itch.io

From what I understand (I could not test that though, as there is no free version of the software), the generator comes with parts baked in that you are supposed to use to create the characters. You can then edit those created characters afterwards (with an image program). The other character asset packs do not seem to be expansions for the generator, but standalone graphics to be used and edited. You can basically see it this way: There were packs released to give you characters for your game making, and then at some point a generator was released to give you more freedom to create your own characters by building from the parts already provided in the software.

Now, depending on how open the software is, I can imagine that within its folders you may find the parts the software uses. So if you would use the same pattern for a part (for example the hair), you could potentially expand/replace a part-category with more (from for example the standalone asset packs), but that would take more effort to get working than if they would be actual expansion packs with the parts already ready to put in.

Edit: Keep in mind that this info is for the original version of the generator. The EX version seems not to be available yet (unless you got the bundle), so maybe that one has that additional feature.

I cannot find anything under that name, not here on itch.io, not via searching it on Google. Are you sure that name is the right one for the program, and that you got it for this platform?

That being said, this is the general itch.io discussion board. If you have questions regarding a product, you need to check the project page and see if there is a comment section / discussion board enabled on there.

While I do not claim to know much about this discussion, as well as believing you have a very valid point, I just want to add an additional information:

While it is true that (normally - not always), platforms with drm (meaning they actually keep your games and you cannot play them without using their services) will keep your access as long as you have  purchased a game before it being removed from the storefront, the very fact that itch.io offers games without drm means that you 'technically' do not need such a thing. You can literally, after you downloaded the games, keep them forever - standalone - to be used, backed up, and - although you are usually not allowed to share them publicy, give them to your close neighborhood friend like in the good old days.

A combination of both would be great of course. I do not know exactly how gog handles it, but they do offer drm-free games you would at least assume can still be accessed from your library if you have already purchased them. In that regard, itch.io does have restrictions to delete projects and accounts if people have already bought your work, so to enable them to redownload the items. But I assume in very specific cases like this one might be, there is not too much the store can do if a readily available file gets removed from the platform. But that is already going into a territory I can only make assumptions, so I will leave it at that.

Also, while I do see a point discussing this (and being aware of it for the future), one does have to acknowledge the fact that this is quite a specific scenario. Not every game franchise will make some legal deals with streaming companies. But it does indeed shed some light into the questions of this being only one example of it being too easy to pull things from buyers without 'fair' reason (legal does not always have to be that), as well as the thought of some sellers/creators not caring too much about the consequences of leaving behind a certain platform/group of their users for debatably justified reasons.

To give some further insight to what was written above:

You can create and publish your project without any downloadable/playable (if browser content) files, but unless you want to show it on your profile or make sure people can easily find it via its browser adress (as draft/restricted are a bit more "complicated" in that matter), you shouldn't do it. You can see it as a good way to make it "visible" at first, but as mentioned you will not be listed into the search results. Not only that but you basically "miss your chance" to appear in the recent category, especially if your publishing and possible indexing into the search results have a larger time gap between them. If you post a devlog for a project and categorize it (justifiably) into "Major update" you may get a push in "Recent". All that said, the general spirit here is that you should not rely on the recent tab and search results too much anyway, but it is still better than wasting it if you do not have the reasons I wrote about at the beginning.

Another thing I want to point out: Devlog Posts are not bound to the same rule you have set for your project if I remember correctly. For example, you can post a devlog for a draft/restricted project and set that devlog to published. It will appear in the devlog section of the website (not this discussion board), as well as in that specific recent tab. I would assume general blog posts you can create from Dashboard -> Posts (and not choosing a specific project you have created) will work the same way. So basically: You can create devlogs and show your progress to people, even without setting your entire project page to public. And when users are on a devlog of a project, clicking on a link that leads them to the actual project should work normally if I recall. So they can visit your website for what it already is from the devlog if they are interested.

All the above is meant as: Publishing -> Set to public when editing a project page / devlog. (Instead of choosing draft or restricted. If you just create a page, it is automatically set to draft at first. So creation is not necessarily publishing in that context.

About the discussion board: You can also share your progress about a project in the devlog section of this community. (It is basically the overall discussion board for itch.io). It was created before devlogs existed, but you can still see it as a way to share your progress directly with the people who visit this place. Mind that you should create and edit only one topic (per project I believe, make sure you read the rules that are openable above each category of this board).

I think most people also do not care that much about the whole drm thing and have no problem just installing what is mostly known and used for pc gaming nowadays. The same way also a lot of people do not mind installing every launcher the publishers throw at them. I am open for other options if they make sense, but what we have for game launchers at the moment strikes me the same way as the billion streaming sites every company owner wanted a bite of the cake from. It can be bad to be on both sides of the scale, I would say.

