• Spzi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Describing your game by listing other games is tempting, but not a good idea, and I’m about to convince you why.

    That did not age so well. I found most arguments rather weak. Here’s an overview of all the three arguments, copied from the article:

    1. It requires your audience to be familiar with those games
    2. It creates pre-conceived notions, setting high expectations
    3. Players prefer to discover the similarities on their own

    Generally, we have at least two options for describing thing A: We can relate it to another thing B (“Pixel washer is like Stardew Valley”), or we can relate it to some abstract attribute (“Pixel washer is uplifting”). Either way, we use language shorthands to describe similarities with other known entities.

    About 1: Yes, that is obviously true. And it’s also true for the opposite, when you don’t relate your game to other games. Granted, your description becomes more accessible to a broader audience since it does not require them to know the other games. But instead, the reader now has to be able to understand and visualize what your description might look and feel like as a game (and thus becomes less accessible again). Take for example the first sentence of the proposed better description:

    “Pixel Washer is a cozy, zen-like game where you play as a cute piggy power washing beautiful pixelated worlds.”

    I’d flag ‘cozy’ and ‘zen-like’ as probably rather less known and/or well-understood terms. I’m also not sure what ‘piggy power’ means. Is it even meant as one thing or is english grammar misleading as so often? Does it involve actual pigs or only their powers, whatever that might mean? But fair enough, even if all that remains not understood, the minimal takeaway is probably that it’s a game with pixels and pigs and washing. So yeah, the alternate description probably works for most people.

    But in the same way, a description referring to other games also works for most people.

    In case of unclear references, a game-reference wins over a word-description. Like when I look up ‘cozy’ and ‘zen-like’, I may or may not come across definitions and pictures which convey the same idea as the author intended. For example, I might find results about baking cookies or shooting arrows, which have nothing to do with washing pigs. Whereas, when I look up “PowerWash Simulator” and “Stardew Valley”, the results are far less ambiguous.

    Argument 2 is the strongest from my point of view. But again, it’s pretty similar for both ways. It should be kept in mind. Maybe it’s best to ask your game testers how they would describe the game, including those who don’t like it, to avoid setting too high expectations because you fell in love with your game while making it.

    Argument 3 was entirely new to me. It never crossed my mind, nor did I hear anyone complain about it. I think people very much appreciate language shorthands, if they are used well and are not misleading. If so, they can save time and give a crisp description. And let’s not forget that we are talking about advertisement. We know we are being lied to, that a ‘fast-paced action shooter’ can feel dull and boring quickly. As the author points out, these descriptions serve one purpose only; to generate more sales.

    I also wanted to include a reference to Roguelikes or Roguelites. Apparently there once was a game named ‘Rogue’, which no one knows. But it spurred other creators to make something similar, and now we have genres called Roguelike and Roguelite. I think that’s kind of funny in this context, since in this case you somewhat cannot describe the genre without comparing it to another, specific game.

    Last but not least, the whole argument is probably less relevant in mainstream games, but more so in indie, or niche, new games in a creative way. When there is almost nothing which is very similar, comparisons to other games might work less well than if you’re just releasing another RTS or FPS.

    • null@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m also not sure what ‘piggy power’ means. Is it even meant as one thing or is english grammar misleading as so often? Does it involve actual pigs or only their powers, whatever that might mean?

      Just FYI, they’re saying you play as a “cute piggy” who is “power washing”. Not “piggy power”.

      • Spzi@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        You can find “piggy power” at the bottom of the article, headlined “How to describe your game instead”.

        Pixel Washer is a cozy, zen-like game where you play as a cute *piggy power washing* beautiful pixelated worlds.
        

        I can read it in two ways: Either you’re a ghostly piggy power, who is washing. Or you’re a “piggy”, who is “power washing”. The grammar is ambiguous.

        Maybe you meant to take side for the interpretation as a “cute piggy”. I agree that’s the most likely interpretation.

        Still, this might confuse or downright misinform some readers. The main point of the article was to communicate what the game is in a clearer, more accessible way. So I found it worthwhile pointing out how it kind of fails there.

        The author was concerned somebody might read a description like “Pixel Washer is like PowerWash Simulator meets Stardew Valley”, and partially fail to understand it, because they don’t really know what “PowerWash Simulator” or “Stardew Valley” are. Because they aren’t literate enough in game titles.

        But similarly, one can worry readers might not know certain words or grammatical constructions (maybe because they are no native speakers, or for other reasons), to decide wether it’s a washing power or a piggy washing; because they aren’t literate enough in English.

        • null@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Simply adding a hyphen, or spelling it powerwashing would resolve that though. I largely agree with you overall, I just feel like that chunk of criticism is a stretch.