The Official Feedback Thread

Ever since backing games on kickstarter, I find it so fascinating reading game development, progress, the struggles, other tidbits and overall, the journey of making a game slowly but surely! It gives me perspective and I have nothing but respect for game devs, especially indies!

Anyways, here’s some ideas I have for now!! :p

I enjoy a wide array of games but I’d be so hyped for a point and click puzzle game!! They’re one of my most favorite types of game as I love the puzzles in them, the adventures, “borrowing” items and using them and clicking on random things and sometimes there’s funny comments. I understand it’ll be a while for one to be developed though with the visuals that need to be made etc. but yeah an escape room setting would be cool or there could be a villain you have to stop. I’d also be hyped for a choose your own adventure visual novel!

I know this is pretty clicky but I’ll throw it out there! A whack a mole type game where you use a toy hammer and use it on Resetti! Maybe a fun and cute little thing you can add is little plushies of staff on the side of the game and you can bonk ‘em!
IMG_0339.gif


A hidden object game. The objective could be to find a staff member in a crowd of animal crossing characters etc, or find and click 50 things of something.

An animal crossing/tbt reskin of pacman!

A text based RPG game! Could fight insects and the final boss could be an evil version of an animal crossing character.

A game based on the coffee order minigame from ACNL. There could also be variations of it like cooking food or crafting items for various characters.

A short idler where you build and improve an animal crossing town! Not much clicking, just wait for the bells to roll in and upgrade the town. You get the code after having a 5 star rating. There could also be an idler focused on growing flowers/crops and harvesting em.

This one’s a little memey. A version of tic tac toe but in order to get the code, you have to be DEFEATED!! And it’ll be a little difficult to achieve that.
 
Question: When it’s time for the official response to “hateful content and controversial content”, will you cover the closed misanthropy discussion from Brewster’s as well and discuss if threads like these are allowed?
 
Not a serious suggestion:
I think in the last thread someone mentioned default icons for TBT- can you imagine if there were avatars on TBT (like Reddit) and using collectibles to dress up said avatar...
 
Event rules and effort in events New
Hi all. In this post, I'll address the topic of event rules, specifically the recurring feedback we've received regarding inconsistent enforcement of effort rules. This concern started during one of the creative tasks in our recent Valentine's Day event when a participant's submission was rejected and they were asked to resubmit.

Since then, some members have expressed frustration about how this was/wasn't addressed during and after the event and have recently pressured Chris, the task's host, to make a statement. While it's too late to make any changes to the event after its conclusion, I'll do my best to explain rule enforcement in events from a staff member's point of view and address aspects of it that we hope to improve.

Effort Rules

Our creative events typically include a rule that asks for each entry to be made with a "reasonable amount of effort." We added this rule a long time ago after we had to ask some participants to resubmit their entries. The idea is to require some standard of participation so that events aren't used as easy ways to earn prizes, especially because other members spend a lot of time on their entries.

To provide some context for this rule's original intention, consider the following example for an event to "create a creature":
1742144363411.png

A staff member drew this image, but there have been submissions in the past that were similar in perceived effort, so this rule was designed to help prevent them. Over time, however, our bar for reasonable effort has likely shifted as these kinds of submissions have become rare. This is possibly a result of the overall increase in quality in submissions as well!

During the recent event, some members disagreed about an entry's rejection for not using enough effort. We've reviewed the event, and while the entry used a different medium than we typically see for art submissions, we agree that it displayed sufficient effort to qualify for participation rewards. Going forward, we'll reframe the effort rule so that it more specifically addresses the amount of "detail" included in creative entries instead of the perceived amount of "effort" it takes to create them. We'd also like to clarify that the medium used will not be considered when making this judgment but, if applicable, would be covered by separate rules depending on the task.

Furthermore, while we would like to keep some form of this rule in place to keep things fair, we believe that event participation is, first and foremost, just for fun. Other participants who go above and beyond have the chance to earn extra prizes by winning contests or staff favorite selections. At the same time, other members may not be confident in their artistic abilities, which could cause them to be unsure about participating in creative events altogether. We want to stress that effort does not necessarily correlate with skill, and we design events to be as inclusive as possible so that everyone feels comfortable participating regardless of their perceived skill level.

