something like this:

"Set aside the Ace of Spades and then thoroughly shuffle the deck. Afterwards, randomly insert the card face up about 2/3rds or half way into the deck."

This satisfies the idea of what the Ace is meant to do (add an alternative way to end the game for pacing). As it is, this mechanic is largely redundant since I never got even close to nearing the deck's end. It was also the only part of setting the game up I actively disliked both times I played. My solution still requires the player to slow down the setup process, but is faster to reset and more realistic for what I believe you are trying to achieve. I managed to go at least 1/3rd to half of the deck in each game.

Mechanics Vs. Theme

Under the current rules there is a pretty bad clash when it comes to "A Good Death's" mechanics compared to the theme. Narratively, I am totally with the game, but the mechanics often tell me to do something different. Allow me to explain.

Right now the best strategy for "winning" this game is to ALWAYS take risks and roll for glory. In fact, take glory whenever possible. Nothing else matters. Hit 0 health or strength? No problem, it's going to happen anyway and the only value in having the game go longer is on the narrative side, or if you don't have any glory at all.

If I let the defenses fall or the people die, I'm not punished in other words. That's why I would propose these mechanics are given a second look. However, I don't want to leave you high and dry, so here's a few suggestions on how you could maybe fix this disconnect.

  • Have the player lose glory after certain fixed intervals of health or strength the first time they are hit (for one or the other, both seems like it would be too much without another adjustment). These should be constants. You start at 50 in each so maybe at break points 35/20/5.
    • To this point, you could offset this new setback and even have it apply to both statistics if you gave the player a free fate or something "minor" like that. This basically gives a chance to win the lost glory back but with some risk. Additionally, a "loss" is fated in that regard, so this thematically is just much more consistent and makes more sense.
  • Add some additional setback for failing a contested roll. Right now if you fail with any 1's or 2's, all that happens is you lose a glory. Maybe 5 points in one of the two stats if you have none. Meaning, there's basically no risk to the player to roll. They "win" on a 3-6, or in other words 2/3rds of the time. Even though a 5 or 6 is what gives the glory, a 3 or 4 is a positive result as it is effectively the same as accepting with zero downside.
    • What makes this worse is if you save up a bunch of fate and just roll all your dice in a big go. Even one 5 or 6 nets you something as the 1's and 2's are overridden. If you get really lucky, you just net a ton of points, with again, no risk.
  • Accepting your fate is a wasted action, always. There is no reason to take this and is thus wasted space in the rules. Either cut this (the boring option, i.e. bad thing to do) or add a benefit to the player for doing this. I would just give the player a fate point, since again, your loss is fated. It's thematically better and gives this action a reason to exist.

These are just the first things that popped into my head when playing, I'm sure there are other little tweaks and changes you already have in mind but I would strongly consider some combination, if not all of the changes I list above.

Difficulty

This brings me to my final point. As a direct result of these two problems, the game is way too easy. I never had less than 5 glory, each time ending closer to the 7+ range. On the one hand, this made the narrative cooler which is what this game is doing well, so that's a win. However, it made the game very boring as a result to actually play. I basically knew I could win by doing x, y, and z.

Naturally, in a game that wants you to focus on narrative first, I shouldn't have been trying to "win". People are going to do this though and I can promise you it will result in folks revisiting this title with less frequency. I was already tapped after 2 goes, so while I am speaking personally here, I also have data from my own game creation experiences to back this up. Most people don't mind if a game is "harder" as long as it feels fair. Whether it is or not doesn't matter usually.

I almost feel like you could make losing more appealing by changing the 0-2 range from "being forgotten", to only being remembered by some fringe group of scientists or something. This paragraph is entirely subjective and just my personal view. I'm also not a typical player as I'm playing as a fellow designer and trying to break your game on purpose. Honestly, this is up to you, but I would at least look at this a little more closely.

Final Thoughts

"A Good Death" was a great first step forward in putting yourself out there which I find very commendable. I sincerely hope my comments are received as constructive and aren't discouraging to you. The game felt like it needed a little more time in the oven with some outside playtesting.

WITH THAT SAID...

  • The game was created in 48 hours as a challenge (something you should mention on the page since that makes this more impressive)
  • This was your first public go, you are going to make mistakes. I certainly did. Take those and improve for next time (and here, because nobody is stopping you)

To the consumer questioning whether to play this game or not:

Yes, give it a shot! Especially if this gets updated.

In spite of what I've said, I still think there's a quality product here, and if what I've mentioned is addressed, I can see it being popular in the journaling crowd. I believe folks should always see for themselves and judge accordingly, but if anyone is on the fence you have my answer.

No problem :)

Looks pretty cool. I was checking this section out since I'm putting out another project soon but wasn't expecting to find any games to try out, but lo and behold, the very first one I see is yours and I do wish to give it a try! I won't get around to this until tomorrow likely, but I'll certainly leave a review and comment on the game's page for you once I have the chance :)

Overall your game's page looks fairly clean and I was able to figure out what your game was about rather quickly. I especially like your layouts and graphical designs showed off via your screenshots. Don't forget to put a dev log out on your game and tell your story, it's the one thing I didn't see that I know would give you a little boost. Anyway, congrats on taking a risk and putting yourself out there! I hope the experience is a good one for you!

