With the improvement of console system technology, PC gaming has turned back into a niche market the past few years.
However, characeristics of the current PC gaming market could be reducing the need for customers to buy more titles each year:
1) Quality titles usually take time and insightful management with talented, dedicated employees to produce; I don't think this point needs an explanation.
2) Replayability of older titles: While waiting for Half-Life 2 and Doom 3, I still play older titles like Starcraft, Counterstrike, and X-Com.
Since these titles still run well under XP, and offer good replayability, this helps to reduce my need to constantly purchase a new game every few weeks.
3) Utility from online gaming: Many people are fans of online games like the Battlefield series, Unreal Tournament series, Counterstrike.
Also, MMORPGs allow players to frequently experience new game content in exchange for their monthly subscription fees.
4) Mods/Customization: I still see new mods appearing every month for games like Half-Life and UT2004K. Mods also allow players to extend the utility of the old game title with new content.
5) Appeal to wealthy customers: Not to brag, but I plan to upgrade later this fall with the fastest video card and CPU I can acquire, so I can enjoy Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Dawn of War, Far Cry 2, and other system-taxing games at a high frame rate.
I have followed this same behavior for a number of years, including upgrading for Doom 1, Quake 2, Deus Ex, Splinter Cell, and probably other titles I like so much I'm willing to pay extra to ensure they run as best as possible.
There are other people, wealthy and not wealthy, who are also willing to spend extra money to have the same utility from computer games. I think I went $2,000 into debt when I upgraded my 386 to a 486 to play Doom 1, but, I wasn't just using the computer for gaming.
Article does not reflect current gaming trends.
on
The State of AI In Games
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I disagree with some of the author's observations about the potential for improved AI in the gaming industry.
1) The author neglects the fact that multiplayer gaming capabilities in games have reduced the need for developers to include well-designed single-player AI. For example, in the game Battlefield 1942 most people will play multiplayer over single-player since the single-player bots don't have enough AI to work in teams or operate vehicles effectively.
Since a majority of the people won't play singleplayer, there is no incentive for the developer to improve the single-player AI.
2) Lack of thorough analysis of AI techniques used in recent games. He covers some techniques from academia, but he should have interviewed more developers and which AI techniques they employed, and the trade-offs involved.
3) A few errors in the article, like referring to a Counterstrike Bot as being from Microsoft.
Later this month Valve will be rolling out an official CounterStrike bot in their "new" game CS:Condition Zero (which has a controversial development history). Any CS bots before this one were developed in the mod community.
I'm sure the author could have interviewed the Condition Zero programmers and ask them what AI techniques they had to utilize for this new bot.
A key point I do agree with is that there is not a common AI standard that game companies are using, compared to the video and audio standards.
No matter how fast the CPUs become, gaming AI will not improve in general until developers can easily generate core AI behavior with little effort.
I tried out the windows version of the demo. It sends you on a terror mission, which are my favorite kind of missions.
The mission was difficult, due to the fact that all my squaddies seemed to have terrible aim. I managed to take out two aliens, but the rest easily moved in and took out the rest of my team.
I don't think learning assembly can necessarily make one a better programmer.
I taught myself assembly a long time ago, and 20 years later I'm making 6 figures programming VBA macros for Excel. It's more relevant I know the ins and outs of the Excel VBA objects rather than lower level registers and memory allocation, though I do have to worry about memory leaks if I don't close out my objects.
"Easy" languages can help make the job simpler to accomplish, especially in cases where staffing is low and business demands are high.
Besides, as we design higher level languages to build software tools for us, I think the understanding of lower-level computer operations may not be that relevant to some programmers.
I just finished Max Payne 2, using the first-person mod, and I found the AI to behave "unfairly" after the first few maps.
The AI reached a point where it would:
1) Always rush you;
2) Once an enemy character appeared through a door or around a corner it would target you in less than a second.
The whole immersion factor of a shooter game was totally lost at this point. The game became more of a puzzle, trying to determine the best place to stand while defending against multiple enemies rushing towards you, who had no sense of self-preservation, and knew where you where, even through walls and doors.
No, Scott Miller, that was not a fun game with the auto-adjusting AI difficulty.
Perhaps 3DRealms should give up beta testing and game-making altogether.
Adaptive AI seems like a good feature for some people.
Why not make it an optional setting? Those who prefer the raw AI as it is can play it at that setting, while those who don't want to risk being held back by an overly frustrating opponent have a fallback to ensure gameplay is still fun for them?
I think PC Gaming will become more of a niche market or hobby, as the lure of sales from console games has attracted many publishers, but I don't think PC gaming will die away completely, since consumers like myself don't mind spending money for non-standard systems.
I think the reduction of commercial PC game publishers may be a good thing, since hopefully this should provide a better market for quality developers to keep making titles they are passionate about, much in the way the PC game market had developed at one point (id software, the old 3DRealms, old Raven, Westwood Studios, many others).
I don't mind paying higher prices for PC games as long as they have quality and can be customized.
Currently I am enjoying Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic on my expensive laptop. Despite the lack of customization, the game is a quality title, and has so much variety that extra modding or customization isn't necessary.
And I'm able to play a bunch of my old PC games on this laptop thanks to DOSBox and Windows Compatibility mode in XP.
Now, if console makers introduced a mouse and keypad to their PC-like systems then I may be tempted to buy a console, since I will face spending at least $1000 or more to upgrade for Doom3 and Half-Life2.
At least card and PC prices should drop some more while I wait for those titles to be released.
I used to get pain in my right hand from mousing, also due to working with the mouse and gaming at night.
So, I switched to using my left hand at work for the mouse, and switched back to the right hand for home-gaming.
It took me a few weeks, but I was able to mouse with both hands without any problems after that. And now I am amberdextrous with the mouse, though I'm still more proficient with the right hand.
I recently uninstalled the Macromedia Flash plug-in from my IE browser because a few sites I would hit would run ads in Flash.
As a result, if I had several browsers open I noticed some would be taking up CPU time, and those were the ones running the Flash ads.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to let a company run a Flash-based ad on my computer using my CPU time.
Now I have to deal with the annoying "Do you want to install Flash" pop-ups from those sites, but I'm quick at clicking the "No" button.
It would be nice if IE had the ability to ignore some certificates and not take any action. Perhaps it does? Or perhaps some other browser can do that.
Note that if you are using the 1.1.NET framework that some of the examples in the book will no longer work. Fortunately, Ingo has some comments about that on his website:
Yes, they should support more shows like Farscape. SciFi's management has become trend-happy. (Sorry about any redundant posting, just trying to show my support).
Is it trying to improve ratings by becoming something like the "hoax investigation" channel?
Instead of dumping money into lawyers pockets, why don't they instead go back to exploring Science Fiction history, or trends in current science fiction development on an international level?
Maybe they will try to hire off Geraldo Rivera from Fox News next. Or maybe Rush Limbaugh.
They should put that lawsuit money back into funding good shows, like Farscape (I'm a little biased. Sorry).
Well, for kids who could be interested in programmnig, there are still plenty of options to explore with modern games. Look at how id software, Epic, Valve, and other companies released source code and content-generation tools so anyone could do their own coding or game modifications.
When I was younger I taught myself 6052 assembly and Basic with my Apple ][e, and made a few text adventures and simple graphic games, but I know I wished I could have designed something to go beyond the assembler code, monochrome monitor, and hardware limitations.
If the computer industry magically had the same technology in the mid 70's and early 80's as they did now, I think they would have opted to make games as we see today, rather than represent what they could with blocky shapes.
As long as gaming technology improves, you will see plenty of kids inspired to find ways to involved themselves with creating their own games.
I did the same thing, putting my face on the main character in the first Grand Theft Auto 3.
It was a blast because it would use the same skin in the cut scenes, so it looked like I was playing a part in the story.