Another reason we're changing the way this rule is worded is that we acknowledge how implying your entry is "low effort" may come across as insulting. While rules will always need to be enforced in events, we certainly don't intend to hurt anyone's feelings! Another concern that came up about this specific incident was the fact that it was rejected publicly. Sometimes we handle issues with submissions within a reply, while other times they are handled privately. This is usually at the host's discretion. Replying directly in the event thread is often easier, or there is additional context wherein a public response seems necessary. However, we can see that this may be embarrassing. Going forward, we'll consider the types of issues with event submissions that would merit a private message and try to handle similar cases privately.

Consistency in Event Rules

As you've seen when we host events, each task is run by one or two staff members, which is one of the ways we distribute event work to the team. Having staff members take the lead on their part of the event helps everything run smoothly, but it means we are generally less focused on the other parts. However, event rules are ideally enforced as consistently as possible, which was one of the concerns brought up about the effort rule. Judging art is subjective, which is also true regarding the perceived effort used to create it. It can be challenging to maintain a consistent standard while considering different skill levels, mediums, and circumstances. To help address this in the future, we'll aim to have more staff members give feedback before a submission is declined. Of course, this can also be challenging due to schedules and commitments in other areas of the event.

Problems With Some Feedback

Finally, I'd like to talk about the feedback that was given about this issue and our response up until now. In my previous posts, I listed some guidelines about leaving feedback and asked that it be cooperative and constructive, not accusatory. Unfortunately, some members who weren't involved made extremely accusatory, demanding, targeted, and sometimes even insulting posts directed at Chris. This is why LadyDestani made another statement about giving feedback and the site's rules regarding being respectful. The situation that resulted would make any staff member feel uncomfortable, which is why he's not addressing this himself. Making demands is not a helpful way to leave feedback, as shown by this example. That being said, we do appreciate all of the constructive and friendly feedback given about any topic, including this one, and we hope to use it to help improve TBT.

Conclusion

In summary, we plan to:
  • Reframe our effort rules
  • If applicable, clarify the allowed medium with separate rules
  • Reach out to participants privately in certain situations
  • Have more team members give feedback before rejecting a submission
We also agree that effort should not be judged too harshly and regret that the enforcement of this rule caused feelings to be hurt. In one of our upcoming responses, we'll touch on more event-related topics, such as repeat winners and competitiveness. Thank you!
 
May I give that example an apple favorite? Just because it used minimum effort doesn’t mean it can’t get a blessing from the apples.

Anyways, thanks for the effort rule. I never really had problem with effort when seeking tickets or other event currency. I knew my art wasn’t going to be enough to net staff favorites or contest nominations in the art events, but it’s enough to earn event currency.
 
Changing "effort" to "detail" is a better move. Although I think maybe "time" would've been ideal- but is not very concrete in terms of judging something. I'm happy to see overall that the staff agreed to make this thread and are discussing the issues being brought up.

For the "Problem with Feedback" - correct me if I'm wrong, but in my opinion, everyone has been pretty respectful? Yes, even Seliph's posts. In my opinion, while the posts may have had some snark, they were critical yet constructive. There were some good points but I can see why the staff may have thought it was too aggressive and perceived it as a personal attack.
For my own posts about Chris in this thread , they were mostly to express disappointment for the inevitable future-hoping for a direct statement that will never come. I do apologize for my post lacking the proper padding and if Chris got offended. Like I said earlier, I really do think the staff is amazing for what they do. I can understand if Chris is too uncomfortable to speak up but I do hope he is reflecting, as I will be too.
 
I've been keeping up with this thread and I haven't seen anyone being "accusatory, demanding, targeted, and sometimes even insulting"? There was a couple instances of namedropping which I understand being against, but overall it's people who were insulted wanting long overdue accountability. It doesn't matter if people weren't involved, it was a blanket statement that implied certain forms of art was "low-effort", of course it affected everyone who read it. This statement reads like you are intentionally shifting the blame on your userbase and making Chris (you already named them yourself, so I figure it's fine now) the sole victim here when that's not the case. People are hurt and frustrated, of course their posts are going to reflect that.