Itch.io not only has no drm, but is rather more niche. There are a lot of thoughts going into publishing on "yet another" storefront for a developer/publisher, so unless it hasn't been forced onto you or gained somewhat mainstream appeal, most will not use it. GOG is another good example: It wasn't known that well unless you specifically looked for a good site to find old (and working) games. Since then it became wider known, partly because of the company behind it, partly because it expanded to also include new and indie titles. But still, it is mostly a question if "new game xyz" comes to the platform, either because the publisher doesn't want to tend to an additional platform and calculate the profit, alongside having to take care of another (drm-free) build, or because the game is already stuck  on one of the other publisher-owned launchers, among it just not being that publicly used compared to steam/consoles. Which looks like a self-repeating cycle at that point.

This has to be the strangest topic I have ever seen in my life. Especially knowing what the comments looked like last year.

Have a great (and normal) birthday, Dave.

Reading the devlog and the announcement on twitter did make it seem like it. That being said, a part of me already knew that it could be different, especially knowing your way of writing for a while by now. But it made more sense to me to adress the assumption directly instead of making it a long comment chain.

All that being said, it was a misunderstanding and I was wrong. So my apologies for that.

Have a nice day.

If you may want to clarify the situation, as reading the post makes it  possible to interpret it in multiple ways:

- The finale/ending of the game will not release on itch.io

- The game will release in its full state on Steam for a asking price, but that version will not also be available on itch.io by updating this project and adding a minimum price to pay

If that is the case, this is always ... quite divisive. As someone mentioned it pretty on point a few days back on the community board, this always feels like you made a userbase on this platform and leave them behind for Steam after they 'supported' you, leaving them with the unfinished product. Saying that the game would always be able to change also makes this only so much better, because it still gave the impression that you had plans to release the full product on here. Not finishing the product in itself can always be a risk, but knowing that it actually became a finished product - just not on here - will always have a bitter aftertaste.

Something to justify this semi-sufficently: It was not a paid product. If that would have been the case, I do not think this could have been salvaged in any form or way, to be honest. But saying it was an in development work people could support voluntarily, makes it a bit more redeemable. But not completely - because those people still donated.

Now I do not know how many people did support you this way, or how much of a userbase you had on here at all - and this does justify a decision like this. I am not saying that one glove fits all here, and I also was more or less on board this development since its release on here, so I am the last person who would not understand or support the situation as much as possible. But it still makes it a bit difficult, at least when there are alternatives available:

- Why not release the full Steam release on itch.io as well, by updating the project and switching to minimum price to pay. People who already claimed it by donating will still have access to the project as well that way

- There is also an option to give out Steam Keys for people currently owning the project by having donated. The project (in its current state) could be switched to completely free, so nobody can donate anymore, and then everyone who did beforehand could be handed out a Steam Key. You can read more about that here: https://itch.io/docs/creators/download-keys#external-keys-steam-etc

These options (in whatever combination) would easily make this situation more supportable.

All that being said, as mentioned above, I do support your decision to go to Steam with the game and wish you recognition and success. It was enjoyable to go this journey with you and see the project grow and improve over time.

I am not sure if I will check it out on Steam. I would be inclined to do so, even paying for it in full once more as I really do like the game and want to support you - but I am done with the platform for a good while now and did not have the intention to go back to it. Thinking about making an exception here should say a lot, but I still need to think about it.

If you feel like changing your way going forward on itch.io, I would of course also gladly take a look at it. But I am only writing this for the sake of making it obvious. Choose to do what you think is best.

Best regards.

I always regarded the Devlog section on this discussion board as an additional way to introduce people to your project and share updates with them, separate to the actual devlog feature which presents your updates to users via the dedicated search listing, as well as in the feed of people (following you). Those devlogs will also be added to your corresponding project page as sort of an info-pool and archive for future visitors. You can create multiple and update/archive/delete them individually, where as going from the rules in the devlog section on here, you should update one topic you created for your project with additional posts and edits.

Basically said: The 'real' devlogs are yours, they are part of managing your projects. The section on this discussion board is sharing your work progress with the community on here.

There are also two types of devlogs since a past update: You can post a devlog directly as part of your account, so it will not be bound directly to one of your projects. For this you can go into your Dashboard -> Posts -> Create a new post. They can basically seen as managing a 'blog'. Or, by choosing one of your projects, or creating a devlog while editing them, you can create devlogs tied to this specific project. You can use both for different context of writing about stuff more in general or specific, or some other reason you do not want to tie something to a specific project.

In regards to spamming: I would not think copying your devlog progress into your forum topic would be considered that, as well as vice versa.

If you intend to create actual devlogs, you should avoid copying the same information over and over again. A specific devlog does not need to be a general one as well. If you have something to write about multiple specific projects, a general devlog may be the better choice. The latter can be context-specific though, so if you have a logical reason, I doubt you would get in trouble for creating two similiar looking devlogs for a very rare occasion.

There are some other things about devlogs in how they are integrated and can be interacted with, but that should be the general gist of them.

I think the best outcome would be if the person posting their video genuinely put effort into making the video out of their own personal interest, as well as wanting to support the developer. In that regard, I would be happy to see someone not only put effort into something they love to do, but also wanted to support me.

