OK, here's the deal - we have released our first game about 2 weeks ago. I submitted it to a not-so-great number of listing sites, it received a few good editorial ratings and the number of downloads is actualy quite a bit higher than I expected for the effort and money ($0) I've put in promoting it so far (averaging at about 100 a day).

So things are peachy, right? Wrong. We've had zero sales so far. OK, I realize it might be a *bit* early to expect to see a constant stream of sales (however small) but I'm rather worried as we're getting a constant stream of downloads from, like, day 3 and no sales whatsoever. So now I'm looking for things to fix.

The ordering page sucked - I changed it, no improvement. I also did some incremental improvements on the site overall. Now I'm turning my focus to the demo. We'll release an update in the next few days as rather annoyingly large number of bugs seemed to have crept in in the last minute changes before the initial release. I would very much appreciate any feedback on what may be turning people away from buying the full version so I can fix it in the update. Here are a few candidates:

- the nagscreen sucks
- demo levels are too hard?
- people don't play the tutorial, and level tips are not enough to get the player going?
- too many demo levels?
- not enough demo levels?

Anyway, the demo can be downloaded at

http://www.lemonade-p.com/download/light&shadow-demo-setup.exe

, the site is obviously here

http://www.lemonade-p.com

Again, any feedback would be much appreciated.

BTW, warning for the easily annoyed ones - the installation *might* require a reboot on W9x - it will (silently) install an updated version of shfolder.dll if it's not already there.

Thanks for the warning. Luckily, it didn't happen to me. :)

Okay, first impressions - I like the overall look of your website. It's cute and fun without looking sloppy, and there's plenty of information available about the game.

I don't really like the L&S title screen graphic, and I can't quite express why. Something about it looks muddled. (This comment holds for its appearance on the webpage as well as in the actual game.) It's much less attractive than the playing board. The download/buy buttons also look less polished than the rest of the site's visual theme.

I was slightly confused in the tutorial, being dumb and not quite seeing that there was a distinction between a blank square and an empty square... I kept clicking on things to flip onto what *I* thought was an empty spot, and being confused that it didn't work. This got cleared up quickly when the game began, but I was puzzled at the time.

Click-and-drag across a row of things that should all be able to flip tends not to work, or to work only sporadically. Clicking on them individually appears more reliable - strange that the tutorial recommended dragging. :)

Can't say much more than that, as I was never very good at these move-one-square-at-a-time puzzle games. I'm playing with it, though, despite my general aversion to that sort of game, so I'd think people who *liked* them should be hooked! :) (Gyah, that flip-after-line-connected thing keeps setting off chain reactions that completely wipe out my pitiful gains...)

[Edited, after playing several levels before convincing self to stop: And husband looked over shoulder, asked questions about how game works, and now HE wants to poke at it, so I'd say that's a thumbs up... :) ]

Originally posted by papillon
Thanks for the warning. Luckily, it didn't happen to me. :)
I don't really like the L&S title screen graphic, and I can't quite express why. Something about it looks muddled. (This comment holds for its appearance on the webpage as well as in the actual game.)
Hm, the title screen has a texture applied over the whole image to hide the fact that textures for the pieces were never meant to be scaled to that size, but I don't think you can really notice that on the thumb sized shot on the site.
It's much less attractive than the playing board. The download/buy buttons also look less polished than the rest of the site's visual theme.
This is so strange to read, as I quite like them. :) I guess I'm still impressed by the fact that my artist hand-made them in under 30 minutes, I was sure he was using some sort of button-making tool or something. :) Anyway, suggestion noted.
I was slightly confused in the tutorial, being dumb and not quite seeing that there was a distinction between a blank square and an empty square... I kept clicking on things to flip onto what *I* thought was an empty spot, and being confused that it didn't work. This got cleared up quickly when the game began, but I was puzzled at the time.
Sheesh, this is a problem. I might add the arrows to indicate the available first moves.
Do you think that the other type of "blocking" piece (the brown one) would be more clear?
Click-and-drag across a row of things that should all be able to flip tends not to work, or to work only sporadically. Clicking on them individually appears more reliable - strange that the tutorial recommended dragging. :)
I'll look into this. Did you get the impression from the tutorial that you should be able to drag the mouse over the whole row in a quick swipe and that the flipping would "catch up" with you?
Can't say much more than that, as I was never very good at these move-one-square-at-a-time puzzle games. I'm playing with it, though, despite my general aversion to that sort of game, so I'd think people who *liked* them should be hooked! :) (Gyah, that flip-after-line-connected thing keeps setting off chain reactions that completely wipe out my pitiful gains...)
BTW, what mode/difficulty were you playing at? Did you notice that puzzle/time-trial modes have different levels?

