The Indie Dev’s Guide to Choosing Feedback vs. Feature Requests

The Vision Killer: When Feedback Becomes Feature Creep

Indie game development is a journey fueled by passion and a singular vision. But what happens when that vision starts to blur? Often, it’s a well-intentioned but ultimately destructive embrace of all player input as equally valid. Treating every “wouldn’t it be cool if…” as a critical feature request can dilute your game’s unique identity, leading to a Frankenstein’s monster of ideas that satisfies no one and derails your original intent.

Defining the Difference

Understanding the nuances of player input is crucial for maintaining focus. Not all feedback is created equal.

Feedback: The Unvarnished Truth

True feedback is an observation. It highlights pain points, reveals emotional responses to gameplay, and exposes usability issues. It’s the player telling you “I got stuck here,” “This part felt frustrating,” or “I loved the sense of discovery in that area.” This input doesn’t offer solutions; it describes experiences.

Feature Requests: Solutions and Speculations

Feature requests, conversely, are often suggested solutions or entirely new content ideas. They manifest as “You should add a crafting system,” “It would be cool if there were multiplayer,” or “Can you include more enemy types?” These are user-generated solutions, often born from their own preferences rather than fundamental issues with your game’s core.

Your North Star: The Goal-Setting Framework

Navigating player input requires a robust framework. This roadmap helps you filter, categorize, and prioritize effectively.

Step 1: Define Your Game’s Core Vision & Pillars

Before you even open a feedback channel, solidify what your game is, and more importantly, what it isn’t. Document your core mechanics, artistic style, target audience, and the emotional experience you aim to deliver. These pillars become your non-negotiable guiding principles.

Step 2: Establish Feedback Channels Wisely

Where and how you solicit input profoundly impacts its quality. Public forums can be useful for broad sentiment, but direct playtesting sessions offer invaluable qualitative observations. Choose channels that encourage descriptive feedback over simple wishlists.

Step 3: The Triage Process

Once input starts flowing, a systematic triage is essential. This is where you separate the signal from the noise.

Listen Actively: Extract Underlying Needs

Look beyond the surface-level request. If a player says, “I need more gold,” the underlying need might be better resource management, clearer progression, or simply a lack of engaging side activities. Focus on the ‘why’ behind their suggestions.

Categorize Ruthlessly: Is It a Bug, Usability, Balance, or New Idea?

Assign each piece of input to a clear category. Is it a technical bug? A design flaw impacting usability? A balance issue making the game too easy or hard? Or is it simply a new idea that falls outside your core vision? This strict categorization is vital.

Filter Against Vision: Does This Align with Your Game’s Core?

Now, apply your game’s core vision as a filter. Does this feedback, or even a feature request, genuinely enhance or align with your established pillars? If a suggestion for a complex crafting system doesn’t fit your minimalist narrative adventure, it’s a clear “no.”

Step 4: Prioritize & Plan

After filtering, you’ll have a curated list of actionable insights. Prioritize based on impact and feasibility, focusing first on critical bugs and usability issues that directly hinder player experience. Then, consider genuine feedback that helps refine your core mechanics. Feature requests that align with your vision might be added to a future roadmap, but only after core issues are addressed.

As you navigate this complex landscape of player input, maintaining a clear record of your design choices, feedback received, and decisions made is paramount. It ensures consistency, helps you reflect on past choices, and prevents scope creep. To effectively track your game development progress and keep a structured game development log, consider starting a dedicated game dev journal. This practice will empower you to manage feedback, document your creative process, and iterate strategically.

Common Mistakes & How to Avoid Them

Even with a framework, pitfalls abound. Awareness is your best defense.

“Building for Everyone” (and Pleasing No One)

Trying to incorporate every suggestion leads to a bloated, unfocused game. It loses its unique identity and fails to resonate deeply with any specific audience. Stick to your niche.

Ignoring Negative Feedback vs. Blindly Implementing Everything

Dismissing negative feedback is a recipe for disaster, as it often highlights critical flaws. However, blindly implementing every suggested solution is equally dangerous. Analyze the underlying issues, then devise your own solutions that align with your vision.

Getting Lost in the Noise

Player communities can be vocal and overwhelming. Without a structured process, you’ll drown in a sea of opinions. Your framework provides the necessary anchor to stay focused.

Actionable Takeaways & Next Steps

Your game’s authenticity is its greatest asset. By diligently distinguishing between feedback and feature requests, and by rigorously applying your game’s core vision as a filter, you can evolve your creation authentically. Continuously refine your triage process and revisit your game’s pillars to ensure every iteration moves you closer to your original, compelling vision.