I'm sorry... but I was under the impression that Doom was released under the Shareware concept and Quake wasn't a demo as much as a tech test with known bugs and problems. I'd hardly call each of those a demo.
Then again, back in my day a demo was something put together at The Party or Assembly by groups with names like Dust or Future Crew.
This isn't a question of growing up, it's just that you're bored. The average age of the video game player is 29. More and more older people are playing games. Heck, even AOL suggests that over-40 women are huge online players. (It might be Hearts, but they're doing it online.)
Video gaming is just as much as an activity as golf, reading, watching television or bowling. It's something you do for entertainment. There doesn't have to be a maturity level attached to gaming. Video games don't age discriminate.
The problem is that you're bored. Video games are a form of entertainment. If you play a game and you've been entertained, then you haven't wasted your time. It's February, an established lull time for the game industry, the next-generation of games have all been delayed and there have been a glut of sequels. We're all bored somewhat. You want to design games because you recognize what's lacking in today's games.
The real difference between being older and playing games and being younger and playing is time. As an adult, you need to balance career and family first before you sit down and play. Why should you make time playing games when it isn't fun? There are plenty of other forms of entertainment out there that you can take advantage of. My advice is to take a break so you don't get burned out and wait for a game to come to you. Don't get burned out by forcing yourself to play something. Have fun. Enjoy yourself doing other things. The games will still be there when you get back.
I think it's a good idea to give it to a new team. What's Rare going to do other than re-create what they already did? You're taking a chance on a new team and that it might not hold up to the original, but I think that a fresh approach will be better in the long run. It doesn't always work, but I'll take this other a heavily-made up rehash.
I know what Randy is talking about. My company fought tooth and nail to get MS to release any patches. There's nothing fishy here... it's just MS corporate policy not to release patches until *they* are good and ready. It's not just games, it's with all Microsoft products. Sheesh, if you want further proof, just look at Office or Windows. Try to get a timely patch for their flagship products let alone a game.
Rick may have taken some ideas, but the germination of the expansion happened after we (yeah, I was there) decided that we needed to delay the production of Age of Empires II for another year. The expansion pack Rise of Rome was inserted as a way to fill the gap. Most of the ideas were new, but some ideas were ones that were cut from the original game.
At that point, most RTS developers were thinking along the same lines and heading in the same direction in terms of featues and GUI.
Age of Empires II did do many of the production queues that you mentioned, as well as the keyboard shortcuts and fortifications. TA was first however. I'm surprised that other games haven't done the unit commands as TA did.
I swear I've seen that comment before... but where?
Seriously though, is this some kind of vendetta thing because I don't think a major videogame award event will happen in my lifetime? Or are you trying to make some pithy comment that I'm just not getting?
I've seen a lot of posters blame the whole hacker incident on the delay. The hack caused a whole host of problems, but almost everyone forgets that the game wasn't going to make the September 2003 release date anyway. Vivendi was already making statements for months doubting the release date was going to be met with Valve consistently stating they were going to make it.
I believe it was around Sept. 20th when Valve and Vivendi admitted that the release was going to be delayed. A few days after that the source was leaked and everyone jumped on that bandwagon. It's know come to light in several HL2 forums that the AI was incomplete and several levels weren't right.
HL2 is an ambitious game and a lot of work goes into creating a AAA title. To have it delayed doesn't surprise me in the least. To blame it all on the source leak is unfair. Valve just didn't make their milestone dates, plain and simple.
The point of the blog is not whether to fight it or not, but to marshall resources to totally obliterate the patent in question. Fighting it in court will be easy, but the point is to stop this patent from being used against others.
I suggest reading the comments in the blog. Several other developer friends of mine have posted (Scott, Sean! What's up?) great points. Scott Miller posted a great point about his company being sued because a wrestler thought his name was stolen for a game: Max Payne. The stupidity and greed extends far and wide.