There wouldn't have been as much pressure if action was taken immediately and this wasn't dragged out for as long as it was. I respect and am glad for the clarification/rule change, truly, but IMO getting a response from you, the site owner, rather than Chris himself goes to show there is still a glaring issue with accountability. You are all adults, if you make a mistake you own up to it, and if you hurt someone you say sorry.

And in case this is seen as "demanding"; at this rate I don't care if there's a response from Chris or not. This has shown enough of how staff responds to criticism.
 
I've been keeping up with this thread and I haven't seen anyone being "accusatory, demanding, targeted, and sometimes even insulting"? There was a couple instances of namedropping which I understand being against, but overall it's people who were insulted wanting long overdue accountability. It doesn't matter if people weren't involved, it was a blanket statement that implied certain forms of art was "low-effort", of course it affected everyone who read it. This statement reads like you are intentionally shifting the blame on your userbase and making Chris (you already named them yourself, so I figure it's fine now) the sole victim here when that's not the case. People are hurt and frustrated, of course their posts are going to reflect that.

There wouldn't have been as much pressure if action was taken immediately and this wasn't dragged out for as long as it was. I respect and am glad for the clarification/rule change, truly, but IMO getting a response from you, the site owner, rather than Chris himself goes to show there is still a glaring issue with accountability. You are all adults, if you make a mistake you own up to it, and if you hurt someone you say sorry.

And in case this is seen as "demanding"; at this rate I don't care if there's a response from Chris or not. This has shown enough of how staff responds to criticism.
This. Very much this.
I 100% agree with you. It feels like you literally took the words right out of my brain.
Honestly this whole ordeal has been just sad.
 
I also just don’t understand why Staff statements can, at this point, specify and defend Chris but not address me personally. My comments on this matter have been public because the original incident was made public, and I have no interest in confronting someone in a position of power privately via CTS at this time, with how this has been handled. If you’re asking us in this thread for specific, actionable feedback, then indirectly reprimanding some people for speaking about a Staff member who publicly caused harm, I think it’s only fair to specify what exactly 1) might have insulted Chris, and 2) what insulted myself and other users. It’s reasonable to expect that accountability goes all ways and free of hierarchy in this situation.
 
I've been keeping up with this thread and I haven't seen anyone being "accusatory, demanding, targeted, and sometimes even insulting"? There was a couple instances of namedropping which I understand being against, but overall it's people who were insulted wanting long overdue accountability. It doesn't matter if people weren't involved, it was a blanket statement that implied certain forms of art was "low-effort", of course it affected everyone who read it. This statement reads like you are intentionally shifting the blame on your userbase and making Chris (you already named them yourself, so I figure it's fine now) the sole victim here when that's not the case. People are hurt and frustrated, of course their posts are going to reflect that.

There wouldn't have been as much pressure if action was taken immediately and this wasn't dragged out for as long as it was. I respect and am glad for the clarification/rule change, truly, but IMO getting a response from you, the site owner, rather than Chris himself goes to show there is still a glaring issue with accountability. You are all adults, if you make a mistake you own up to it, and if you hurt someone you say sorry.

And in case this is seen as "demanding"; at this rate I don't care if there's a response from Chris or not. This has shown enough of how staff responds to criticism.

With all due respect, nearly all of the posts you've made to both feedback threads have been extremely rude and often inaccurate. This is yet another example. Considering the reports and complaints we've received, I doubt this feeling is unique to the staff. That's not to mention the post I deleted on Thursday after you made even more condescending demands just minutes after LadyDestani asked for patience and for the rules to be followed:

Do not target, harass, publicly criticize, or make snide remarks towards staff members of The Bell Tree. As volunteers, staff members devote their free time to running the forum and should be allowed to do so without being targeted.

We have been very lenient in this thread in the name of receiving feedback, but the way in which you share your opinions is going to ruin feedback for everyone if you don't change to a more cooperative approach.

By the way, I'm not about to ask one of the moderators to be wheeled out to this whipping post you keep trying to erect. At the end of the day, an event host thought an entry didn't follow the rules of their event, and some people disagreed, which is what I've addressed. There is no blame being shifted. Chris ran the event in a particular way. You decided to leave feedback in a particular way. These are two different things, and I hope you will be as receptive to feedback as we have been.
 

