• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

818 Good

About Liuqahs15

  • Rank
  1. Looks really cool and detailed! Very impressive. But the art style is dated. If you fix that, it could be a hit.
  2. Excellent read. Lots of helpful links and information, and a fun story about an indie haha.   After reading about the amount of time you put into marketing, e-mails, etc, it hit me that maybe I should figure out a way to track the increase in hits to my website that correspond to the time I put into marketing. That way I can find a point of diminishing returns and not have to kill myself spending extra hours on unneeded work.
  3. Hey thanks for writing this up. It was a great read.   You should make a new trailer that emphasizes the fact that it's for fans of lunar lander. That seems like a huge missed opportunity.
  4.   That's nonsense. Some of those same websites probably reviewed Halo 4, and I know Microsoft  didn't send them $200 through paypal. A website's main userbase is its group of readers, who visit it because they respect the views on the website as unbiased. You remain unbiased by making sure your customers aren't the ones you're critiquing. What if the FDA charged pharmaceutical manufacturers to test the safety of their drugs? Don't be a bozo. They're clearly running a scam. They charge the devs, give them a meaningless 5 star review (because all their reviews are 5 stars), and scam readers into visiting their site so they can quote pumped up (equally meaningless) viewership stats to the same devs they're robbing. A simple con.   Thanks for the journal post; never expected an outcome like that. Maybe try much smaller sites? Websites like and always list work from small websites that are likely willing to do reviews for free.
  5. You should include some examples of poor UI that could have been improved by chunking, or fail to make proper use of known analogies.
  6. Two thoughts:   1. on r/indieGaming you got 26 click-throughs for 2 upvotes, and on r/androidGaming you got 13 click-throughs? How many upvotes were on r/androidGaming? It looks like you can assume for now that there's a 13 click-through/upvote ratio, if there's only one upvote. If that link is strong enough, and you can figure out why people are upvoting, you could turn a measly 50 upvotes into around 650 click-throughs. Doesn't mean anybody's buying, but once they're on your website you have many more tools for getting them to make the purchase. Very cool.   2. You went from 13 click-throughs to 600 click-throughs just by changing the title with r/androidGaming, but do you know for sure that only the title changed? What's the likelihood that the mere fact that it was a different day of the week gave you a boost? Did you post both at around the same time on each of the two days? I don't want to seem petty, but that little stuff matters a lot. In terms of straight figures, it's not a huge deal to go from 13 to 600, but percentage-wise, it's incredible. That's more than 4,000%. If your information is correct, on r/androidGaming at least, nothing but the title matters!
  7. I love this idea. Can't wait to read the results.   But how are you testing so many variables with so few websites in such a short time? If you actually want to test the effectiveness of tags like [Android][Java], and call to action titles vs descriptive titles, you're going to have to make one default format, and then change one single variable on each site to see which performs better. Even that's shaky evidence. I'm not even talking about for being scientifically thorough--just for proving to yourself that your findings are accurate.   I guess the best middle ground is to make a big list of forums, and break the most similar in terms of community size, activity and attitude toward advertisement into pairs. Then name the pairs based on what variable you're testing and call each website in the pair A or B. On website A of the Title Pair, make a call-to-action-titled post, and then on website B make the same exact post, but make the title descriptive. The results, theoretically, should only differ as the effectiveness of the titles do. This isn't very scientifically sound, but it's good enough for practicality.   I'd be more patient. I mean, if you're serious about this. I'd just do whatever stupid little requirements I have to fill out for each forum, and make a nice big list so the dataset is large enough. Actually, I'll do this myself just for the info. It'll be cool to see how our data stacks up.   Good luck with this. I'll be following your journal. It's a very cool idea.
  8. I was able to follow along vaguely as a beginner, but I have to admit that if I didn't already understand a buffer from 2D game programming I'd have been utterly lost. A little explanation of terms like that can be a huge difference maker.   Also, be careful of repeating yourself needlessly.     Otherwise, it was beautifully concise and clear. No dragging on and on. I was actually surprised when I realized I'd finished the article. I was ready for 2,000 words. But you were able to have the article end before my attention span split in two and started beating the hell out of itself.   Thanks.
  9.   I'm confused. typedef    INFINITY_VOID        (INFINITY_CALL    *EventCallback_t)(IEvent *); That's not void, is it? Then again, he isn't returning anything in his INFINITY_VOID functions, so obviously you're right. I just don't understand that code.
  10. Very interesting read. I hadn't heard of breaking the world up into sections. But I'm still confused as to how this helps provide pixel-perfect collision detection. It minimizes unnecessary tests, which is great, but how, for example, would I check if a hexagon and a rotated diamond were touching using the stuff you described?   I also like that you pointed out some obvious stuff that I hadn't actually thought about until now, like the fact that horizontal collision is usually the best thing to test first.   Anyway, thanks for the article!
  11. It's a really great game, and this was an awesome read.