How can we get more people at Gamesquad!

[SkaterMcgee]

interesting thread... I work as a moderator for the owner of couple of 'niche' music based sites, catering to particular styles of music.. and that is a question that always comes up. How to bring in more visitors...


my answer to him was always.. you don't... you can't... you build the best site you can, make sure it is clean and does not alienate potential members. What else can you do. People who have an interest in the subject will find it. You don't find people interested in... say.. the Italian rock scene of the 1970's :laugh: ... or those interested in gaming... they will find you.

Whats really frustrating is that we do get new people everyday but they dont post and even say they do, they only make a post or two and leave, are we that boring?

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

At the risk of becoming even more unpopular...

The ASL forums tend to assume that people are already relative experts on ASL. I remember getting into it with a couple of members when I first joined. They kept busting my chops for posting on certain subjects. I tried to point out that the thread that covered these topics assumed that you already understood the issue. The "flame war topics" sticky thread is gone, so it's hard to come up with a concrete example. A few I remember were "VBM freeze" and "skulking." Someone new to the game wouldn't even understand what that meant. "Skulking" doesn't appear anywhere in the ASLRB that I have seen.

This was under the old reputation system, and one or two real [fill in the blank]s tried to drive me off during my first week, just for asking questions and daring to complain when members jumped me.

Most of that malarkey has been cleaned up, but I could see someone getting frustrated even now. There's no real way to "fix" this, because you can't make experienced players "unlearn" what they already know.

 

[micky]

Whats really frustrating is that we do get new people everyday but they dont post and even say they do, they only make a post or two and leave, are we that boring?

not boring :laugh: ...I see the site as having a strong basis as a reference and information site, especially for ASL and I would suppose computer gaming which is what 99% of your audience is here for. Some are looking for that, not for a site to chat and shoot the bull. I think it is safe to assume many of these new people who don't post just lurk and catch up on information and opinions on games and just don't have an interest in belonging to an online 'community'.

 

[micky]

At the risk of becoming even more unpopular...

The ASL forums tend to assume that people are already relative experts on ASL. I remember getting into it with a couple of members when I first joined. They kept busting my chops for posting on certain subjects. I tried to point out that the thread that covered these topics assumed that you already understood the issue. The "flame war topics" sticky thread is gone, so it's hard to come up with a concrete example. A few I remember were "VBM freeze" and "skulking." Someone new to the game wouldn't even understand what that meant. "Skulking" doesn't appear anywhere in the ASLRB that I have seen.

This was under the old reputation system, and one or two real [fill in the blank]s tried to drive me off during my first week, just for asking questions and daring to complain when members jumped me.

Most of that malarkey has been cleaned up, but I could see someone getting frustrated even now. There's no real way to "fix" this, because you can't make experienced players "unlearn" what they already know.

thank god.. though would have been no great loss of course.. but never would have stuck around if that had happened to me. As a returning player to ASL after a long time away from it, I sort of underestimated just how much I had forgotten and my curve for getting back into the game, it was like learning it for the first time. I have asked some really stupid questions here.. just missing something in the rules.. or just 'overthinking' a particular rule and missing the obvious answer. A smart ass reply or being jumped would have been all it would have taken to drive me away.

 

[Psycho]

thank god.. though would have been no great loss of course.. but never would have stuck around if that had happened to me. As a returning player to ASL after a long time away from it, I sort of underestimated just how much I had forgotten and my curve for getting back into the game, it was like learning it for the first time. I have asked some really stupid questions here.. just missing something in the rules.. or just 'overthinking' a particular rule and missing the obvious answer. A smart ass reply or being jumped would have been all it would have taken to drive me away.

Most of the guys here are helpful and thoughtful. Then there are the guys that are aholes to everyone so you shouldn't feel bad.

 

[micky]

Most of the guys here are helpful and thoughtful. Then there are the guys that are aholes to everyone so you shouldn't feel bad.

of course are you are 100% right... every forum has them I suppose.. thankfully I haven't met them (at least that I know of haha). Everyone I've interacted with have been thoughtful and very helpful.

 

[GrumpyWargamer]

It's true, too many of the ASL community are on occasion too full of themselves

I might not be the greatest challenge you will encounter on the other side of the map, but one thing I DO know, is I have put in my time. I was with the game when it was just Squad Leader. My collection is mainly first editions, bought at the original retail price too.

But occasionally too many on too many forums look at a join date and a post count total and too maybe at a rep level, and make idiotic amateur conclusions. My join date isn't accurate, and I don't care. I was here believe it or not, before ASL was

Don likely would do well to shunt off the ASL crowd to it's own haunt sooner than later. He says that's the plan. The sooner the ASL fraternity is not periodically embarrassing Don, the sooner Don might make some headway on all the non ASL locations he desires.