I had to read the article a few times because it was giving me tired head, it's afternoon and my ADD is in full gear. So if you're like me, here's a summary of the article:
Paragraph 1:Fantasy vs. Reality gets talked about a lot. Paragraph 2:Too much fantasy is bad. Too much reality is bad. You have to balance them, otherwise people complain. Paragraph 3:I like neuropsychology. I read things that told me that brains like to figure things out. Paragraph 4:If brains can't figure something out, it reacts negatively. Brain like to make sense. Paragraph 5:Never mind what I said previously, because games are fun because they are goal-oriented and brains like that.
Gah! Five paragraphs with no real point. Nothing to back up any claims made... and I'm not sure what those claims are. In fact, the person submitting the/. asks a question that isn't even addressed in the article. Are there games that make no sense logically but fun? Sure, take the H2G2 adventure game where the solutions make no sense. (Stick a fish in your ear? Towels? Fluff? Brownian motion?) There's your answer.
The Fantasy vs. Reality argument is really a non-argument because it doesn't exist. Well, at least the vs. part because they aren't against each other as much as they compliment each other. Every game has portions of fantasy and reality and strike a balance somehow. It would have been far more interesting to see an article written about the design decisions that go into balancing the two or when one prevails over the other. Instead there's a lot of Dr. Phil talk about an argument that doesn't exist.
Bwahahaha! Oh man, that's great. A "major, significant videogame award event". That's a good one. I've got tears rolling down my cheek from laughing so hard at that joke. Like that'll ever happen!
In the case of Starcraft, they purposely delayed the release of the game because of Age of Empires. They didn't want two blockbusters slugging it out at the same time impacting their sales. So they delayed a few months. It worked to everyone's advantage.
And no... Christmas releases are not only for B titles. Q4 is the most important quarter for publishers and they reserve their best titles for then. The problem that they are having is that these best titles are so huge and complicated in their development that they are often delayed. In fact, many of the titles that missed Christmas this year are being delayed even longer to be released in September this year to catch the Christmas wave again.
Did you have a fear of the actors overpowering other characters?
I can't recall a game where a "big name star" overwhelmed the other characters. More often than not, the bigger the star the bigger the disaster. For example, David Duchovny is currently takes shots for his lackluster performance in XIII.
If it works, then it really works well. Look at the ensemble performances in games like Planescape, Fallout or SSX Tricky. Each of them featured some big name actors (more recognizable to the average gamer than Jean Reno) and it worked extremely well. That's just voices. Look no further than Wing Commander III and IV for great (for a video game) performances by Mark Hamill, John Rhys-Davies, Malcolm McDowell and Tom Wilson.
Gosh, what a stupid question. I've never known or heard of a game designer even bring this up. Like I said, they're more worried about making sure the big name star doesn't suck it up and embarass himself.
While everyone at CNN seems to be latching on to the $99 price point, everyone else seems to think different. EA thinks that the price is more likely $149 and Activision is pressing things by suggesting a $129 price point.
Truth is that most people do not expect Microsoft to go to $99 dollars. In fact, a price drop to $129 would keep sales on par with 2003. But hey, $99 is a sexy number that Chris Morris wants to base his entire article on. Remember these are the same analysts that predicted a price drop on both the PS2 and the X-Box at Christmas. Neither one happened.
7. The average age of the typical gamer is around 30.
8. Work restrictions forbid us from putting games on our laptops. Handhelds are perfect.
9. Did I mention disposable income?
10. Playing a game on one of these is so easy in a hotel room and doesn't suck up my laptop juice when I need it for my presentation the next day.
11. You can hide easily from your boss.
12. You can play at lunch or during breaks.
Okay I'll bite. Was Donkey.bas the greatest thing in the world? Heck no. But it isn't as bad as this article makes it out to be. Donkey was never meant to be a true game. It was friggin' demo. I remember running and thinking, okay that's nice. What else is there?
