Alrighty, here’s the feedback for IntroComp 2023 itself, run by @Feneric!
Some context: This is the first ever IF competition I’ve entered in. The good part about this is that I might offer a perspective seasoned comp entrants may not have anymore. However I may tread on old ground and unreasonable tasks, so apologies in advance for that.
Disclaimer: I understand there’s various constraints involved (like Eric having his own life and things to handle) so my feedback here is no biggie, they’re just some thoughts I had about the comp.
Some things I liked
-
I appreciate the brevity and depth of the rules. After reading everything I don’t think I had any questions aside from wondering how long my entry should be and what some qualities of a “finished” game might be, which were more curiosity than anything.
-
Receiving reviews from folks and feedback from voters was my favorite part. It was fun seeing people’s thoughts on the entries.
-
Knowing that it wasn’t the end of the world if I didn’t reach my desired scope- This was a nice mental safety-net to have while making my entry.
Some suggestions
Including links to past entries.
Maybe it’s just me but playing older IntroComp games was important for me to better understand the approximate length that were expected here. While I know the rules say length is up to the dev, it was still helpful for my own planning purposes. And yes, I know IFDB is a thing but those who don’t know about it would have a harder time finding previous games.
Some ideas that come to mind include having a section linking to the IFDB pages for previous years’ comps (which already lead to the games themselves), linking directly to IntroComp’s own archive somewhere on the main page (ideally with a similar interface as the main page), and having a “Hall of Fame” section or page, similar to how IFComp lists previous years’ results.
Note: Rereading my emails with Eric, I think he might have mentioned something akin to this (unless I’m reading into it wrong), so that’s exciting.
Posting updates on the site.
I remember finding out about the results through Twitter- but this was only after remembering that there was a Twitter account in the first place. Including this more prominently on the website may help keep those of us who don’t check Twitter/X much in the loop.
One way this might be able to work is by embedding the Twitter account’s posts onto the site.
Providing links to resource for beginning authors.
Part of what got me to enter this year was hearing that IntroComp welcomed new authors. I think providing them with resources to get started helps show more folks that making their first IF game isn’t that crazy (I mean it is, but y’know, it doesn’t have to be and- I’ll stop talking…)
I like how IFComp gives a quick list of tools to make IF pieces. Showing previous years’ entries also gives newbies an example of what they could achieve with their own entries.
Defining “finished, polished product”.
Maybe this is too subjective but it’d be nice to have some baseline descriptors of this. I ask because it’s a little intimidating to consider that I might burn out before actually finishing, since I don’t even know if my idea of finished and polished is the same as the organizer’s. I think it’d even be interesting if they varied a little depending on the organizer’s tastes but that’s out of scope for this reply.
For example a non-exhaustive rubric gives entrants a direction to aim for. Part of why I bring this up is because I was ready to just submit a .gblorb file but Eric suggested exporting a web version, which turned out to be a much better layer of presentation. It’d be nice to have an idea of this kind of stuff before submitting.
Can entrants talk with each other on the forum here?
Less of a suggestion and more of a question. I joined intfiction to interact with Brian’s review post so I’m not too familiar with what we can do here, but I wish I had more people to talk with during the comp.
Is it possible to have a private post just for entrants and the organizer to discuss things in?
EDIT: And on that note, it’d be nice for an option to keep folks accountable; kind of like a monthly check-in where we share our progress on finishing our games. I realized at some point that the coming year might feel a little lonely in regards to finishing, and I imagine others will feel the same.
Providing a sample rubric for voters and non-voters to analyze and review games with.
If this comp is meant to be friendly for new authors then I don’t see why it can’t be friendly to new reviewers too. I feel like part of what made me hesitate to review games is that I just didn’t know what to talk about in the first place; and if I did, where would I stop?
It doesn’t necessarily need to be focused on giving a quantitative score. Something as simple as the structure I used in this post is fine too. The focus should be on helping folks understand their interactions with entries and learn structured analysis to make them feel comfortable in sharing their thoughts.
Giving entrants a little commemoration of the time they spent for the comp.
Just for fun! It could be a simple PDF certificate congratulating them by name; it’s like those shirts that go like “I entered IntroComp 20XX… And survived!!!” Obviously this means more work for the organizer, so I won’t anticipate this anytime soon.
Finally, he’s done talking!
I had a great time with this comp and look forward to entering other ones. Shout out to Eric for being a real one and taking on the unholy work that is organizing 
I’ll also be going back and cleaning up the formatting for the feedback I gave (typography is important!).