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

not boring :laugh: ...I see the site as having a strong basis as a reference and information site, especially for ASL and I would suppose computer gaming which is what 99% of your audience is here for. Some are looking for that, not for a site to chat and shoot the bull. I think it is safe to assume many of these new people who don't post just lurk and catch up on information and opinions on games and just don't have an interest in belonging to an online 'community'.

I used to be an administrator of a specialty firearms site for Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ). Based on that experience, I would say that a significant number of people, maybe as much as 30-35% of the total membership, joined in order to ask a few specific questions. Once they got their answers, they were gone...

At one point, I had dedicated the equivalent of about 200 man-hours to the FAQ section before I realized I was essentially discouraging new members from joining. Again, I'm not really sure what could be done about this phenomenon; it's sort of the nature of specialty internet forums.

On the bright side, GameSquad at least does not have all of the built-in problems of ConSim World.

 

[Gen. Sosabowski]

Most of the guys here are helpful and thoughtful. Then there are the guys that are aholes to everyone so you shouldn't feel bad.

The Great Purge that occurred when the reputation system was changed (August 2009?) really cleaned up a lot of the problems. I can't overemphasize that enough. I won't name names, but I'm pretty sure you know of whom I am speaking. I don't even know if you even remember, Psycho, but you were the first person to stick up for me. So, thanks again!

 

[micky]

I used to be an administrator of a specialty firearms site for Ceska Zbrojovka (CZ). Based on that experience, I would say that a significant number of people, maybe as much as 30-35% of the total membership, joined in order to ask a few specific questions. Once they got their answers, they were gone...

At one point, I had dedicated the equivalent of about 200 man-hours to the FAQ section before I realized I was essentially discouraging new members from joining. Again, I'm not really sure what could be done about this phenomenon; it's sort of the nature of specialty internet forums.

On the bright side, GameSquad at least does not have all of the built-in problems of ConSim World.

I couldn't agree more.... the main site I work(ed) with is an archival site and is based on album reviews yet the owner wants to have a thriving forum... yet you can only have discussions about this or that so many times before it all gets stale to some. Again the nature of specialty forums... look at where Tater is coming from on the TPP threads. In order to open things up I guess you can interject discussion about politics and/or religion (which never get stale hahah) but then there goes the whole community aspect as people start at each others throats hahah.

I glanced at ConSim one time... and ..well... yuck. Couldn't make heads or tails of that site. I like sites nice, organized and easy to navigate... it's my allowance for getting old and crouchity hahha

 

[SkaterMcgee]

Hmm, I never go to the ASL place. Honestly dont know 100% what it is.

 

[Redwolf]

Hmm, I never go to the ASL place. Honestly dont know 100% what it is.

Myself, I would love to hang out with ASL people because we would share the interest in WW2 tactics, equipment etc.

The particular ASL crowd hanging out on GS on the other hand is too much trouble all things combined.

 

[SkaterMcgee]

Ill just stay away from it then lol.

 

[Palantir]

The main point is as mentioned: you can’t get people to come here- you can only present the best stuff you can and then see what happens.

I'd love to see more game reviews since I'm the kind of guy who checks out multipile sites to get more than just 1-2 general comments about a game. Big sites get into a rut when cranking out 1 page reviews hitting just the highpoints & soundbites about a game but the smaller ones usually have played the full game and can give more detailed insights and longer reviews.


On the forums:
I was quite thrilled when I saw that Don had started a Lord of the Rings Online Forum which I play about every day. But the main reason I starting posting here was- the group I was with before (an in-game Kinship forum) didn't want ANYONE complaining about the game or bringing up "un-nice" topics. Or as I was told- "don't rain on our parade go someplace else" so I did.

So I started posting here because I knew it would be an open forum (a plus for GS), one that I wouldn't get scorned at / or berated to speak what was on my mind about the game (within sane reason). However, since then that forum has become my personal "blog" as 95% of all posts are mine. I started a poll asking "Is this Forum (Lord of the Rings) even useful?" It got 100 hits, but only 3 posts & 3 votes.

So what does that tell us? Subtracting multiple views by people to check the poll did 75+ different people pop in to read it? The average thread there gets @40 views but only 3 replies and those by the same 3 people.

But it does show that relatively a lot of people (vs. those who post) are stopping in to read the various stuff I throw up there but have little interest in posting. Which I find strange, why stop in to read something you must be interested in but never comment? And thats the case with most forums, more lurkers than posters.