There was plenty. The PC when it was first introduced ran all the Infocom games at the time. It ran Wizardry and all the Epyx games. Sure it wasn't as homey as the Apple II my friend had, but all the business were buying it.
I'm opening myself up for -1 Trolls and Overrated, but the PC wasn't *that* bad. It's easy to take a swipe at Gates for something thrown together at the last minute. It's not like he was making Choplifter or anything. In the end, the PC's open architecture that led it to be the computer platform of choice. The C64, Amiga, Atari ST were all great gaming platforms but just couldn't keep up with the ever upgrading of the PC. The roots of today's Half-Life 2, Doom 3's and Counter-Strikes all have roots with that first PC so long ago.
Honestly? Knowing the general numbers, Warcraft III was much more expensive to make. Which one costs more? Photoshop is a no brainer there. Warcraft III outsells Photoshop by a huge margin, but the price of Photoshop makes up for it. Which one is more profitable? Hard to tell because there's more than just software. Blizzard also licenses out to other companies to make toys, cartoons, what have you. Which one makes the most money? Good question.
No, that's right. WCIII probably had the best tree since you were fighting for the existence of the human race. But it was possible to totally biff one mission and then win enough to get back on the "winning" tree. This is something all of the XYZ-Fighter series wouln't allow you to do. It had a linear mission tree that you *had* to complete to advance in the game. That was just a game design decision that many didn't like. Doesn't mean that it was wrong to do. Just that players didn't generally like it.
Tie Fighter probably isn't the best example. The entire Fighter series suffered from "complete the objectives or the game ends syndrome". It was all or nothing. So even if you couldn't complete jsut the basic objectives (which on escort missions was almost impossible at times) you couldn't advance.
Tie Fighter is and was an excellent game in all respects except for this one. Players would point to other space sims, most notably Wing Commander which had a branching storyline based on success or failure. (Sidenote: Yeah, my character sported all of those tattoos. So many hours spent getting them, so many broken joysticks because of it.)
I'm just happy to get a friggin' paper manual nowadays. Game boxes (much like old album covers) are an expression of art. I remember going to the store and seeing the cover of Ultima III. Flames, a demon and a pentagon. Heck yeah am I buying that game. (Playing the first two didn't hurt either.)
Like an earlier article mentioned, in the early days getting a game box was like getting Cracker Jack prizes. You never knew what was going to be inside. Now it's mostly air and some shrinkwrap. For a smaller title or extra titles, I'm willing to download it. For a triple A title I expect a box, a CD and a manual. I'm willing to pay a premium for those items. Give me something tangible. Is it too hard to ask?
I knew a guy who was a sniper in Vietnam. One of his favorite stories involved him taking out a few people during a field promotion ceremony. A Major was giving an award to a Vietnamese soldier. He waited until he pinned it on the soldier and they saluted each other before he took out the newly promoted soldier. Then then immediately took out the Major.
He could have taken them out at any time, but chose his moment to send a message to the rest of the people present. Like most snipers, he was so far away that the bullet hit before the sound of the rifle so his targets didn't have a chance.
Slashdot Mirror
Then again, back in my day a demo was something put together at The Party or Assembly by groups with names like Dust or Future Crew.
Video gaming is just as much as an activity as golf, reading, watching television or bowling. It's something you do for entertainment. There doesn't have to be a maturity level attached to gaming. Video games don't age discriminate.
The problem is that you're bored. Video games are a form of entertainment. If you play a game and you've been entertained, then you haven't wasted your time. It's February, an established lull time for the game industry, the next-generation of games have all been delayed and there have been a glut of sequels. We're all bored somewhat. You want to design games because you recognize what's lacking in today's games.
The real difference between being older and playing games and being younger and playing is time. As an adult, you need to balance career and family first before you sit down and play. Why should you make time playing games when it isn't fun? There are plenty of other forms of entertainment out there that you can take advantage of. My advice is to take a break so you don't get burned out and wait for a game to come to you. Don't get burned out by forcing yourself to play something. Have fun. Enjoy yourself doing other things. The games will still be there when you get back.
