| 24 JUL 2006 at 10:16pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ogre (24 JUL 2006 10:03pm)
See this is exactly what I mean! The instant someone criticises a beloved game people do become hostile, tell you have no idea what you are talking about and so on...
[smiley=rofl.gif] Ok, THAT was funny!
|
| 24 JUL 2006 at 11:47pm |
KoriSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 399
Joined: 27 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | Well, this is The Hot Spot, so it's OK to vent. That is why I posted the question here; Why so hostile?
Indie game makers do not make games for the money, or if they do, they are mistaken. On average, adventure indie game can expect to sell 1000 copies, if it is a GOOD indie game. There are a few exceptions like Dark Fall, but not many. I don’t know of any adventure indie game makers that have quit their day jobs.
So if we adventure indie game makers are not in it for the money, we must be in it for the fun of making the game, or a little adventure community fame. What adventure indie game maker has not daydreamed of seeing his own game interview on Just Adventure?
But...in our discussions here, we have come to the sad conclusion that the indie game maker should (after he releases the game), avoid posting on Just Adventure, or risk attacks on his game, his motives for posting or his personal habits. So much for a little fame. Even after spending a few years making your game, you now have to avoid posting on Just Adventure, but rather READ the posts only!
No direct contact with the adventure gang now. Yes, you made your dream adventure game for money, fame, sex, drugs, rock and roll, but now you better stay away from the forum or risk attack from the players of your 'own' game. You thought it would be cool to be known as an adventure game maker, but you did not take into account the dreaded paparazzi!
Will someone please explain to me again why I am making my adventure game???
Kori
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 12:24am |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Kori (24 JUL 2006 11:47pm)
I don’t know of any adventure indie game makers that have quit their day jobs.
[smiley=whistle.gif]
Nice to meet ya!
So if we adventure indie game makers are not in it for the money, we must be in it for the fun of making the game, or a little adventure community fame. What adventure indie game maker has not daydreamed of seeing his own game interview on Just Adventure?
If you aren't in it for the money, then why sell your game? Why not just do freeware?
But...in our discussions here, we have come to the sad conclusion that the indie game maker should (after he releases the game), avoid posting on Just Adventure, or risk attacks on his game, his motives for posting or his personal habits. So much for a little fame. Even after spending a few years making your game, you now have to avoid posting on Just Adventure, but rather READ the posts only!
No direct contact with the adventure gang now. Yes, you made your dream adventure game for money, fame, sex, drugs, rock and roll, but now you better stay away from the forum or risk attack from the players of your 'own' game. You thought it would be cool to be known as an adventure game maker, but you did not take into account the dreaded paparazzi!
It's very difficult to be a self-motivator. Like it or not, 1 bad comment will override 100 good ones. In a recent Time Magazine interview, M.Night Shyamalan (6th Sense, Signs, The Village) was asked a question:
In your American Express ad, you say your biggest challenge is not letting work make you unhappy. What’s that about?
His response was:
It’s human nature. Twenty-six people love the movie and the 27th person hates it, and the only thing you can think about it is the 27th person.
Think about it and you'll understand why developers stay away from the forums...
As my game gets further along, I'll probably pull a disappearing act myself.
Will someone please explain to me again why I am making my adventure game???
The free sex.
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 1:26am |
KoriSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 399
Joined: 27 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | [If you aren't in it for the money, then why sell your game? Why not just do freeware?]
As for making it freeware, I would still want to sell the game ($19.95) and make enough in the first year to cover my hardware/software expenses. After the game had been out a year or so, it would be nice to get a small check each month from whatever retailer you use to buy yourself late night snacks while you work on your next game. So forget freeware.
[Think about it and you'll understand why developers stay away from the forums...As my game gets further along, I'll probably pull a disappearing act myself.]
And about leaving the forum, or at least, not posting anything after you release your game; I have an idea. Get a new server and put it in some family members name. Then register with Just Adventure with a new name, and change your sex too. Then, become another Crapstorm and SLAM your ‘own’ game. Now ‘that’ would be fun!