This face-replacement took longer to accomplish in the sequal, GTA:Vice City, since whenever your main avatar has to change clothes the game uses an entire "skin" for the clothing, which includes the original face skin.
So you would have to place your face on over a dozen different skins. I didn't want to go through all that trouble so I backed off.
Also, it was tricky having to "warp" a picture of your face to make it fit in the correct way so the U/V mapping would paint the face correctly. Fortunately, MS Paint was adequate for the task.
Why are gamers mad? Could it be that many gamers like Valve? I have enjoyed buying and playing their products for years, and I hate the fact they are being taken advantage of.
I was reviewing Sun's financials, and found that on their consolidated fiscal year-end income statement they had a $2.1 billion addition called "impairment of goodwill".
Without this addition they would have lost $4.4 billion dollars for the fiscal year instead of the $2.3 billion.
What does this mean? Based on this Forbes article on the subject, it has something to do with the difference in the market value and book value of an asset. If the market value is less than the book value then you can take the difference and apply it back as an asset?
I have never heard any studies claim that a signifant portion of the "older" world population plays video games.
I found interesting the author's link to Chris Crawford, who ran his own small survey on gaming habits, after being suspicious of another published survey's results on gamers and age ranges:
and his conclusion is that you can make anything you want of survey statistics.
I would think that most older people wouldn't play video games initially because they came from a generation where entertainment didn't have a computer understanding requirement.
However, I see more older people play video games these days. I encourage my older mother to play rather simple games online on her computer, which she enjoys. I'll be moving her up from card and match games to SimThemePark and perhaps Starcraft or Warcraft once I upgrade her system.
I'm in my 30's, and I will be playing video games as long as I can physically and mentally function to do so, so I imagine that there are others like me and we will see more older game players in the future.
I look forward to Counter-Strike 6, and I will continue to school the 13-year olds in that game, too!
Those are good points, but keep in mind that $25,000 would be split between the team members, and with three or four people that average $7,000 each before taxes.
Also, there is no guarantee that Garriott will judge the entries. He's on as a board member/sponsor, and he may even be receiving a fee for having his name associated with the contest. He's no stranger to advertising, as I saw him in a magazine Merryl Lynch ad a few years ago, right before Ulitma 9 was released.
I think a better plan for the college teams is to build their game prototype, get a copyright on their materials or ideas, and then pitch the game to publishers, distributors, and educators.
They could even sell the game themselves to a local system, and use that success to attract the attention of a major publisher. Marketing a game on your own is difficult, but it's not impossible, especially if it's a quality product.
The $25,000 price can still stand, but I think the authors should get some type of royalty if their game content is used to make a professional product, which appears to be the goal of this foundation. The same royalty arrangement should be available to all entrants, regardless if their game wins or not.
Also, if this nonprofit foundation decides to disband, who would retain ownership of the game content? I don't think the students would automatically get their ownership back, which means someone could still profit from their ideas.
I think I selected the text with my browser (I'm using IE under WinXP), then did a CTRL-INSERT to copy it and SHIFT-INSERT to paste it into my message, in which the default setting was HTML Formatted. Let me try it again:
3. OWNERSHIP OF ENTRIES: AS A CONDITION OF ENTERING THE CONTEST, AND TO...
Yep, worked like a charm. I wasn't trying to bypass the filters. And, this is is the text's original format. I was also able to type in CAPS with no problem, as you can see here.
I wonder if text format is important to maintain in order to avoid plagerism?
I agree there was a time period where the quality of Lucasarts games declined, which seemed to happen around the time XWing vs Tie Fighter was released.
I was amazed by the quality of older titles like Strike Fleet (modern-day naval simulator), and Tie Fighter, and Dark Forces.
But once they started to contract out the work to other companies the quality was very erratic.
It was if key personnel were no longer working on the games, and instead just licensing out the Star Wars content to other companies, hoping they could build good products.