Here's something quick I came up with today, though this is more of a supplement than a full system but nothing's stopping you:

Here's the 50/50 System!

The basic story is I had a dream about teaching 4-6 year old kids how to play TRPG's but the problem was I only had a coin. In real life I work with kids, so this scenario isn't all that unlikely actually. Anyway, I came up with this system and when I woke up, I thought it was actually a good idea with a few tweaks added.

As a result The 50/50 System was born! I've added a bit more complexity/nuance to it than in my dream, but I want to stress that it isn't a robust system, which is why I call it a "supplemental system". However, it comes with some nice bonuses:

  • It's super accessible. Everybody knows how a coin flip works and it's hyper visual
  • You can emulate this online if you needed/wanted to with great ease
  • In a pinch, you can always run a simple scenario
  • Expedites certain checks when you really don't want to spend a lot of time on something
  • It's a great introduction to oracle systems
  • You can use it for group or solo play

I'm sure there are others but that's what came to mind when I thought about it. The document has been updated with typo corrections and one rule clarification (which was my fault due to a typo), but I more-or-less made this after waking up today. Other folks seem really pleased with it, which surprised me, and I thought y'all might too.

Enjoy, and happy gaming! :D

Thank you so much for the kind words! I'm very glad to hear you enjoyed the game and think so highly of it, especially given the design limitations for the competition.

Thank you so much! I'm glad you've enjoyed my content so much :)

Just coming in to say that Julian is FANTASTIC! He's always been an absolute pleasure to work with and timely to boot.

Thank you very much for the response and for resolving this issue. It's greatly appreciated!

As for ratings, I really wasn't worried about one bad rating, I was more irritated that this user was able to leave one when he wasn't supposed to. I'm not worried about driving metrics or anything in that regard but I suppose the advice is nice. Either way, I'm very glad this is resolved now, thank you once again.

It's been over a month now, I've contacted support in every conceivable way multiple times now. What is the deal here? Why am I not getting any response? I've tried being as patient as possible and as nice as possible about this as I can but at this point I'm ready to stop using this website altogether. It simply should not be this difficult to get support. I'd be a lot more understanding about the wait if there were ANY communication whatsoever but there isn't. You know what the issue is, have acknowledged it even, and so it seems pretty simple to me to just fix it. I really cannot understand why I'm out here in the wind like this after, what, 35 days? That's absurd!

For the record I have:

  • Made a post here, outlining everything (which was not a small task, this took actual work due to the issue) and have offered even more information and assistance on my end to resolve this issue.
  • After being told to contact support, I did so... TWICE, pinging the first ticket as well. No answer!
  • I even tweeted as the alternative contact method, as your support page indicates, said tweet even got a decent amount of attention from my following asking for a response and still, you guessed it, NOTHING!
  • Beyond that, I've waited patiently and asked for updates. This is completely reasonable, but I'm actively being punished for this since response and action don't seem to come unless I make a big fuss. Why? How does that help anyone? I'm sure you are irritated with me constantly pinging you about this.

Look, I'm not trying to make anyone's life difficult here and I don't enjoy doing this sort of thing but I'm at the end of my rope on this. There's enough garbage going on that I shouldn't have to put up with this. It's an issue created on Itch.io's end, an issue that NEEDS addressing since the action your staff takes to deal with this issue only punishes creators, not the abusers. I've provided the proof, gotten the acknowledgement, so...??? Though I'd be pretty irate after all this, even a negative response would be better than the deafening silence I'm getting now.

Just help me, seriously, I'm practically begging... I feel like I'm screaming into an uncaring void though and depending on what happens next will determine if I ever come back to this place. I'm not going to put in all this time and effort on a platform when said platform doesn't seem to care about its users. I'm not the only guy who has been trying to get support (though I am sure their issues are different), and seeing that only reaffirms this frustration.

Sorry for rambling a bit, but at this point I've given up on trying to even provide a careful response.

Gonna join you here. I've reported an issue in here almost a full month ago now, put in multiple tickets (following the instructions), and followed up on the forums and email and nothing. I'd really love to know why these tickets aren't getting addressed after all of this time. I'm starting to lose faith, and therefore interest, in this website for any future projects getting released here because support should NOT be this difficult to get.

Hope things work out for the both of us and will certainly be keeping an eye on this thread.

Thank you, and again, really sorry to keep bothering with this. I appreciate the patients and assistance.