Anyway, tnx for the feedback.

Ok I jumped in my mister "customer" clothes... ( i'm getting pretty good at this :) )

I launched the game and then i clicked on "Buy Now" i thought it was "Play Now" ( i didn't really read carefully ). So it took me to the site, then i came back to the game but it crashed -> that made me grumpy. ( it seems that when you switch task your game crashes )


ok so i decided to give it a second go, i managed to see the play now in the left corner this time, YAY !
i'm in the game and i don't know what to do :(

It's hard to read the menus and there's a big text ( for a non english native, it better be simple text or i skip it ) to read... I would have prefered to see a 1 line text like : "Click On NEW GAME to start" or "It's your first time, Click on TUTORIAL to learn"


ok i found the new game button! I thought I was smart so i ran directly into the first level, but i couldn't figure what to do...

Well i decided to go back and clicked on the tutorial but i can't move the pieces :mad: . I guess i'm color blind :cool: I didn't really see the empty square, it took me a while to figure out, i think a blinking yellow outline would have helped me a LOT.

The music is too agressive for this kind of game ( it's cool though but not adapted ).

Ok the music is stressing me but i want to play!
I didn't really figure out to win the round :confused:
after the 4 or 5th game i figured it out. I would suggest to put a
"Go To next round" ( or better ) at the right of the progress bar and a "Lose Game" at the left.


Overall it's a good game, once you can get into it, it's really fun. Graphically i find it messy because the colors are too close to each over ( well i have thick glasses :cool: ) and the music and sound fx are too agressive.

It definitely needs to be clearer on what to do and where to click i think this game can get great success.

Hope this helps.
pat.

I'll look into this. Did you get the impression from the tutorial that you should be able to drag the mouse over the whole row in a quick swipe and that the flipping would "catch up" with you?


Sort of, although I figured I probably wouldn't be able to swipe too quickly. But even with what I thought was a reasonable speed, sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. I'd *like* to be able to sweep over a row, it would look cool. :)


BTW, what mode/difficulty were you playing at? Did you notice that puzzle/time-trial modes have different levels?


Yes, I saw there were different modes... but since I know I'm not very good at this, I stuck with Easy, Puzzle. (Time limits would be too stressful!)

I did turn the music down slightly after a bit, but this was easy enough to do. While it might be nice to have a more varied soundtrack, I didn't find the current sound bothersome once I adjusted it.

Oh, like the next fellow I did click on Buy Now when the game first loaded because I wasn't reading closely and thought it was Play Now. The clickable text at that point is, again, much less pretty than the playboard. But I had no problem switching in and out of the game, it never crashed on me.

Ooh, this game ISNT about lemonade.

I had the hardest time figuring that out. I was thinking, what do these screenshots have to do with lemonade?

Until I finally read the description.

Perhaps Im not the only one with this problem? ;)

Alex

a game about lemonade... hmmmm... not a bad idea ;)
I haven't had a chance to try the demo yet, but just from what you have told me, it sounds like you did your marketing backwards... (you submitted a unpolished product for download, then fixed the website, then fixed the demo...) Just a thought... not that you can do anything about it now. I'll try the demo in a bit.