And thanks to the rising sales of home computers a few years ago, I guess Lucasarts was able to make money from these mediocre titles, which gave them no reason to make quality a high priority.
What was the last game that Lucasarts made inhouse? Are the older employees even there anymore?
Hmmm. I think if you do manage to get a college-level team to come up with an excellent "stealth-education" game or prototype, the team would do better off marketing the game themselves.
Note in exchange for $25,000 that in the fine print:
3. OWNERSHIP OF ENTRIES: AS A CONDITION OF ENTERING THE CONTEST, AND TO THE EXTENT LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, ALL ENTRY FORMS, GAME ENTRIES, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTENT, AND ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS THEREIN WILL BE OWNED EXCLUSIVELY BY THE FOUNDATION. EACH ENTRANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO ASSIGN ALL OWNERSHIP OF A GAME IDEA AND THE GAME ENTRY, AND ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THAT GAME IDEA AND GAME ENTRY, TO THE FOUNDATION IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTEST.
IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WORK ON YOUR GAME IDEA AFTER THE CONTEST, OR WANT OR HOPE TO SELL IT TO A THIRD PARTY SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, DO NOT ENTER YOUR GAME IDEA INTO THIS CONTEST."
This means the foundation will own _all_ of the game entries, and can take any of the gaming prototypes and use them as they see fit. Sounds like they win and everyone else loses for a mere $25,000.
This could be the main reason why this contest is not open to non-college students, such as unemployed game developers. Perhaps it's easier to exploit the enthusiasm of college kids who may not have any idea how much money their fresh ideas could be worth.
Slashdot Mirror
With the improvement of console system technology, PC gaming has turned back into a niche market the past few years.
However, characeristics of the current PC gaming market could be reducing the need for customers to buy more titles each year:
1) Quality titles usually take time and insightful management with talented, dedicated employees to produce;
I don't think this point needs an explanation.
2) Replayability of older titles: While waiting for Half-Life 2 and Doom 3, I still play older titles like Starcraft, Counterstrike, and X-Com.
Since these titles still run well under XP, and offer good replayability, this helps to reduce my need to constantly purchase a new game every few weeks.
3) Utility from online gaming: Many people are fans of online games like the Battlefield series, Unreal Tournament series, Counterstrike.
Also, MMORPGs allow players to frequently experience new game content in exchange for their monthly subscription fees.
4) Mods/Customization: I still see new mods appearing every month for games like Half-Life and UT2004K. Mods also allow players to extend the utility of the old game title with new content.
5) Appeal to wealthy customers: Not to brag, but I plan to upgrade later this fall with the fastest video card and CPU I can acquire, so I can enjoy Doom 3, Half-Life 2, Dawn of War, Far Cry 2, and other system-taxing games at a high frame rate.
I have followed this same behavior for a number of years, including upgrading for Doom 1, Quake 2, Deus Ex, Splinter Cell, and probably other titles I like so much I'm willing to pay extra to ensure they run as best as possible.
There are other people, wealthy and not wealthy, who are also willing to spend extra money to have the same utility from computer games. I think I went $2,000 into debt when I upgraded my 386 to a 486 to play Doom 1, but, I wasn't just using the computer for gaming.
I disagree with some of the author's observations about the potential for improved AI in the gaming industry.
1) The author neglects the fact that multiplayer gaming capabilities in games have reduced the need for developers to include well-designed single-player AI. For example, in the game Battlefield 1942 most people will play multiplayer over single-player since the single-player bots don't have enough AI to work in teams or operate vehicles effectively.
Since a majority of the people won't play singleplayer, there is no incentive for the developer to improve the single-player AI.
2) Lack of thorough analysis of AI techniques used in recent games. He covers some techniques from academia, but he should have interviewed more developers and which AI techniques they employed, and the trade-offs involved.
3) A few errors in the article, like referring to a Counterstrike Bot as being from Microsoft.
Later this month Valve will be rolling out an official CounterStrike bot in their "new" game CS:Condition Zero (which has a controversial development history). Any CS bots before this one were developed in the mod community.