Sometimes however, it feels like people are posting it just with the intent of getting views on their video. Maybe they still choose to showcase your game because they were interested, maybe they just saw it as a good strategy.

I think that still benefits both parties, so minding it personally would not make too much sense. But it still seems a bit on the nose. Sometimes I can understand that approach, as every person may have a different reason or thinking process, sometimes it does feel a bit disappointing.

While in your library, when you hover over the thumbnail of a game, you should see an interface popup which lets you move them around or remove them. You can arrange them in any way you like until you are pleased.

Granted, that is not the same as a sorting function, and if you have a lot of games in the collection before you start organizing them, it may get tedious.

The things you own list cannot be rearranged, it will always sort the items you bought or claimed from most recent to least.

That is alright, but I have donated to everyone I plan to use things from so far, and I really took a liking to these fruits out of all I found. I also like to know that I have 'claimed' all of the things I want to use, so there is a personal reason, as well.

Thank you very much for your work and support. Have a great day.

I would be interested to know if the character could also be used to create a profile picture. Would that fall under the usage rights or be considered redistribution?

Kind regards.

No worries, feel free to let me know once you have fixed the issue, so I can donate you something.

There seems to be a problem with your direct payment setup, as I am not able to use PayPal to purchase your product. May you take a look at it?

Kind regards.

If you go to your account settings (the down-arrow at the top right corner of the page -> Settings) and select 'Email adresses', you should be able to either send a new verification e-mail or change your current e-mail adress linked to your itch.io account.

Hope that helps you.

Yes, I remember it as well now. In that sense it would not sound unlikely that one may get a boost when the project gets out of 'In development'.

I would assume some sort of guidebooks in relation to programming and game design. Especially ones that focus on a combination of both, seeing as you want to look into gameplay mechanics and how to implement them.

That being said I would not know of specifics other than looking up those kind of guides in proper places. So maybe someone with more knowledge can add something to this topic.

From what I understand you only get that boost into 'Recent' the first time your game gets published and indexed. The FAQ is a bit vague on the whole process, though. For example I am pretty sure I once got one point in my publishing e-mail stating that pages in prototype/without downloads will not get added into the search results. Which makes sense, but it leaves the question if it still counted as published then or not. So the same could go for some other selectable types or circumstances.

I guess one way of seeing is that if you would know it too exactly it may be abused? And seeing as itch.io clearly states that you should not rely on the recent tab too much anyway to gather a following, I guess it is debatable if such things should be updated into the faq eventually or not.

This is the general itch.io discussion board. If you need help from a developer you bought something from, you can try the following:

- Check if they have a comment section / discussion section at the bottom of the project you bought

There should also be a page where you can see individual support emails listed if a developer has supplied one, but I cannot find that page for the life of me. I was certain it was another one than https://itch.io/support, but maybe I am wrong and I just do not have any adresses listed.

In regards to your problem: This usally means either a general issue with the plugin (error in the code/placement in your plugin list/incompatibility with the corescriptversion or other plugins used/wrong iteration of the engine used) or an issue with how to set up the plugin parameters/database or assets needed for the plugin to access.

You could try the following:

- Check if your e-mail has been verified (Account Settings -> E-mail adresses)

- Disable your VPN for the uploading process

- Use a different browser

- Try disabling your antivirus (at your own discretion and with that specific tab being open to try the upload)

- Try restarting your internet connection (On your decive and/or router) or your device entirely

- Wait for some hours or a day, maybe there simply is an issue with the server right now

If none of that works, it may be a more specific issue in regards to your internet connection / location. In that case, maybe someone knows a bit more about that.

Do you use custom css for the page or just the editor?

My only assumption would be that when choosing a hyperlink colour with not enough contrast to the background, it may auto-highlight it. So you could try choosing a different colour combination.

It does not seem like you can change notifications on site. There is a notification category in your account settings, but it is only tied to e-mail notifications.

In that regard, the feed system does seem a bit rudimentary. You could make a suggestion to improve it on https://itch.io/board/580406/ideas-feedback (or look up if a corresponding topic already exists and bump it).

I often see creators note that they would like to hear from people when they are using their assets in a game, so that they can check it out. Optional, of course. And there are devs who do that, just as you have experienced.

I do not think that you can do too much more here, though. At least I do not see a simple way to really 'track this' (for example if your assets would fall under a very particular tag that devs would use when using it, so you can easily pin down which games have used it). I believe at the end of the day, it is just a matter of 'letting your art out into the wild'. You may stumble on it from time to time, but I do not think there is too much to force the issue.

I believe there is a captcha check during log-in, yes. But probably anyone with some tech knowledge would now give you the answer that this does not stop bots completely, otherwise there would not be issues with bots as a conclusion.

I have not yet clicked on the report button (and do not feel like testing it out by clicking on it under random posts), but I assumed it would notify the staff to check the corresponding comment/user. Maybe the system also tracks reports and acts accordingly if too many accumulate, but that could also easily be abused, so maybe a notification is all there is - simply because while we are managing our own pages, there is a 'parent' above us we (and especially 'normal' users) can ask for help.

So the basic answer to your question is: It does not... really change a thing. The person could still be the same amount of bot as they could not. Which of course brings us back to all the analyz-y stuff about overdoing and how to handle it by your own measurements.

I know what you mean with basically saying: No matter which route you take on this, you feel like you are overthinking anyways. Doing it on your own (specifically planning on how to do it) - overthinking. Asking others about the issue (Making it bigger than it is) - overthinking. Again, one part here is to read the room. Is it overthinking or just making sense to open another topic on this, for example. The other part is the solution I came up with (or actually still try to integrate more and more in my behaviour) - listening to my feeling. Because as you mention yourself, there always seems to be so much variety in how things could go and actually be, that with thinking alone you never can get to a satisfying conclusion. Came up with something yourself? Maybe you still forgot something or learn to do better next time. Asked someone? Maybe they only gave you their point of view? It can never be 'perfect' in that regard.

If you try listen to your feeling however, it usually turns out... as intended. That is at least my experience (and can sound not that convincing, I am aware). Sometimes it turns out right, because you did the most fitting action in your circumstance, sometimes it does turn out so-so, but usually because you were supposed to learn something from it. That is at least how I noticed a lot of times since I tried that approach. And even if it would be complete nonsense, you actively achieved the following: Not thinking too much about something were it is not required, and just do as you feel is right. And that is usually always beneficial. Because even if you have to think about a topic more, your feeling will tell you that as well, or you can learn something from doing what you felt was right to broaden your horizon.

In regards to some of your points:

Checking if a spammer or not for peace of mind: While I know that nagging feeling, I can assure just letting it rest at some point (especially if there is nothing to be gained) is the wiser choice. And it makes you think less, which is a win in that regard.

Discord Situation: This is actually something I think about from time to time, as well. You do not want to be unsympathetic to a person who just are how they are. Seems correct. But it is not as black and white there, either. Sometimes people have to learn and adjust their behaviour, at least as much as they are able to. And it is sadly a truth that we all only have so much attention and endurance to handle all kind of people and situations. You can only try to do your best, which again, for me means to listen to my feeling. That could mean waiting until a person leaves on their own eventually, getting into a situation where you can remove them, keeping them because it is fine, or even liking to have them around. It can still be a very diverse outcome, but without overthinking and doubting oneself.

And if your feeling tells you that it is a bot... at some point you have to make the decision if you want to kick them based on that - or not. Maybe you learn something from it, maybe it was the right decision to do because you needed to handle it that way to 'make it work' for you. And maybe they simply were a bot. Just as sometimes you just know some people are not that great and no matter how much you doubt yourself it turns out that you were right at the end. Again, quite wild amount of outcomes. You can only listen to yourself of what would be the best approach at that point in time.

Writing a second reminder: That is actually a really good solution. And if your only doubt is that it could come across awkward: Forget about that. Honestly, if you think it would make sense to approach the situation like that, just do it upfront: Tell them why you are asking again, what was missing from their last reply, give them some points they could answer on, and just be clear about it. What is the worst that could happen? That they did not like your polite honesty for not seeing why you did it? It may sound harsh from my side, but unless I have a good reason to believe they can nothing for it, it sounds like a problem on their side, not mine. So I can be upfront. I do not have to be afraid of making it awkward. We already are in that situation to begin with and it was not me starting to get us into that. And after being upfront and tackling all points, it may even give you a better view depending on how the person answers you once more.

Putting into spotlight: Yes, I meant the particular user. And yes, purely realistically speaking, you do have a point about how the discussion board is visited and by whom. I am just more of a person of 'the end does not justify the means'. It still seems not polite (or right) to me to put them into a spotlight. And at the end of the day, they could be a normal user liking your work - and they could potentially visit this discussion board. Feels kind of... not cool to me. But as said in my previous post, I can see why you did it. It made sense (at least to you). If not trying to be black and white, the world did not collapse on it. And yes, sometimes it is once again about reading the room: Would it work out this time? How would the other person react? Does it make sense in this situation? For example, your asking yourself what else of an option would there have been? In regards to the user here, as some have pointed out, either letting it be or try to solve it by yourself. For the teammate you had, maybe writing to them directly, instead of seeking an indirect solution where they may see you talked about them. Most of the time, people do not like that too much. But this can (and should) rely on how you read the room. Maybe it did make total sense there to do it like that. Who am I to put your situation into a box and say 'No'.

About ratings: I mean, what could you really do if a platform would be (potentially, not saying it is) infested with bots spamming positive or negative ratings? Hoping that it gets solved eventually, I assume. In that regard, I guess I would not mind either. I would not like fake ratings per se, I would love to get ratings that are truthful, but I cannot do anything against 'good' or 'bad' spam. If you are doing your work commercially, you would of course be driven to like one side more and still care about the other for obvious reasons. If you are doing it as a hobby, you could still care about the latter, but... it is really not worth it. I certainly would not.