I'll keep posting stuff there to share unless I stumble upon a forum that offers more feedback about LotRO that interests me. A forum is supposed to be about discussing your interests with other like minded people but everything I post I already know before I post it & if no one bothers to discuss anything with me why post it at all?

{I could post more at the official LotRO Forum but with 30+ pages of replies per thread it's a mess & like most "official forums" full of "loons" who make you not want to play the game more than play it.}

To comment on the Wow Forum- that quickly became more of a private "Horde Guild" forum than open WoW Forum and when the guild imploded (?) that site died a quick death even though there were hundreds of members in it. I played WoW at that time but not being in THAT guild & not having a HORDE character I very rarely visited or posted in it since it had nothing for me- a player of WoW.

The LotRO forum is as I said just about a private forum- "mine" since I do most of the posting but I try to start general threads so anyone can comment. Even then few people post but I'm still plodding along.

Again- you do the best you can and see what happens, I'm sure some forums will be hits others will just fade away...

 

[Scott Tortorice]

The main point is as mentioned: you can’t get people to come here- you can only present the best stuff you can and then see what happens.

I'd love to see more game reviews since I'm the kind of guy who checks out multipile sites to get more than just 1-2 general comments about a game. Big sites get into a rut when cranking out 1 page reviews hitting just the highpoints & soundbites about a game but the smaller ones usually have played the full game and can give more detailed insights and longer reviews.

I hope to start cranking out some more reviews. 2010 has been such a dismal year for gaming that there have been few games that have attracted my attention and merited a review. I realize that the bigger sites like to review bad games, but I see that as a waste of time. I'd rather use GS homepage to spotlight those games that I believe are worthy of attention (i.e., games that get me excited)...hence why I haven't written a review since Dragon Age. :angry: Fall 2010 looks to have some interesting stuff coming out, and 2011 may well shape up to be a Renaissance for gaming, so hopefully there will be more to write about soon.

But it does show that relatively a lot of people (vs. those who post) are stopping in to read the various stuff I throw up there but have little interest in posting. Which I find strange, why stop in to read something you must be interested in but never comment? And thats the case with most forums, more lurkers than posters.

Sad but true. I also hang out on different forums and find the same everywhere. Every forum seems to have a small cadre of talkers and a huge shadow of lurkers who use a forum like a wiki. I don't know what to make of it. I suspect, though, that it has a lot to do with the hostile environment you find at other sites where an unconventional opinion, a repeated question/observation, or an off topic discussion is immediately attacked by the old hens and/or mods of a forum. GS is unique in that we are pretty loose around here and encourage "free range" discussions both by our mods largely 'hands off' attitude and by our forum features, blogs and clubs. We want talkers around here!

All we can do is keep plucking away. I truly believe GS to be a gem of a site in terms of features and community. We just need to continue enriching ourselves until we reach critical mass and catch the gaming world's attention with a big mushroom cloud.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I don't think the LOTRo forum is as bad as that; I try and respond to all the threads, so I would think I contribute more than 5%...?

 

[SkaterMcgee]

Big sites get into a rut when cranking out 1 page reviews hitting just the highpoints & soundbites about a game but the smaller ones usually have played the full game and can give more detailed insights and longer reviews.

True that. True that.

 

[Dr Zaius]

We've tried paying for reviews, but the reality is that we're only able to do that on a very limited basis because it's just not a sound investment for the most part. The reviews simply can't generate enough additional traffic to pay even a fraction of what it cost us to pay the author. We also tried giving users the ability to contribute their own reivews when we installed review software and linked it to the forums, but sadly that feature was pretty much ignored and was eventually removed.

The end result is we don't have as many reviews as I would like.

I would also mention that I talk to webmasters and staff from other game sites from time to time, and it's the same story everywhere: All the small and mid-sized sites are struggling. You'll notice that even a lot of the larger game sites have gone bankrupt in the last 2 years, and many of the remaining ones have been forced to drastically cut back their staff and/or have been consolidated into other sites. I've lost count of the smaller game sites I used to visit that have simply vanished.

But why is this happening? Several reasons. For starters, it's harder than ever to get decent advertising these days because there are fewer advertising dollars to be had and many advertisers are putting their entire marketing budgets into console gaming and console gaming mags. Second, Google AdSense has virtually destroyed online advertising and crippled the ability of smaller sites to fund themselves by driving the CPM rate down to ridiculous levels. Third, too many gamers want something for nothing. They expect quality articles and lots of features, but then refuse to pay subscription fees, use ad blockers in order to deprive the site of revenue, and in many cases even pirate the games so they won't have to pay for those either!