I'm sure the author could have interviewed the Condition Zero programmers and ask them what AI techniques they had to utilize for this new bot.
A key point I do agree with is that there is not a common AI standard that game companies are using, compared to the video and audio standards.
No matter how fast the CPUs become, gaming AI will not improve in general until developers can easily generate core AI behavior with little effort.
I tried out the windows version of the demo. It sends you on a terror mission, which are my favorite kind of missions.
The mission was difficult, due to the fact that all my squaddies seemed to have terrible aim. I managed to take out two aliens, but the rest easily moved in and took out the rest of my team.
I don't think learning assembly can necessarily make one a better programmer.
I taught myself assembly a long time ago, and 20 years later I'm making 6 figures programming VBA macros for Excel. It's more relevant I know the ins and outs of the Excel VBA objects rather than lower level registers and memory allocation, though I do have to worry about memory leaks if I don't close out my objects.
"Easy" languages can help make the job simpler to accomplish, especially in cases where staffing is low and business demands are high.
Besides, as we design higher level languages to build software tools for us, I think the understanding of lower-level computer operations may not be that relevant to some programmers.
I just finished Max Payne 2, using the first-person mod, and I found the AI to behave "unfairly" after the first few maps. The AI reached a point where it would: 1) Always rush you; 2) Once an enemy character appeared through a door or around a corner it would target you in less than a second. The whole immersion factor of a shooter game was totally lost at this point. The game became more of a puzzle, trying to determine the best place to stand while defending against multiple enemies rushing towards you, who had no sense of self-preservation, and knew where you where, even through walls and doors. No, Scott Miller, that was not a fun game with the auto-adjusting AI difficulty. Perhaps 3DRealms should give up beta testing and game-making altogether.
Adaptive AI seems like a good feature for some people. Why not make it an optional setting? Those who prefer the raw AI as it is can play it at that setting, while those who don't want to risk being held back by an overly frustrating opponent have a fallback to ensure gameplay is still fun for them?
I think PC Gaming will become more of a niche market or hobby, as the lure of sales from console games has attracted many publishers, but I don't think PC gaming will die away completely, since consumers like myself don't mind spending money for non-standard systems.
I think the reduction of commercial PC game publishers may be a good thing, since hopefully this should provide a better market for quality developers to keep making titles they are passionate about, much in the way the PC game market had developed at one point (id software, the old 3DRealms, old Raven, Westwood Studios, many others).
I don't mind paying higher prices for PC games as long as they have quality and can be customized.
Currently I am enjoying Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic on my expensive laptop. Despite the lack of customization, the game is a quality title, and has so much variety that extra modding or customization isn't necessary.
And I'm able to play a bunch of my old PC games on this laptop thanks to DOSBox and Windows Compatibility mode in XP.
Now, if console makers introduced a mouse and keypad to their PC-like systems then I may be tempted to buy a console, since I will face spending at least $1000 or more to upgrade for Doom3 and Half-Life2.
At least card and PC prices should drop some more while I wait for those titles to be released.
I used to get pain in my right hand from mousing, also due to working with the mouse and gaming at night.
So, I switched to using my left hand at work for the mouse, and switched back to the right hand for home-gaming.
It took me a few weeks, but I was able to mouse with both hands without any problems after that. And now I am amberdextrous with the mouse, though I'm still more proficient with the right hand.
Thanks for the suggestions. I will implement them.
I recently uninstalled the Macromedia Flash plug-in from my IE browser because a few sites I would hit would run ads in Flash.
As a result, if I had several browsers open I noticed some would be taking up CPU time, and those were the ones running the Flash ads.
I'm sorry, but I'm going to let a company run a Flash-based ad on my computer using my CPU time.
Now I have to deal with the annoying "Do you want to install Flash" pop-ups from those sites, but I'm quick at clicking the "No" button.
