User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:22 pm

Poll Results: Next Steps for Pocket Tactics

Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:30 pm

A couple of weeks ago, we ran a poll on Pocket Tactics to mark a year since I took up post here.

http://www.pockettactics.com/articles/poll-results-next-steps-for-pocket-tactics/

Oynox
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:29 pm

Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:55 pm

Sad so see F2P games go. Even without one off payments there are some good F2P games out there in my opinion. But it was always apparent that the weight of this page lays on strategy and board games.

Optimus Lime
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 7:45 pm

Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:58 pm

When it comes to people "dissatisfied with the quality of the writing and editing" I wouldn't stress that too much. I think PT is one the better written and engaging sites in my feed.

User avatar
EICJoe
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:50 pm

Re:

Thu Jul 27, 2017 4:17 pm

Optimus Lime wrote:When it comes to people "dissatisfied with the quality of the writing and editing" I wouldn't stress that too much. I think PT is one the better written and engaging sites in my feed.


That's kind of you to say :) but we must never be complacent! We could do with a few more voices anyway as we've been operating with a bit of a skeleton crew to try and keep things simple.

I think it's time to try something else though!
"Determining the appropriate level of influence in somebody else's war is never a simple matter."
- Special Circumstances

Editor-in-Chief
Wargamer.com
PocketTactics.com
StrategyGamer.com

User avatar
biffpow
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:48 pm
Location: The East Bay, California

Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:28 pm

Thanks for posting this, Joe. One hugely positive thing that you've done since taking over the site duties is to be extremely transparent about what you're thinking and deciding with regards to the site's content and focus. That's much appreciated, and I am glad to see the decisions you've noted here. I'll be sticking around to see how the site re-adjusts.

skoptic
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:03 am

Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:59 pm

Yes, echo thank you sentiments for following up with a review of the survey and your thoughts on next steps. It's nice to be in the loop and don't be too hard on the writing, editing and refularity - structure and flexibility are not always the best of friends!

Rangent
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2016 5:50 pm

Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 pm

I agree with OYNOX regarding a lack of F2P games:
While they are the worst when they're blatant about having you pay to win, there are still merit in games with a pay as you play structure. Objectively when I look at what is still installed and being played on my phone consistently, my favorite games on my phone are free to play. I doubt that I'm in the minority here either? Setting up the site to cater primarily to non-F2P is good, but missing at least 75% of all games released simply because of their pay structure seems wrong, especially since there are some great games in that majority.

anto
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:21 am

Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:24 am

Fully agree on the new direction concerning so called F2P games.

Regarding writing quality, I think the survey result sounded worse than it really is (by which I mean the quality is fine).

Regarding posts: once a day is more than enough, no worries as far as I am concerned, less is more / prefer quality over quantity.

Overall, great to see feedback results and an open discussion about it.

User avatar
EICJoe
Posts: 402
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:50 pm

Re: Poll Results: Next Steps for Pocket Tactics

Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:27 am

Thanks guys,

I do respect the concerns of people who are worried there are high-profile games we'll miss out on. There is always an exception to every rule, and even we've recognised that some of our top performing bits of game coverage were covering games that were, technically, free-to-play. The market is what the market is.

Saying that, Pocket Tactics built it's reputation on, essentially, ignoring that market. People came here because we only covered the decent premium titles, and even if those titles get fewer and far between, we probably shouldn't stray too far outside that identity.

What you guys can't see, and what I can't really share, is how PT has performed over the past year. All I can really say is: we need to do better.

Like I said, we will look at keeping coverage on games that are either pay-to-unlock, and potentially some ad-support stuff, but we will by-and-large cut out anything that deals in F2P design, like premium currencies or time-locks.

You guys are more than welcome to email me suggestions if there's something you want us to look into - someone emailed in earlier in the week pointing out Neo-Scavenger to us, for example.

My door is always open :)
"Determining the appropriate level of influence in somebody else's war is never a simple matter."
- Special Circumstances

Editor-in-Chief
Wargamer.com
PocketTactics.com
StrategyGamer.com

pjft
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:39 am

Re: Poll Results: Next Steps for Pocket Tactics

Fri Jul 28, 2017 9:55 am

Just wanted to thank you for the transparency with the results and next steps. I have indeed filled out the survey, and while not all the next steps are necessary aligned with my particular preferences, I do stand behind them and wish that this new year will be even better for PT!

Best of luck.

Return to “Pocket Tactics Front Page Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest