4 ms·

Completely regardless of "social responsibility" or "over-sensitivity" or anything like that: what effect does that name have on sales/downloads? I wouldn't thi

Completely regardless of "social responsibility" or "over-sensitivity" or anything like that: what effect does that name have on sales/downloads? I wouldn't think it'd be good. And, yes, that's "unfair" since it's a play on Whack-A-Mole (which I've never heard complained about)... are moles more OK to whack than kitties? Still, that's the way the world works, and I wouldn't have used that name for my own game for that reason alone.

Rubyred 16y ago
Whacking any kind of animal is not cool. But I wonder, with all the creative possibilities in the universe, why would someone design a game around abusing kittens?
- TheAmazingIdiot 16y ago
  I guess even in the startup communities, making money is paramount to ethics. Or to answer your question: To make money.
- alanfalcon 16y ago
  Watch the video. It's based on a Youtube clip of someone gently prodding adorable little kittens back into a box with a very soft mallet. No abuse here, and a valid enough inspiration for a quick game.
  - CopyrightTroll 16y ago
    No abuse here? It's tastefulness, not abuse. It will be interesting to see if he releases another game called "Beat the Puppy" or "Tazer the Baby".
- tzs 16y ago
  > But I wonder, with all the creative possibilities in the universe, why would someone design a game around abusing kittens? They didn't. Maybe you should actually look at the game sometime.
alex_c 16y ago
Well, for what it's worth, this thread was the first "complaint" about the name. I expected that to happen on YouTube first, but it was actually HN - go figure. It's really tough to separate the name from all other factors influencing downloads, but I haven't seen any evidence it's hurting. I think the name is pretty effective, for a few reasons: the most common reaction when I tell people the name, by far, is genuine laughter. I'll take that over polite interest any day. The name is descriptive, anyone who knows what Whack-a-Mole is can make an educated guess about this game (although it's probably cuter than they would expect). And yes, it is a tiny bit naughty - no one ACTUALLY wants to whack a kitten! - which is what makes it memorable, without crossing into offensive or controversial for controversy's sake (at least for the vast majority of people). Do you have suggestions for other names? I can't think of anything good - "Tap-a-Kitten" or "Tap-a-Kitty" sound a lot more bland and unremarkable. Lots of R-rated names I can think of, but that's the last thing I want to get into in this thread :p
- glhaynes 16y ago
  Here's my only suggestion: rename it "Whac-A-Kitten". Drop the "k", throw in a couple of hyphens. Might not be enough for the most vigorous of offense-takers (nothing ever will be in this arena), but it at least partially mitigates that visual symbol "whack". And is a more direct reference to its progenitor, anyway. It 'feels' more like a carnival game to me than "WhackAKitty" does. Edit: maybe also change "Kitten" to "Kitty"? I'm not sure why that sounds a bit more palatable to me - maybe because "kitten" only ever means a juvenile cat whereas "kitty" can mean several other things? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty

Rubyred 16y ago

Whacking any kind of animal is not cool. But I wonder, with all the creative possibilities in the universe, why would someone design a game around abusing kittens?

TheAmazingIdiot 16y ago
I guess even in the startup communities, making money is paramount to ethics. Or to answer your question: To make money.
alanfalcon 16y ago
Watch the video. It's based on a Youtube clip of someone gently prodding adorable little kittens back into a box with a very soft mallet. No abuse here, and a valid enough inspiration for a quick game.
- CopyrightTroll 16y ago
  No abuse here? It's tastefulness, not abuse. It will be interesting to see if he releases another game called "Beat the Puppy" or "Tazer the Baby".
tzs 16y ago
> But I wonder, with all the creative possibilities in the universe, why would someone design a game around abusing kittens? They didn't. Maybe you should actually look at the game sometime.

alex_c 16y ago

Well, for what it's worth, this thread was the first "complaint" about the name. I expected that to happen on YouTube first, but it was actually HN - go figure. It's really tough to separate the name from all other factors influencing downloads, but I haven't seen any evidence it's hurting. I think the name is pretty effective, for a few reasons: the most common reaction when I tell people the name, by far, is genuine laughter. I'll take that over polite interest any day. The name is descriptive, anyone who knows what Whack-a-Mole is can make an educated guess about this game (although it's probably cuter than they would expect). And yes, it is a tiny bit naughty - no one ACTUALLY wants to whack a kitten! - which is what makes it memorable, without crossing into offensive or controversial for controversy's sake (at least for the vast majority of people). Do you have suggestions for other names? I can't think of anything good - "Tap-a-Kitten" or "Tap-a-Kitty" sound a lot more bland and unremarkable. Lots of R-rated names I can think of, but that's the last thing I want to get into in this thread :p

glhaynes 16y ago
Here's my only suggestion: rename it "Whac-A-Kitten". Drop the "k", throw in a couple of hyphens. Might not be enough for the most vigorous of offense-takers (nothing ever will be in this arena), but it at least partially mitigates that visual symbol "whack". And is a more direct reference to its progenitor, anyway. It 'feels' more like a carnival game to me than "WhackAKitty" does. Edit: maybe also change "Kitten" to "Kitty"? I'm not sure why that sounds a bit more palatable to me - maybe because "kitten" only ever means a juvenile cat whereas "kitty" can mean several other things? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitty