Catch-up time..
Day 16: Design Partners - well, again, I haven't done much actual design recently, but when I did I knew I could lean on my home play group for the sort of thoughtful, sensitive and constructive feedback I have grown to know and love* Beyond that, the wider blind playtesting posse have been brilliant. During the development of D&H there was a nice crossover between the Raw Deal crew and the RPG crew in Scotland, so Dave Avery and his gang in Edinburgh and Steve Ironside and his group in Aberdeen were scientifically thorough. And of course, where would I be without my caged tamed artist Peter Frain? In more modern esoteric times, the Liminal writers group - who I have dubbed the Urban Spookie Collective (and goddamit I'm going to keep using it until it catches on), have been really useful too!
* May contain sarcasm...
Day 17: Favourite Form of Feedback? You might want to go and grab yourself a drink, we may be some time. Feedback is a funny old thing and the usefulness of it really depends on the relationship that exists, or is taken between the giver and the receiver. Ideally, you would like to see a discussions on a similar level but that rarely happens. A lot of feedback is simply gushing froth and simply useless except for an ego boost. The other large portion of feedback is framed in a customer-provider dynamic, with the giver demanding that the designer concede to their point, at the risk of losing face, sales or reputation. This might well be useful feedback but the format makes it untenable. Additionally, as a self-published designer, as has been said before, you are your brand and when your brand is heavily and aggressively criticised it requires a ridiculous degree of discipline to mentally segregate the two.
Elsewhere (Facebook) I had a little moment recently about the trend for amateur commentators on movies to feel obliged to couch their reviews with knowing nods to their own superiority - "[FILM] is enjoyable but, of course, flawed in places", "I really enjoyed [FILM], but it isn't perfect", "Enjoyed [FILM] despite it being, obviously, problematic" - and I caught a bit of flak for it, because it was seen as just wanting to eject criticism. It wasn't; it was wanting to eject the culture where we simply HAVE to find flaw with things to look 'balanced'. The effect this has on feedback is that people who want to give something a clean bill of health feel obliged to find something ... anything ... so as not to look like a gushing, frothing, fanboi. There is a middle ground to be had.
So what is my favourite form of feedback? Feedback that is honest, owned by the giver, provides useful avenues for development and most importantly is given with the understanding that (a) the giver may not have all the facts, (b) the giver has no right to demand the adoption of their recommendations and (c) the receiver deserves to be treated with human respect and dignity - and not abused for having the sheer gall to dare try to write a game/scenario/podcast etc.