Well the visual style of the game is great. Here are my comments:
1) Well I solved two or three levels, closed the game and opened it and I wasn't sure which levels I had finished. I'm a hardcore gamer and I always like to see progression in any game I play. If I have to use my memory to keep track of which levels I've played already, it drives me crazy.

2) The thing that made me really upset at times is during play when I've made a move, then some random flips would happen and then all my gains would be lost. In puzzle mode, on medium difficulty (I never play a game on easy :)) a single random flip would wipe out most of my gains. Since the random flips are not under my control, I feel the good parts of the game: puzzling it out are completely undermined by the randomness of what will happen next :(

3) I'd personally buy it if the random flips didn't mess me up. I love puzzle games of this type :)

The flips aren't actually random - the tutorial says what the rule is for how the flips work. But they are *frustrating.* :)

OK, great feedback so far. It's much appreciated. Few specific points:

papillon: I'll fix the swiping thingy. There was an actual reason for it to be the way it is (half-broken), but I've come up with a workaround.

BrewKnowC: yes, we messed it up with the release. But hey, 2 weeks and a thousand downloads - not much damage done.

pangyan: in the last minute we've changed it from only 1 level being unlocked when you first start to 6 being unlocked. Hence the confusion with the progress. I'll fix that. wrt the random flips - erm, there are no random flips. Unfortunately we never figured a way to comunicate to the player which pieces flip if they haven't read the tutorial. BTW, I assume you talk about pieces flipping after you connect a line?

I reread the tutorial and I missed that sentence. I read the first line, tried it out and saw the flip and never noticed the second set of flips. I would suggest putting the line about what happens after a successful flip on a new para/line, maybe an extra step in the tutorial, where you show the successful flip and then when he clicks next, show how the alternate pieces of the line flip over again. I still find this particular feature frustrating when my hard work is undone after I've just got 4 in a row :)

But still you've got a good product there, so keep at it. Like I've said, the only thing that would stop me as a game player from getting your game is that feature. That's my opinion :)

I have not checked out the game yet, but one thing you might want to try:

Get a friend who's never seen the game to play it, and ask them to "think out loud" as they play it. Be in the room with them. Don't give them ANY HELP. Do NOT say a word. Take notes at to what mistakes they make. Take notes as to what they figure out and what they don't.

I guarantee you after watching ONE person this way you'll understand a TON about what people are doing after they download your game. I did this with my game and I generated a list of things to go that was 3 pages long. It's incredible what you'll learn.

~Hanford

hanford: I'm not that happy with that idea :)

The reason is, when you put a friend playing your game, and being watched, HE KNOWS he is being watched, so no matter what you say to him, he will always try harder than normally to understand something, or to do something just right, opposed to a normal player that will just try to rumble his way out. People don't do this consciently (sp?) but they do it anyway. While it may have some advantages, it doesn't find out many problems on the most important area, the ares pllayers just glance over or skip, since they are paying more attention than normal.

But have you tried it?

I urge everyone working on a game to try it. The absolute worst thing that can happen is they do everything perfectly and you gain no useful information.

I agree, you won't learn EVERYTHING that you could from watching someone undected, but it's the closest you'll be able to come. You'll learn more about your game than just asking people on websites, I assure you. Seriously, believe me: I've tried it, you haven't ;).

You gotta tell your friends that they're testing the game rather than you testing them. You gotta tell them to think out loud. You gotta tell them if they hold back, you lose becuase you can't fix the problems you don't detect.

The best way do get them used to it is to have them start thinking out loud from the point of installation. They'll warm up to it pretty quick. After a few minutes they'll not think twice.

In my experience, users have stumbled on areas that I never would have guessed. I've seen people solve levels of mine in 10 seconds using a method I've never thought of. I've seen people get confused by instructions becuase I had them worded incorrectly. I had people complain about keyboard controls that I thought were fine.

You definitely have to have an open mind in order to do a test like this, and end up with useful results. If you're convinced it's not going to work, then of course, you won't learn anything. But with an open mind I guarantee you that you'll learn volumes more than you could than my just asking people.