Hi Jeremy,

I haven't replied to this thread yet but I have been watching it. I also watched the Valentines Day events unfold and have reached out to Sleepey who is someone I now consider a friend.

You may feel like Seliph, Box, and Sleepey have gone too far by naming Chris but I'm genuinely asking what the issue with that is? We all saw the Valentines Event thread. We know which staff member told Sleepey their entry was low effort and therefore not going to be accepted, despite that being untrue.

A collection of members spoke out in defense of Sleepey and their art and no staff member outwardly acknowledged the situation.

Sleepey has asked, and others have asked, for what happened to them to be acknowledged. They do deserve an apology. Chris called them out publicly and said that their art - that they put time and effort into wasnt worthy of being accepted for an event. That was hurtful. It was mean. Whether he meant it that way or not it it still was. When my toddlers knock somebody over, even by accident, we still have them stop and check if the other person is okay. Even if they didn't mean to hurt the other child their actions still did so we stop, we acknowledge what happened, and we apologize.

At this point it feels like you would rather say Seliph (and others) are being disrespectful then acknowledge what it is they are actually trying to say.

Even if they are being mean (which I don't feel like they are) that doesn't make Sleepey any less deserving of an apology. People are getting angrier and antsy about this because it's been over a month. I understand people are busy, but this is getting silly.
 
not to add fuel to the fire but you have to realise this is a no-win situation, if accountability was taken and an apology was made in a reasonable amount of time there would be no need for any of these posts. what other option do users have except to call it out? through an anonymous CTS that people have already mentioned often aren't even acknowledged..?? it's really hurtful for people to have been belittled and see zero accountability that someone was genuinely hurt, I appreciate that possibly too many people voiced an opinion but like.. so what.. if it hurt a lot of people they have a right to say that, also YOU made a thread for feedback, you can't possibly be making thinly veiled threats to take it away now that someone was perceived to say something a bit mean about someone who was a bit mean

personally I don't care if Chris apologises or not and it's not me that was insulted, a quick apology to sleepy through DM and changing of the rules would have sorted this problem out long ago and it wouldn't have turned into this mess - next time act a bit quicker, I hope you take that as constructive feedback for future : )

I'll echo my thanks though that steps have been taken to eliminate this in future
 
i've been avoiding commenting in this thread because i don't want to start any arguments or have my tone misinterpreted or get warned etc. for disagreeing with staff, but i did want to say, i think the response to seliph could've been done without the line about them being reported/complained about by other users. it doesn't really add anything to the response, except to make it sound like the community doesn't want them around -- which is not an opinion everyone holds -- and shaming them in front of everyone, or suggesting they're unliked. that's not something that should be aired imo, it just feels very cruel and targeted, and is no better than what is allegedly happening to a staff member. two wrongs don't make a right in that regard. as a user here, it doesn't make me feel very comfortable to see the site owner treating a fellow user like that. the same goes for, as mogyay has already put it, the thinly veiled threat to remove feedback simply because of another user's tone. i hope that's constructive enough.

i will also echo that i do at least appreciate the change to the low/no effort rule, especially as someone who didn't submit an art entry for the recent event because of that, as i had limited time and -- especially after the incident -- worried my idea/entry would be considered the same had i gone through with it. having other mods, especially art inclined ones, peer review entries that are up for "debate" is a nice reassurance, if i'm reading that part right lol. i remember messaging mistreil once during the NL event to review my entry, i think regarding whether or not the referencing was too heavy, and they were really nice about it. assuming they have time, i think it would be nice to have event hosts reach out similarly like that when it comes to entries they're on the fence about.
 
Hi Jeremy,

I haven't replied to this thread yet but I have been watching it. I also watched the Valentines Day events unfold and have reached out to Sleepey who is someone I now consider a friend.

You may feel like Seliph, Box, and Sleepey have gone too far by naming Chris but I'm genuinely asking what the issue with that is? We all saw the Valentines Event thread. We know which staff member told Sleepey their entry was low effort and therefore not going to be accepted, despite that being untrue.

A collection of members spoke out in defense of Sleepey and their art and no staff member outwardly acknowledged the situation.