About reviews/comments: Again, if you are going commercial, or just want your work to be recognized, than yes. Hoping for users to actually use the systems that matter would be great. Adding a detailed text in some form would be a bonus. From my point of view though: Ratings would be cool, yeah. But I would love for people to engage in the comments about it, no matter if just a short 'Really cool' or a 3 page essay about the principals of game design. Of course, especially if it comes down to 'really bad', you would hope for a more detailed feedback instead of leaving a negative 'impact' on your work. But that is also just how it is. Some people give their expression (sometimes justified, sometimes debatably not), and all you can do is accept and/or ask them for a more detailed answer.

Pinned topics: At the end of the day, it is always up to the mindset of the staff/moderator on how they see their surroundings they are working in. They could have felt like such a topic would make sense to pin as it is not clearly explained in the guidelines - which I agree with. And with some topics they may think it is doable in other ways. Which... is debatable. I often agree on it. Sometimes I feel like the guidelines have more topics which could be expanded upon, as well as some issues handled better on the site/board (Like the reminder of not asking about indexing within a spoiler tag at the top which feels like only 2% of visitors are actually reading). That being said: I am using this site for almost three years now, and while I can see need of improvement at some parts (for example the speed of updates and especially support handling requests/issues), one can see that they do care to do their job right - and they also do listen to their users. Which I do not take for granted nowadays.

... That last part got a bit sidetracked. What I wanted to write here is: It could be a viable suggestion to the team to maybe pin topics more often or think about how to improve the faq and guides on the discussion board. However, as mentioned last post, they probably have other matters to attend to - and as we all know, the usage of the discussion board is quite limited, so once again: I would not think too much about topics getting pinned or not, to be honest.

I am not sure if you intended this topic to be answered by anyone else than a moderator/staff member, so feel free to ignore me if that is the case.

I tried to look at your situation from various potential angles,  but no matter how you look at it - and reading the rest of your post, I believe it simply comes down to this: You are really giving this too much care for reasons you cannot completely avoid anyway.

And I am not writing this to make your issue seem less important. Believe me, I understand why one would think about stuff like this the way you do. But it still always comes back to the fact that it is just overdoing it without any reasonable benefit. Something that one has to accept at some point.

To get into your points:

About the user: I do not think that they are a bot or are using AI. They are either very young and/or believe writing anything to leave a note/support the creator is a valid use of the comment function. And if you ignore all else - they are actually correct.

Looking through their other comments on their profile page makes it obvious that they intend to write such short comments, either after playing or by just looking at the screenshots of a page. The only thing that makes me go more into 'troll' direction would be specifically the comment about the 'jumping mechanic' - because it is written quite... on the nose, to say the least. But as you wrote yourself, this could also have a logical reason. The thing once more however is: You have multiple reasons, and you cannot pin it down. Not even the staff can confirm for sure that it might be an age thing - at least I cannot remember that you actively have to put your birth date or age when creating your account.

Which brings us to the point of: How far can/should you go as a page creator/moderator? It is your home base so to speak. So potentially, you could moderate the 'intention' of how your comment section should work. But going from what I wrote above about how the user may see the comment section: Are they wrong? Can you make the justified choice to kick them out? Would that go against any fair use of your moderation rights (Which should be a thing in the Guidelines, I would assume).

And that brings us to the final part: All that effort for the following train of thought: How will this user make my comment section look and what image will it reflect to the other users? The thing is you are asking this question in an open web space, where not everyone has the same point of view on things and features, and are thinking about limiting the 'behaviour' as outlined above. The questions here are: Is it really worth it, all things considered? Where are the limits? Where do you have to stop anyway? Is it really that bad to open yourself up to just let it be?

These are questions you have to ask yourself, because nobody else can really give you a final answer to this. You can see a valid reasoning for acting upon this a specific way - there may be merit in there. But it may also be just unnecessary waste of your own energy. Think about it.

On another note: The way you explain your situation and want to resolve it is clashing a bit with what you are actively doing with that mentioned user here. You are writing yourself that you may not want to go all out on them because there could be valid reason for their behaviour and you do not want to be rude. But at the same moment you are openly putting them in a spot light in the global itch.io discussion board. I am not saying you should not have opened this topic. And looking the user up made it possible for me to take my own point of view. But considering: Is it worth it? Are you not thinking too much about it? And during that process: Are you not making a bit overly questionable decisions yourself, even if with reason?

About the locked topic: I read through it (even twice I believe) and I was under the impression that it resolved the issue as much as possible. The points arising here are - as you pointed out yourself - that the system might not be perfect. Especially by just going by the guidelines, I actually had to look up other people asking how the process works and what you can do with it.