~Hanford

I have to agree with Hanford. It does work great. In my case I used my wife as my test subject. She knew about my game the whole time I developed it, but just the basics (name, what it was about, a few graphics, etc). I was very careful to not let her see any of the levels, me playing the game, or anything like that. When I got to first alpha, I let her play the game with the first 2 levels. I learned a lot from how she played, such as what things are not obvious, what was too difficult/awkward, and what just rubbed her the wrong way. I made quite a few changes based on that. when I got to first Beta, I once again let her play the game, this time with all levels. I learned a bit more in this second round.

I will definitely repeat this process with future games. I will also try to find a secondary tester, so my wife can be my initial alpha tester, and then I can try it again fresh with someone else when I'm at beta.

Originally posted by hanford_lemoore
But have you tried it?

...

I've tried it, you haven't ;).


Why did you ask a question and answered it for me as well ? :)

Yes I have tried it, tried it several friends, from hardcore gamers to non gamers. There is relunctance on their part and I note that. Sure you learn stuff, but it is the same things you can by asking people online :)

Having dedicated testers with filling forms in the end works a lot better. (of course, if you can spy on them without them knowing is the best :))

I think Hanford is right, We´ve tried it on a bunch of people at different occasions during the developement phase and we always got useful information/feedback.

Seeing someone play your game really helps you to see what you´ve missed because you thought it was obvious.

For example, I really hate when you have to fight the menu system in a game to get where you want.
If some companies (no name) let someone try their menu system before releasing their game, they would have sold me a copy... :)

Hello,


BTW, warning for the easily annoyed ones - the installation *might* require a reboot on W9x - it will (silently) install an updated version of shfolder.dll if it's not already there.

Don't do this! Don't silently make changes to the users system files, just to try a demo. Either inform them they have an older version and give them the option is installing a newer one OR just make your program work with the older version OR perform the required task by some other means.


About the game (IMHO):

- Seems an odd choice to make the first button "Pause" instead of "Play Now" (also making "Play Now" a lighter color than the rest might be a good idea; would cause it to stand out more.)

- Colors are a bit too drab; some brighter/lighter shades would be nice (and if I remember correctly, dark browns make you sleepy :) I think the colors are too dark and moody for a puzzle game.

- Music is too up-tempo/distracting for a game that require concentration, such as this; something more ambient would be nice.

- At the start of each new board, there is a message displayed, but no indication that the player has to click the mouse button to remove the message and get on with play. I sat there waiting for a few moments, before I thought "Maybe it's wafting for ME?". A simple message like "click to continue" would be helpful.

- There is not enough contrast between the pieces (the initial two types) themselves and between the pieces and the game board. I find myself having to really concentrate and "squint" to make sure I'm seeing the pieces correctly before I make a move. Compare to Othello or Go!, where even with a quick glance the player can see what's what, due the very high level of distinction between all the game elements.

- On the splash screen, I feel the title "Light & Shadow" should be a bit bigger and stand out more from the background. The screen is dominated by the game pieces surrounding the title.

- You have the "Close Window" button disabled. I don't thinks its a good idea to not make the standard window elements available: players who are new to computing might feel a little thrown, if the action they've been using to close a window, all of a sudden does not work.

Overall, I like the look of the game: very clean and professional.

Hope this helps and Good luck with it. :)

David

Originally posted by Akura
Why did you ask a question and answered it for me as well ? :) Whoops. I didn't mean to. I was kind of joking, but I'm sorry if it bugged you. No harm done I hope. :)

Yes I have tried it, tried it several friends, from hardcore gamers to non gamers. There is relunctance on their part and I note that.

Reluctance to speak out? Reluctance to play the game? Well, there's probably something to learn from that. You should for-sure test with your target audience.

Sure you learn stuff, but it is the same things you can by asking people online :)

From my experience this is totally untrue. The things you find with asking people on-line are more bug-oriented, and "wish" oriented, like "I wish I had a machine gun in this level". When you watch someone play, you're not just listening to what they say, you're watching what they do. Did they read the instructions before starting the game? Did you totally miss some element and not realize it? These are things that people might not even know they missed, and so they won't nessicarity post on a forum. it's more about how their initial experience goes. What they understand and what they don't. There's such a TON you can learn from watching the screen and what they do, there's no way the experience of watching someone play a game compares to reading about it in an email.