Sleepey has asked, and others have asked, for what happened to them to be acknowledged. They do deserve an apology. Chris called them out publicly and said that their art - that they put time and effort into wasnt worthy of being accepted for an event. That was hurtful. It was mean. Whether he meant it that way or not it it still was. When my toddlers knock somebody over, even by accident, we still have them stop and check if the other person is okay. Even if they didn't mean to hurt the other child their actions still did so we stop, we acknowledge what happened, and we apologize.

At this point it feels like you would rather say Seliph (and others) are being disrespectful then acknowledge what it is they are actually trying to say.

Even if they are being mean (which I don't feel like they are) that doesn't make Sleepey any less deserving of an apology. People are getting angrier and antsy about this because it's been over a month. I understand people are busy, but this is getting silly.
Rejecting entries and asking for resubmissions is fairly common. I disagree that it's mean. This case stood out because a lot of people didn't agree that the effort rule should apply. While enforcing an event's rules is not inherently mean, it's perfectly understandable that this particular rule has the chance to hurt feelings, which is why we're reworking it. Chris did point out from the beginning that it was not intended this way and my post described ways in which we can help prevent it in the future. Also, my post was only about 10% dedicated to disrespectful feedback, but it's an important point to make. My previous post was, unfortunately, the fifth time something has had to be said in this thread.
 
I'm not trying to pile on here but I agree with daringred that the comment about the reports/complaints seliph has supposedly received was unnecessary. if I recall correctly this isn't even the first time a comment like that has been made to seliph and I don't think it's appropriate to air that out, especially since the staff always ask us not to talk about our own reports and won't give us much information when our reports are dealt with to maintain privacy

I wasn't involved in the valentine's day event and I've only just observed everything, but I genuinely don't think anyone is just trying to get a chance to hurl insults at chris like implied. sleepey has said they were hurt by what happened and a lot of users (me included) think that means an apology is warranted, that's all
 
Rejecting entries and asking for resubmissions is fairly common. I disagree that it's mean. This case stood out because a lot of people didn't agree that the effort rule should apply. While enforcing an event's rules is not inherently mean, it's perfectly understandable that this particular rule has the chance to hurt feelings, which is why we're reworking it. Chris did point out from the beginning that it was not intended this way and my post described ways in which we can help prevent it in the future. Also, my post was only about 10% dedicated to disrespectful feedback, but it's an important point to make. My previous post was, unfortunately, the fifth time something has had to be said in this thread.

While rejecting submissions and asking for a resubmission is fairly common and the job of a staff member the way Chris went about it was mean. You may disagree that it's mean but it feels like a good chunk of people disagree with you. Namely Sleepey, the person who's feelings on this whole ordeal matter the most imo. If their feelings were hurt you can't ~disagree~ with that.

Sleepey has said that what Chris did hurt their feelings. It made them feel negatively about TBT. Other users saw the way Chris responded and also agreed that not only was his decision wrong but the way he wrote it was callous. He could have PM'd Sleepey. When I've had event entries under review for potentially not being accepted for something other than missing a username I've been PM'd, which is the respectful way to do things.

In Sleepey's case his entry was initially denied in a vague enough way they thought maybe the picture of their entry wasn't suitable. Fair enough thinking that staff didn't want a picture of the 3DS but instead an exported file. So they exported their picture and re-tried. This was another opportunity for Chris to privately message Sleepey about why their entry wasn't being accepted but instead Chris chose to publicly tell Sleepey that their entry wasn't being accepted because it didn't meet ~tbt standards for effort~ which as we've all discussed is problematic.

Even if Chris pointed out that he didn't intend for it to be mean, it was. That's the issue. What he did ended up being mean and hurtful and so Sleepey deserves an apology. I'm glad the rule about effort is being re-examined but that isn't an excuse to not apologize to Sleepey.
 
Not a serious suggestion:
I think in the last thread someone mentioned default icons for TBT- can you imagine if there were avatars on TBT (like Reddit) and using collectibles to dress up said avatar...
I know you said don't take this seriously, but it reminded me of the Sega official forums I used to go to. I think they're long gone, I tried looking them up and I can't find them. Anyway that's what they did. They had default avatars of Sega to use Sonic, Phantasy Star, ect. but then later on they decided to open up the forum to using any saved avatars. This was a nice nostalgic blast from the past. ❤️
 
Last edited:
Back
Top