But that is exactly the thing: The system works how it does. And in that regard, I believe the moderator gave you all the answers they could have given you - and pinned it specifically because others may want to know it themselves. They locked it because it seemed sufficently done to them and did something that is just common procedure. Asking for more after this is once again thinking into it too much: You are asking for a specific treatment that no one could always foresee being necessary - which is the slight difference to 'actual needing improvement'. I am not saying that they could not improve there either - I think the most obvious problem here compared to other discussion boards is the lack of a private message function - which has been ommited for a reason, however. Everything else you pointed out is - again - quite specific. I for once would not see a reason for why I would need to be notified when a topic of mine gets pinned. And if I would really want to add something to a locked topic, then I read the room: Should I make a new topic? Was it closed by a moderator with the intention of not being discussed any further? Will the moderator eat me (potentially unjustified) if I personally have more questions regarding the closed topic? In regards to your issue - especially after two years - I think nobody would have said anything to you for making a new topic to discuss this further. In some discussion boards a moderator can even merge such topics with the old one.

And if you really think a system needs improvement, they have a dedicated section here to post it. But I would assume adding some more notification check-boxes for forum activity might not have the highest priority for them at the moment.

Again, this is all just my opinion, and I am not perfect either. So take it for what it is worth.

Edit: Having read redonihunter's comment: Something I actually forgot to mention here, is that yes of course: It could also still be something unnatural. Even though (and as they pointed out themself at the end) I believe this not to be the case here.

So it is still a thing you have to judge for yourself. If you have enough reason to believe they are a bot or doing something malicious, it is your very right to ban or report them. But as it is now, and as (including you) three people now have the same opinion of 'Might be, but potentially not' - it just comes back to a user writing comments. Which is just what it is. And honestly: Even if you could ban/report one bot and stop their masterplan of creating good ratings and reviews - as long as it does not go overboard - how much energy do you really want to spend into streamlining your comments and thinking about every spammer/bot/mastermind?

Downloading malware from itch.io is a realistic scenario, so you always have to make sure you know what you are doing. Check the page for suspicious stuff that makes it seem like it is not the real-deal, check for comments or the discussion board if it is enabled. Make a google search about your issue and see what comes up. It can always be that the game is unsafe or that someone has copied it to spread a virus.

That being said, antivirus software likes to claim executebales as malware, especially from indie games who did not go through the signing procress like the big companies. Some executebales get around that because they already are signed from the get-go with the software you make your game, but it is not always a clear-cut case.

So in such a scenario - and only if that would be the case here - you can do the following at your own risk:

1. If the files get only deleted after you start to execute them - you can go into the quarantine of your antivirus and restore them. You can then look up your whitelist of the antivirus (it should be a section under settings/in the quarantine menu/something on is own in the application) and add the corresponding file (for example the .exe) to the whitelist so your antivirus will ignore it.

2. If the files get already flagged before you can add them to your whitelist, nor can you restore them from your quarantine to do step 1 (sometimes your antivirus just deletes stuff outright without warning), you can prepare everything in your browser to be ready to hit download, deactivate your antivirus, download just that one file you need and add it to your whitelist, and re-activate your antivirus. During that process you should not keep anything else open in your browser (or something that connects to the internet unnecessarily).

I believe with Steam you at least have to give comment on your recommendation, so that people can 'review' the reviews. That of course does not change how the rating system works and that those ratings will always be a mix between subjective opinion and objective analysis.

The system could also be expanded to make it more custom-tailored and fair. But that is a topic that could be discussed a lot. Some had considered a middle option to choose instead of just recommend or not. Maybe giving viewers some tags or filtering the reviews based on the collected account interests could also be a viable solution.

In regards to itch.io, I get why they have 'limited' the reviews here - but it also makes their function just that - limited. Maybe they could also expand it for users to check some questions when rating, like 'What did you like/not like - Gameplay - Presentation - etc., or simply giving stars to more categories and then summarizing this to give a better insight when checking the review section for a user.

Then again, it seems not a lot of people are using the rating system to much extent anyway. And you can also always just open up your comment section if you want people to share their opinion on your product. The system might not be perfect, but I guess it is an additional thing to serve its purpose for users and when considering results in the search system.

Checking their page, I have found this devlog: https://nachogames.itch.io/thats-not-my-neighbor/devlog/708650/read-if-you-have-...

Have you tried these steps?

That being said, I do not know this game - so try deactivating your antivirus (or rather try setting the game on the whitelist of your antivirus, never just deactivate it permanently without very good reason) at your own discretion.

I think one option would be to check the kickstarter site directly. I am sure nowadays they have a faq in terms of tips and recommendations, as well as guidelines of what you actually have to have ready when making a project there.

My personal opinion (with zero experience on this, mind you) is that I can see it being difficult to pitch something without showing anything. Ideas on text are usually not enough. I would want to say 'nowadays' because of so many games out there, as well as failed kickstarters - but honestly I believe it would never have been too easy without some material to show. Of course there are always exceptions to the rule, but I am sure you can see how small that chance would be.