In general, you can also do testing like this earlier in the process than on-line. With in-person testing, you don't need to make an installer or worry about distributing the game. And if someone gets really stuck or runs into a major bug, you can step in and tell them how to get around it in order to proceed with the testing.

Having dedicated testers with filling forms in the end works a lot better.

I'm not saying you should do in-person testing INSTEAD of online forums. I think they both serve purposes and get good information. But from my experience, the in-person test really helps with debugging the "user experience" and if you take the information you glean to heart, you can really apply some polish.

~Hanford

I concur with Hanford. I did many hours of in-person testing with several people for Dweep, and I found it extremely valuable. As soon as I had level 1 ready to play, I sat someone down to play it in front of me.

The hardest part was keeping my mouth shut while watching them play (and I must admit I didn't always succeed). I made many subtle changes to the game as a result of this process -- the kinds of things I never would have noticed if I was only getting reports from people who played the game on their own.

Doing this early in the process showed me what players found most fun (the AHA experience) and what players found most frustrating (the confusion experience). I also learned early on that the project was probably going to be a success.

I agree. Being able to witness someone playing or testing your game is incredibly valuable to development. You can't expect someone to completely behave like they would if nobody was watching them, but you can get close enough. When I did it, I was able to pretend that I was paying attention to something else and I learned a lot with what I was able to observe.

I have to back up Hanford, Ron and Steve. I used to test SSM against live persons while watching and it was some of the best experiences I had. That way I found the interesting spots and the confusing spots, something I would have been unable to do without observation.

I highly recomend this method.

Just chiming in, agreeing with Hanford and others here. In the UI literature this is sometimes known as 'elicited response' -- you basically try to keep the user talking about what they're doing, what they're thinking, what they're trying to do, etc., in as close to a running stream as possible. Any time they fall silent, it means they're having to think too much about what they're trying to do (often a bad sign).

I've used this on everything from games to CT scanner systems; it's one of the most powerful usability techniques there is.

And sure, sometimes people are a bit uncomfortable at first -- but as Hanford said, just keep reminding them that they're helping you test the software, you're not testing them. Oddly enough, strangers are a lot less inhibited than are your friends and family -- using people you know in situations like this often doesn't work well (I suspect it's because you become a distracting presence). It is also extremely important to remain silent, or at most just say, "you're doing fine, just keep going" etc. If someone really gets stuck, you can ask them questions like "what are you trying to do?" or "do you see anything on the screen that would help you do <x>?", but at this point the original test is essentially over (we used to have a half-joking metric that when the test subject burst into tears, the test is over :) ).

Originally posted by alchemist
we used to have a half-joking metric that when the test subject burst into tears, the test is over.
Or maybe when the developer bursts into tears? :)

Assuming you build this into your code, and you look ahead this far, it's possible to build into the game a system to keep track of user actions over time and save them off to a file. If you build a mechanism into the game as sort of a replay feature, you can send your game out to beta testers, and have them send you back the files or automatically send them back to you via an internet connection at various intervals. Then you can analyze what they did, what took them a long time, what wasn't apparently obvious, etc.

Just a thought. I give our games to a friend of mine and make him play test them without giving him any help. I agree that watching is very valuable, but the above suggestion might be useful in some cases for anyone interested in that sort of thing who doesn't have the luxury of being able to sit in front of people. You can also use it to help you track down obscure bugs. "What did you do to make it crash?" "I dunno. I was just playing and it died."

Gotta love those 'friendly as microsoft' error reports sometimes. :)

My suggestions for L&S would be to use more ligths, more brighter colors and more downbeat music or maybe ambient. As a general rule try to resist the winter depression and use ligths, alphas, colors like if it was always late spring. :)