Finally, a live version of Robot Carnival. Well, maybe not quite...
I think it's a good idea to give it to a new team. What's Rare going to do other than re-create what they already did? You're taking a chance on a new team and that it might not hold up to the original, but I think that a fresh approach will be better in the long run. It doesn't always work, but I'll take this other a heavily-made up rehash.
I know what Randy is talking about. My company fought tooth and nail to get MS to release any patches. There's nothing fishy here... it's just MS corporate policy not to release patches until *they* are good and ready. It's not just games, it's with all Microsoft products. Sheesh, if you want further proof, just look at Office or Windows. Try to get a timely patch for their flagship products let alone a game.
At that point, most RTS developers were thinking along the same lines and heading in the same direction in terms of featues and GUI.
Age of Empires II did do many of the production queues that you mentioned, as well as the keyboard shortcuts and fortifications. TA was first however. I'm surprised that other games haven't done the unit commands as TA did.
No, Rick left right after Age came out. He didn't have anything to do with the Expansion pack. That was all Sandy Peterson.
Seriously though, is this some kind of vendetta thing because I don't think a major videogame award event will happen in my lifetime? Or are you trying to make some pithy comment that I'm just not getting?
I believe it was around Sept. 20th when Valve and Vivendi admitted that the release was going to be delayed. A few days after that the source was leaked and everyone jumped on that bandwagon. It's know come to light in several HL2 forums that the AI was incomplete and several levels weren't right.
HL2 is an ambitious game and a lot of work goes into creating a AAA title. To have it delayed doesn't surprise me in the least. To blame it all on the source leak is unfair. Valve just didn't make their milestone dates, plain and simple.
I suggest reading the comments in the blog. Several other developer friends of mine have posted (Scott, Sean! What's up?) great points. Scott Miller posted a great point about his company being sued because a wrestler thought his name was stolen for a game: Max Payne. The stupidity and greed extends far and wide.
Paragraph 1:Fantasy vs. Reality gets talked about a lot.
Paragraph 2:Too much fantasy is bad. Too much reality is bad. You have to balance them, otherwise people complain.
Paragraph 3:I like neuropsychology. I read things that told me that brains like to figure things out.
Paragraph 4:If brains can't figure something out, it reacts negatively. Brain like to make sense.
Paragraph 5:Never mind what I said previously, because games are fun because they are goal-oriented and brains like that.
Gah! Five paragraphs with no real point. Nothing to back up any claims made... and I'm not sure what those claims are. In fact, the person submitting the /. asks a question that isn't even addressed in the article. Are there games that make no sense logically but fun? Sure, take the H2G2 adventure game where the solutions make no sense. (Stick a fish in your ear? Towels? Fluff? Brownian motion?) There's your answer.
The Fantasy vs. Reality argument is really a non-argument because it doesn't exist. Well, at least the vs. part because they aren't against each other as much as they compliment each other. Every game has portions of fantasy and reality and strike a balance somehow. It would have been far more interesting to see an article written about the design decisions that go into balancing the two or when one prevails over the other. Instead there's a lot of Dr. Phil talk about an argument that doesn't exist.
Bwahahaha! Oh man, that's great. A "major, significant videogame award event". That's a good one. I've got tears rolling down my cheek from laughing so hard at that joke. Like that'll ever happen!
And no... Christmas releases are not only for B titles. Q4 is the most important quarter for publishers and they reserve their best titles for then. The problem that they are having is that these best titles are so huge and complicated in their development that they are often delayed. In fact, many of the titles that missed Christmas this year are being delayed even longer to be released in September this year to catch the Christmas wave again.
I can't recall a game where a "big name star" overwhelmed the other characters. More often than not, the bigger the star the bigger the disaster. For example, David Duchovny is currently takes shots for his lackluster performance in XIII.