That being said, if you already have 25% of a demo, do you not have anything to show? At least anything from the project, or maybe to underline your presentation text.

At the end of the day: If you set up a kickstarter that gets cancelled/refunded if it does not meet the goal, you at least tried. (I believe that is how it works, right?) Others even tried a second time afterwards. That being said, this could harm your 'publicity' (or basically said, a second run must not always work out great).

In regards of what you should do: Difficult - as is the whole Kickstarter affair. I just recently looked into a project where the dev did a successful second run on it - and they pretty much regretted their decision because of what it meant to work on the game under that circumstances. But that is only one possibility.

My recommendation: Check the kickstarter website. Ask for advice (as you did). Think about it from all sides and what you feel would make sense in your situation.

That being said, anyone clearly having more experience with this than me should feel free to chime in on this.

I do not believe there is such a function. You can choose how long they will be dismissed - so if you have chosen a time period, they should reappear after that time frame. If you chose until next interaction or forever, then that is what you have chosen.

If you closed those pages recently, you may be able to re-open them via your browser history. On their project page, you can then rate them. (Or after your next interaction with them, if you have chosen that before)

While I agree that a score system in itself is not perfect, sometimes people also may just overthink it (or in that regard, make them way too complex). With 5 stars, you basically have a scale of (Not at all - mostly not - middle ground - mostly yes - very yes). You can either define that by how much you enjoyed it subjectively, how good it was objectively, or a mix of both - which you then can specify with the optional review function.

As others mentioned above, first and foremost there are legal matters to consider. Not even only for the archiver, but also sometimes for the dev themself, who could have a very good reason of why they only publish their game a certain way, or - because of that - how they can handle future sharing and archiving.

From an archiver's point of view: You can not >just< take another person's game and upload it without considering (and knowing) that legal situation. I think it was mentioned in another topic a while back, but there is no law for video games the same way as for some music and literature that has been made public-domain, and even there sometimes the situation is not that clear-cut nowadays.

With all that being said: I am also on the side of game preservation. As soon as you publish your work to the outer world, it starts connecting with it. That is partially why you wanted to create it, right? It can resonate with people - a lot even. It would be entitled of those people to say they have a right on it, yes. But it also seems short-sighted to take it away for them without reason. Or to not think about avoiding such an outcome.

Which brings me to how I would (generally) handle this situation: Try to plan a way you will handle this for future preservation. You have terms of use for your game, you want to keep it in your hands as long as possible and only the way you want it to be available. That is fine. But think about how you will open this up for a scenario x (or think about it when scenario x comes) and change your terms or add an addendum. Give your work (partially) into the hands of others, so that they can at least keep it online and alive.

At the end, it will always be the responsibility of the game dev, and they also will always have the last word. Which makes sense and I believe this should not be changed (unless something like public-domain would make sense). But they should also bear the responsibility to think further ahead about their work and what it means to the world. It would actually annoy me quite a lot to know I would have spend so much effort into my work just to see it gone one day because I did not set up a proper way to allow people keeping it around.

As others wrote: You should try to get a broader picture of the situation and ask both sides. I support you for opening this topic first - and making a video out of it can be informative and inspiring.

About your name in search: The latest update to the search backend removed showing accounts in the search results. So this is simply something that is currently no longer available.

About your games: It currently (for a long time by now) takes considerably longer for games to get indexed. I do not remember the specific time frame suggested to wait right now, but it should (or rather can) be more than two weeks. You can open a topic like this, writing that you have followed the instructions, so it can get looked up accordingly. If it is still in the usual time frame however, you will probably be asked to be patient.

Getting indexed is more of a question about it being your first (paid) project, I believe. But even this may only be one of multiple conditions. In general, your project either gets indexed or has to get approval, which then simply is a matter of time. Contacting support is also an option, but they may still take their time to handle all of the requests.

Nowadays my two 'anchors' for handling feedback are the following:

1. Know what you yourself want to do and how you want to do it. Only you yourself can know that, and it is understandable that you have a vision about your project and how much changes you want/plan/can implement

2. That being said, the surroundings and 'how it goes' are quite important. You always should be open to feedback, and (at first) not even limit yourself too much in your own beliefs. There are always things you may have not considered, and you can always improve or take a chance that made itself available

To give some more context: I am currently planning out the projects I want to do with what I am doing here. Granted, it is only a hobby for me - so you already have much more space to maneuvre and do your own thing (so keep that in mind). The reason why I am doing that is because I want a clear idea and plan going forward, as it feels right to me to do so. With this statement alone you would already have a lot of situations/personalities who would strongly disagree with you, however.

Based on that, I also know what I want to put into the games, and how receiving feedback will be able to shape this vision. And while this does not mean that you could not potentially still go a complete open way of re-designing everything as it comes along to make it a better game, it is not something that I plan to do, simply believing that I will get out something enjoyable the way I already planned to do it.

And those last scentences above are where it becomes tricky, because as you said yourself: You believe to have talent - and you should (no matter if you could improve). So handling feedback and the way you incorporate can/will always get tested by certain situations where people would like to have you do it different for one reason or the other. Because they want to see it made another way, because they think they are right, because they believe you are not caring for feedback otherwise. Again, it is not that they have to be wrong - they could have valid points. It is just that thinking feedback has to be 'this' or 'that' is a way too limited approach. Some people/environments understand this, and they do not mind how you do your work as long as it is good. Sometimes you find yourself in situations where you are constantly questioned about your way of doing it - and it does not always have to mean that your work is not good. It can be quite a variying experience.

That is why I believe the first point to be important: Know yourself what you want and how to handle it. Because then you can ask a lot of people for feedback and take everything as valid. No matter what group of players, no matter what they believe and what they are providing. Everything is valuable, and everything that is not for you -personally- - it is your job to remind you how you would like to handle it. You do not have to change your gameplay if you do not want, even if you got 100 reports about it. But you can look into all of them with an open mind to see if there is not still something in it that you could see a point in - and maybe even do change in your project - as long as you want to do it.

The second point is more versatile and objective(?): Your surroundings play an important role. If you know you have people that play your games who understand you and your work and how you want to incorporate feedback, you can either let more into your testing, or simply write out to them what your are looking for (and what not for example - can save them a lot of work if they know you do not want to check that specifically). Also - workload. As you said yourself, it can be daunting to go through so much feedback. It is totally valid to reduce the amount of testers (or give them clear directions) because of that. It just comes back to the question: Are you limiting it because of a realistic circumstance or because you do not want to handle it as described above?

About your points specifically:

1. Feedback that makes your game universally better

While I see where your are coming from here (and you are basically correct), do keep in mind that even these things can be subjective. Not everyone is bothered by the same control schemes, mechanics (technical aspects), and some (perhaps you yourself) see them as solid and an improvement. So even this feedback needs to be split up, theoretically.

2. Feedback to make the game fit better with others of the genre

Yes and no, based on what I described above. I am personally more in the 'Yes' team myself, as I do not like to do the same things over again just because 'they are part of the genre' based on what people feel it has to contain. A game is a game, it can be enjoyable (for some), no matter how it fits into a glove. That being said, if you are on a budget and have to make something that appeals, this thought process can break your neck if you strain too niche.

That being said, remember the point about being open for yourself: Maybe they do mention things that you can see improving your game, or that they have a point of your game missing something - even if you want to give a different experience. Or maybe even reading their feedback or their point for a game mechanic gives you an idea how to change it up and include something more unique into your project that still qualifies why people suggested it. It can potentially be a win for both sides.

Other notes:

Technically speaking: Even a fps player could potentially give you valid feedback. For example about controls and camere movement in your first-person-puzzle-explorer. But yes, it does make sense do keep in mind where they are coming from saying 'the game has not enough action for me'. Still, even that could be something: Want to include something more active in your game after reading this? It may not be enough for the fps gaming crowd, but it could benefit your game how you envision it and give others more enjoyment. Again, stay open and think around the initial point of the feedback. But yes, if you only have so much time, focusing your testing on a more limited group - based on what you want to achieve out of that testing (there can be different 'studies' you want to perform), can be important, too.

About the positive things:

Debatable. Depending on how you define 'teaching'. You cannot specifically learn every talent, that may be true. But executing said talent efficiently (and even that word is debatable in what it could mean) is an ongoing learning experience. You can always improve over time - based on the lessons you have learned - and how you handled them. Of course, we once again have the two sides of the coin here: Yes, you can already have talent. Your work could already be good. And then good old fps gamer (no offences meant, they have their valid interest and place as everyone else) comes around and says your game is 'not good' because you do not take their feedback and have nothing to show to prove them different. You know what is different when you have made a name for yourself? Your experience? Debatably.

Yes, of course you got more experience. But what would be the first thing people may say about your work at that point? 'Ah yes, the developer has made a name for themself, they handle feedback like -this-, and people like their work.' Great. It just shows how empty these arguments can (not have to) be. You can already make something decent. So stick to it. But be open to feedback. That is how it should be, I believe. Everything else is just making it bigger in your head than it has to be.

Now again, if you do this as a job and got stuck into a scenario where your game is not receiving the popularity it needs to, it can get limiting. That is why you often read about specific design choices made because of thinking processes you as a player would not have thought to be the reason of why the game came out as it did. Or why it was only like 'this', or not like 'that'. And then sometimes a game became a masterpiece specifically because of those limits, and sometimes it flopped. And the other way around, as well. Which only brings us back to the two points in the beginning: Know yourself, know your surroundings. If you know that and why you have to handle things the way you do, you can - at best - handle it and yourself as honest as possible and combine making something you would want to do with how it may has to be based on how it is (or can be, if you are open to it.)

In short: I basically agree with you a lot, so my rambling is more of giving it a bit more 'insight' from my point of view.