Many smaller sites rely on their forums/blogs/chat rooms to operate. And forum owners everywhere are screaming as gigantic corporate entities like facebook have gutted countless forums and made it almost a futile enterprise to start new ones. Another unfortunate trend is that many game publishers are now opting to run their own forums so they can control information about the game and "moderate" the discussions in a manner more advantages for their own products. At one time it was common for gamers to visit official forums only for tech support, but go to dedicated game sites for open discussion and news. But now that there are fewer and fewer publishers and they're opting to run their own forums so they can control everything, it's driven a lot of the fan sites and smaller game sites out of business.

The end result is that there has been a clear trend toward game sites consolidating under the banner of a handful of big corporate sites because the smaller game sites are just having a hell of a time surviving in this environment. If you value the games you play -- don't steal them, pay for them! And if you value the ability to post on an open forum without a game publisher acting a moderator and deciding what you will be "permitted" to discuss or criticize -- then support the independent game sites or they won't be around forever.

 

[Redwolf]

The reviewers are also in a difficult position. For the review to have some reach with audiences you need to have it out by release time. Then you test a pre-release build. There will be bugs that the developer says will be fixed. How do you deal with that?

 

[Dr Zaius]

The reviewers are also in a difficult position. For the review to have some reach with audiences you need to have it out by release time. Then you test a pre-release build. There will be bugs that the developer says will be fixed. How do you deal with that?

It's an excellent point, but I'm afraid to report there are no easy answers here.

Although I don't agree that a review must necessarily be published on release day, it's certainly fair to say that it's highly desirable to do so for a number of reasons. That's what the gamers want and that's what editors want, too. However, there's only one way to achieve that and that's to get pre-release access so the review process can begin a week or so before the game is available to the public. And here's where it gets messy.

Publishers long ago realized they hold almost all the cards in this scenario, and many of them have been pretty ruthless about who gets access and who doesn't. It used to be that most any member of the press could get advance copies for reviews, though sometimes there was an "embargo" attached to the copy. But over time that gradually became rarer and only the bigger sites could get access while the smaller sites were completely cut out. But now even that less-than-ideal situation has changed for the worse. Today, it's not uncommon for publishers to award one exclusive advance copy to one of the big corporate game sites while everyone else has to get their copies at retail. Understandably, this leads to a situation where the editors from the sites that didn't get the exclusive push reviewers to get the article done as quickly as possible or it won't even be worth the effort and expense of paying for it.

This sorry situation has led to a lot of articles criticizing the state of game journalism as rushed, sloppy, or whatever. Also, it has raised issues of whether or not some game sites "go soft" on certain titles because A) they are afraid of losing their inside access if they go too rough on a big game or B) jeopardizing their lucrative advertising contracts which are critical to funding the site and paying the bills. One need look no further than the firing of long time Gamespot editor Jeff Gerstman to see what might have been an example of exactly this kind of pressure. I say "might have" because no one really knows what happened in that episode except Gerstman, the senior editors and the publisher. But public perception has a way of taking on a life of its own.

So where does that leave game sites? We've now established that reviews have to be really cheap in order for them to be a worthwhile undertaking under any circumstance (even IGN and Gamespot don't pay reviewers very well); reviews need to come out as close to release day as possible in order to be relevant; reviewers need to spend a fair amount of time with a given title in order to provide solid information for gamers, yet render a verdict that is fair and won't totally alienate publishers and developers because of missed features or whatever; and finally a reviewer has to struggle with reviewing a game "as is" or waiting for an early patch that will remedy obvious bugs. The end result is a witches brew of conflicting interests and difficult to attain goals. In reality, it's a wonder any decent reviews ever get written at all!

The basic problem here is managing the expectations of gamers. As long a gamers demand that game sites publish reviews very close to release day, the sites will by necessity be at the mercy of game publishers and forced play by the rules they set. Gamers then complain that there's an incestuous relationship between game sites and publishers! In a lot of ways, it's really a lose-lose situation and nearly all the headaches on the editorial side of running a game site come from reviews. Plus, when you factor into it that reviews require a lot of time and effort but pay very poorly for the reviewer, and you've got a situation ripe with all sorts of inherent problems and built-in headaches for the editors.

All that said, I would like to publish more reviews at GameSquad. But in the big scheme of things, we get a lot more mileage out of posting editorials, guides, and opinion pieces than we do reviews. We can be as hard-hitting and opinionated as we feel like, and there's little anyone can say because A) there's no deadline B) we don't need anything from the publisher and C) the article is clearly labeled as an opinion piece which makes it hard for anyone to really criticize.