If it works, then it really works well. Look at the ensemble performances in games like Planescape, Fallout or SSX Tricky. Each of them featured some big name actors (more recognizable to the average gamer than Jean Reno) and it worked extremely well. That's just voices. Look no further than Wing Commander III and IV for great (for a video game) performances by Mark Hamill, John Rhys-Davies, Malcolm McDowell and Tom Wilson.
Gosh, what a stupid question. I've never known or heard of a game designer even bring this up. Like I said, they're more worried about making sure the big name star doesn't suck it up and embarass himself.
Truth is that most people do not expect Microsoft to go to $99 dollars. In fact, a price drop to $129 would keep sales on par with 2003. But hey, $99 is a sexy number that Chris Morris wants to base his entire article on. Remember these are the same analysts that predicted a price drop on both the PS2 and the X-Box at Christmas. Neither one happened.
7. The average age of the typical gamer is around 30.
8. Work restrictions forbid us from putting games on our laptops. Handhelds are perfect.
9. Did I mention disposable income?
10. Playing a game on one of these is so easy in a hotel room and doesn't suck up my laptop juice when I need it for my presentation the next day.
11. You can hide easily from your boss.
12. You can play at lunch or during breaks.
Is it too early to just go ahead and put the Nintendo DS on the list? Hey, I'm just trying to save us all some time.
There was plenty. The PC when it was first introduced ran all the Infocom games at the time. It ran Wizardry and all the Epyx games. Sure it wasn't as homey as the Apple II my friend had, but all the business were buying it.
I'm opening myself up for -1 Trolls and Overrated, but the PC wasn't *that* bad. It's easy to take a swipe at Gates for something thrown together at the last minute. It's not like he was making Choplifter or anything. In the end, the PC's open architecture that led it to be the computer platform of choice. The C64, Amiga, Atari ST were all great gaming platforms but just couldn't keep up with the ever upgrading of the PC. The roots of today's Half-Life 2, Doom 3's and Counter-Strikes all have roots with that first PC so long ago.
Honestly? Knowing the general numbers, Warcraft III was much more expensive to make. Which one costs more? Photoshop is a no brainer there. Warcraft III outsells Photoshop by a huge margin, but the price of Photoshop makes up for it. Which one is more profitable? Hard to tell because there's more than just software. Blizzard also licenses out to other companies to make toys, cartoons, what have you. Which one makes the most money? Good question.
If I don't get an invitation, does this disprove the Six Degrees theory or just prove that I need to get out more?
No, that's right. WCIII probably had the best tree since you were fighting for the existence of the human race. But it was possible to totally biff one mission and then win enough to get back on the "winning" tree. This is something all of the XYZ-Fighter series wouln't allow you to do. It had a linear mission tree that you *had* to complete to advance in the game. That was just a game design decision that many didn't like. Doesn't mean that it was wrong to do. Just that players didn't generally like it.
Tie Fighter is and was an excellent game in all respects except for this one. Players would point to other space sims, most notably Wing Commander which had a branching storyline based on success or failure. (Sidenote: Yeah, my character sported all of those tattoos. So many hours spent getting them, so many broken joysticks because of it.)
Like an earlier article mentioned, in the early days getting a game box was like getting Cracker Jack prizes. You never knew what was going to be inside. Now it's mostly air and some shrinkwrap. For a smaller title or extra titles, I'm willing to download it. For a triple A title I expect a box, a CD and a manual. I'm willing to pay a premium for those items. Give me something tangible. Is it too hard to ask?
I knew a guy who was a sniper in Vietnam. One of his favorite stories involved him taking out a few people during a field promotion ceremony. A Major was giving an award to a Vietnamese soldier. He waited until he pinned it on the soldier and they saluted each other before he took out the newly promoted soldier. Then then immediately took out the Major.
He could have taken them out at any time, but chose his moment to send a message to the rest of the people present. Like most snipers, he was so far away that the bullet hit before the sound of the rifle so his targets didn't have a chance.