It would be nice if IE had the ability to ignore some certificates and not take any action. Perhaps it does? Or perhaps some other browser can do that.
The book was a decent reference, for it's time.
.NET framework that some of the examples in the book will no longer work. Fortunately, Ingo has some comments about that on his website:
. html
Note that if you are using the 1.1
http://www.ingorammer.com/remotingFAQ/changes2003
What does this rant have to do with Advanced .NET Remoting again?
Yes, they should support more shows like Farscape. SciFi's management has become trend-happy. (Sorry about any redundant posting, just trying to show my support).
Is it trying to improve ratings by becoming something like the "hoax investigation" channel?
Instead of dumping money into lawyers pockets, why don't they instead go back to exploring Science Fiction history, or trends in current science fiction development on an international level?
Maybe they will try to hire off Geraldo Rivera from Fox News next. Or maybe Rush Limbaugh.
They should put that lawsuit money back into funding good shows, like Farscape (I'm a little biased. Sorry).
Well, for kids who could be interested in programmnig, there are still plenty of options to explore with modern games. Look at how id software, Epic, Valve, and other companies released source code and content-generation tools so anyone could do their own coding or game modifications.
When I was younger I taught myself 6052 assembly and Basic with my Apple ][e, and made a few text adventures and simple graphic games, but I know I wished I could have designed something to go beyond the assembler code, monochrome monitor, and hardware limitations.
If the computer industry magically had the same technology in the mid 70's and early 80's as they did now, I think they would have opted to make games as we see today, rather than represent what they could with blocky shapes.
As long as gaming technology improves, you will see plenty of kids inspired to find ways to involved themselves with creating their own games.
(p.s. Robotron still rocks!).
Why do people keep resorting to this site. It's tired and old.
I did the same thing, putting my face on the main character in the first Grand Theft Auto 3.
It was a blast because it would use the same skin in the cut scenes, so it looked like I was playing a part in the story.
This face-replacement took longer to accomplish in the sequal, GTA:Vice City, since whenever your main avatar has to change clothes the game uses an entire "skin" for the clothing, which includes the original face skin.
So you would have to place your face on over a dozen different skins. I didn't want to go through all that trouble so I backed off.
Also, it was tricky having to "warp" a picture of your face to make it fit in the correct way so the U/V mapping would paint the face correctly. Fortunately, MS Paint was adequate for the task.
Why are gamers mad? Could it be that many gamers like Valve? I have enjoyed buying and playing their products for years, and I hate the fact they are being taken advantage of.
I was reviewing Sun's financials, and found that on their consolidated fiscal year-end income statement they had a $2.1 billion addition called "impairment of goodwill".
0 03-q4.html
http://www.sun.com/aboutsun/investor/financials/2
Without this addition they would have lost $4.4 billion dollars for the fiscal year instead of the $2.3 billion.
What does this mean? Based on this Forbes article on the subject, it has something to do with the difference in the market value and book value of an asset. If the market value is less than the book value then you can take the difference and apply it back as an asset?
http://www.forbes.com/2002/05/22/0522sf.html
It appears the amount is based on the revaluation of some assets or acquisition they had, but it's not explained in the notes.
From the previous the year the value was only $6 million.
I'm just curious if this financial adjustment makes the story at Sun worse than it appears.
I guess Blizzard is breaking new ground again, with a combined stealth/vehicle shooter? It's hard at this point what kind of game this is going to be.
I have never heard any studies claim that a signifant portion of the "older" world population plays video games.
a meStatistics.html
I found interesting the author's link to Chris Crawford, who ran his own small survey on gaming habits, after being suspicious of another published survey's results on gamers and age ranges:
http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/Game%20Design/G
and his conclusion is that you can make anything you want of survey statistics.
I would think that most older people wouldn't play video games initially because they came from a generation where entertainment didn't have a computer understanding requirement.
However, I see more older people play video games these days. I encourage my older mother to play rather simple games online on her computer, which she enjoys. I'll be moving her up from card and match games to SimThemePark and perhaps Starcraft or Warcraft once I upgrade her system.
I'm in my 30's, and I will be playing video games as long as I can physically and mentally function to do so, so I imagine that there are others like me and we will see more older game players in the future.
I look forward to Counter-Strike 6, and I will continue to school the 13-year olds in that game, too!
Those are good points, but keep in mind that $25,000 would be split between the team members, and with three or four people that average $7,000 each before taxes.
Also, there is no guarantee that Garriott will judge the entries. He's on as a board member/sponsor, and he may even be receiving a fee for having his name associated with the contest. He's no stranger to advertising, as I saw him in a magazine Merryl Lynch ad a few years ago, right before Ulitma 9 was released.
I think a better plan for the college teams is to build their game prototype, get a copyright on their materials or ideas, and then pitch the game to publishers, distributors, and educators.
They could even sell the game themselves to a local system, and use that success to attract the attention of a major publisher. Marketing a game on your own is difficult, but it's not impossible, especially if it's a quality product.
The $25,000 price can still stand, but I think the authors should get some type of royalty if their game content is used to make a professional product, which appears to be the goal of this foundation. The same royalty arrangement should be available to all entrants, regardless if their game wins or not.
Also, if this nonprofit foundation decides to disband, who would retain ownership of the game content? I don't think the students would automatically get their ownership back, which means someone could still profit from their ideas.
Off topic:
...
I think I selected the text with my browser (I'm using IE under WinXP), then did a CTRL-INSERT to copy it and SHIFT-INSERT to paste it into my message, in which the default setting was HTML Formatted. Let me try it again:
3. OWNERSHIP OF ENTRIES:
AS A CONDITION OF ENTERING THE CONTEST, AND TO
Yep, worked like a charm. I wasn't trying to bypass the filters. And, this is is the text's original format. I was also able to type in CAPS with no problem, as you can see here.
I wonder if text format is important to maintain in order to avoid plagerism?
I agree there was a time period where the quality of Lucasarts games declined, which seemed to happen around the time XWing vs Tie Fighter was released.
I was amazed by the quality of older titles like Strike Fleet (modern-day naval simulator), and Tie Fighter, and Dark Forces.
But once they started to contract out the work to other companies the quality was very erratic.
It was if key personnel were no longer working on the games, and instead just licensing out the Star Wars content to other companies, hoping they could build good products.
And thanks to the rising sales of home computers a few years ago, I guess Lucasarts was able to make money from these mediocre titles, which gave them no reason to make quality a high priority.
What was the last game that Lucasarts made inhouse? Are the older employees even there anymore?
Hmmm. I think if you do manage to get a college-level team to come up with an excellent "stealth-education" game or prototype, the team would do better off marketing the game themselves.
Note in exchange for $25,000 that in the fine print:
3. OWNERSHIP OF ENTRIES:
AS A CONDITION OF ENTERING THE CONTEST, AND TO THE EXTENT LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE, ALL ENTRY FORMS, GAME ENTRIES, AND THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTENT, AND ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS THEREIN WILL BE OWNED EXCLUSIVELY BY THE FOUNDATION. EACH ENTRANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO ASSIGN ALL OWNERSHIP OF A GAME IDEA AND THE GAME ENTRY, AND ALL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THAT GAME IDEA AND GAME ENTRY, TO THE FOUNDATION IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTEST.
IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE WORK ON YOUR GAME IDEA AFTER THE CONTEST, OR WANT OR HOPE TO SELL IT TO A THIRD PARTY SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, DO NOT ENTER YOUR GAME IDEA INTO THIS CONTEST."
This means the foundation will own _all_ of the game entries, and can take any of the gaming prototypes and use them as they see fit. Sounds like they win and everyone else loses for a mere $25,000.
This could be the main reason why this contest is not open to non-college students, such as unemployed game developers. Perhaps it's easier to exploit the enthusiasm of college kids who may not have any idea how much money their fresh ideas could be worth.