Hey, me again. Really sorry to keep bothering you but it has been another week and I just want this resolved. I've put in a ticket like you suggested (number 44743) and nothing. I've pinged the ticket since it has been over a week a few days ago, and nothing. I just want some basic communication and resolution regarding my issue. I'm not trying to be rude but I'm getting pretty irritated because I've outlined the issue thoroughly, have offered additional information and clarifications, but am getting nothing in return. This is something that is a problem on your end, not mine, so I can't really do much about it. If a user, who has been banned from reviews and comments, can still review (and not only that, publicly DAMAGE a person's project), then this should be of some concern to your staff. It means your solution to people doing what this guy did doesn't work. I want to not only get this sorted for myself but to help folks who may also be dealing with this issue.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to get this moving. Leafo was the admin involved with the original case, maybe mention this to him? I just don't know what to do and want something to happen. I'm tired of being ignored (intentionally or not). Thank you once again for your time and patience with my pestering.

-Jon

Awesome, thank you. I didn't know how to do that.

It's been almost a full week now and no word. I don't appreciate this just nebulously being handed off to admins with no communication. Can I be put in contact with admins in some way as to resolve this more quickly?

Thanks for replying regardless. Please keep me updated in regards to any new developments.

Hate to trouble you again but it's been over 48 hours with no update or contact of any kind. Can I get an ETA on this or if there's anything else I need to do on my end?

Thank you very much for taking the time and updating me.

I mean yes and no, seeing the feedback it's valuable to the consumer. It's why most outlets allow it, plus it increases engagement. Not to say there isn't any validity in anonymity either though. Appreciate the response.

By the way, and somewhat related, can I get help with my other topic I posted yesterday and updated today? You've replied to two others now and nobody has even looked into my issue.

This has been a feature request for ever. I still don't know why it isn't or why the comments that go with them aren't public...

I would still like help with this please. This was posted last night when I was more tired so I just want to offer some more clarification/information so Mods can help me better.

As stated above, I noticed that one of my games got a "review" but it wouldn't show when I actually click on the review portion of the game itself. I will provide images below so you can see exactly what I'm talking about:



This is weird enough on its own but I wasn't really all that worried about it. I figured this was just the internal servers being slow, some minor bug, or whatever. However, I went to check the game's page to see if the "review" was reflected there. Turns out it WAS and I'm not very happy about that for a few reasons. First let me show you the evidence that it is posted there:


As you can see, this also says 6 reviews instead of the 5 that I can see as a creator when actually checking reviews. Again, not a problem except I know that dropping to a 4 star on this title is IMPOSSIBLE unless I received an exactly 1-star review. This is what lead me to track down the review and see what was up. When somebody hates your game that much you kind of want the feedback, especially when all but one of your reviews up to that point has been 5-star.

So I did exactly that. Since I knew roughly when the "review" came in, I searched the "Global" feed to find it. It was exactly where I thought it was and I grabbed a screenshot of said "review" and the user who posted it. As stated above, I don't want to put this guy on blast so I will NOT provide the photo here unless the mods request it. I think this guy is pretty rude for what he's doing but I'm not here to be malicious, I just want his "review" removed from my game as he was NOT supped to be able to even leave one in the first place.

Let me explain. Doing some basic investigative work, I found that he was going around giving 1-star reviews and complaining on other game pages, notably FREE games related to COVID giveaways for games that were not claimable. This prompted moderator response where his review privileges were revoked along with commenting privileges (to my understanding, on the second one). This was approximately 9 days ago, you can also see his posting activity ceases there as well reflecting that this went in place.

Moderator involved was Leafo, response was verbatim this:

"Stop spamming on people’s pages, and, even worse, stop rating them 1 star because they don’t want to permanently give you the game for free. Your posting privileges have been disabled along with all of your ratings."

Despite this, he seems to still be able to leave ratings that are invisible to the creator but visible to the public. Why? He should not have been able to leave a review on my game in the first place, not withstanding the actual harm it's done to my title. There is sufficient proof that this user is leaving bad-faith reviews that are, as far as I'm concerned fraudulent. The system should not allow this when the user is a known issue who keeps repeating the same offense. I as a creator should not be punished as a result of one bad actor (who shouldn't have even been able to act) either.

Hopefully this provides more information and speeds up the help I can get.

Thank you for your time,

-JS

(1 edit)

EDIT - Now that I'm more awake, I posted a far better summary of the issue and what I need done. Please refer to the second post.


Hey folks,

So I previously posted about this "mystery" review I've received where it says I have 6, impacted my star ratings, but when I check the actual "ratings" page, it says I only have 5 ratings. Thought that was weird, maybe even a bug. Did some digging, found the guy who gave me the review and was going to leave it alone EXCEPT I learned something that has me a little irritated and confused.

This guy has had his review privileges revoked for giving 1-star reviews to games that are FREE and tied to COVID giveaways. I can prove it if mods need, I don't really want to shame this guy publicly. That's really messed up for one, but two, it's actively hurting my best performing game because I haven't received a ton of ratings from folks. Can I get some help with this and sorry for posting twice, I did not realize this was going to be a whole ordeal...

(1 edit)

Thanks for your question damianea!

The base game is 100% free forever so there's no reason to claim, just download and play :) I hope you enjoy and have fun!

Thank you so much! I'm glad you enjoyed the game and appreciate your support :)