[The free sex.]
Yea, the free sex angle might be OK, but some of these Adventure babes live a long ways away. Like in other countries even. :'(
Kori
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 11:14am |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By alkis21 (23 JUL 2006 1:23pm)
I want to ask you all something that's been bugging me for quite some time..
Do you think it's best for the developer to join discussions about an upcoming game, or is it more prudent to just read the comments and keep a safe distance?
A valid question. But... imho the rest of your post about the big ego and not being able to work for two days was a mistake. As a developer, you should never reveal that kind of personal info about yourself. It will influence people when they know you are that vulnerable, unless you want them to tiptoe in your presence and apologize all the time for saying things you may have taken the wrong way.
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 11:32am |
alkis21Schattenjger
Posts : 2112
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: GR
Status : Offline | You are right. Sometimes I can be a drama queen and can't hold my big mouth shut.
From now on, I'll be the mysterious developer who talks about anything but his game.
Betje, can you please remove me from your ignore list? I need to tell you something. I'll understand if you don't want to.
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 12:37pm |
percyIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 9
Joined: 20 JUL 2006
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Ogre (24 JUL 2006 10:03pm)
Anyway I'll answer your "attack" (did you write that on purpose actually?) briefly:
I play all kind of computer and video games since about 1984. I own about 1000 or more games of all kind of genres. I own several home computer systems, several PCs and a whole closet with all kind of consoles. My most favorite genres at the moment are Adventures, (online) RPG's and Arcade Racers for some fun inbetween and I also don't say no to a shooter (I love Joint Operations for example) but I generally used to and play everything (less now since lack of time, though). Guess I do know a bit when I talk about games, eh?
Diablo is a Hack/Gauntlet clone and added some RPG elements so its not even original! Everybody even the biggest fans admitted when they came out that both Diablo parts where way behind when it came to ingame graphics at the time of their release. To most that didn't matter since they liked the game so much for its other qualities for others it didn't matter also because it is a Blizzard game...
You also don't play the cutscenes, do you? They were indeed fantastic but they are just a bonus who help to set an atmosphere -they are not the game!
The Dreamcast game Record of Lodoss War was released a while before Diablo 2 but looks a million times better. The game has nothing at all to do with the anime series, it just uses the brandname and the world it plays in. Indeed you only have one character here thats because you play a story related to him and this is the biggest advantage RoLW has - it has a wonderful told story you like to know how it's going on and you do that by playing a game that looks better as Diablo but else is practically exactly the same.
Well I know it's no Blizzard game and simply for that can't be so good... ^^
And I've played the Diablo series, the Warcraft series and WoW but their best game remains Starcraft!
I do enjoy the Blizzard games since their very first Super Nintendo releases like Rock'n Roll Racing but I'm no fanboy of anything but judge simply by game not by name! I've found a lot of games over the years better and more interesting then the famous and successful twins.
In my book "Knights and Merchants" is a million times better then "The Settlers" or "Anno" series. (it simply had the bad luck to have been released by a well known low budget publisher)
In my book Guild Wars is todays best MMORPG and not WoW (I play both and some others as well but I do see the many faults that WoW has - and its still a good game!)
Diablo is a good game, but Record simply is the better one when seen objectively by simply comparing the cons and pros both games have. And as I said before I always get slaughtered when I dare to say that there are better games then the Blizzard ones. It's like you tell a fan of Madonna that she's too old, can't sing and recylcles stuff again and again and simply is boring and that there are a million other singers who look better, sing better and have a better taste in music in general. You just can'tcriticise an idol... sorry I don't give a da*n because I like what I like not by name but by quality...
just because you played a lot of games doesnt mean anything, my friend. most of us here has played just as many games.
i think we are looking at completely different viewpoints here.
i myself always look at graphics, since thats kinda my area. secondly, i believe gameplay is vital in any game. so far you haven't said anything about the gameplay, and from what i can gather it's not all that. i dont play WOW, i find it boring. i played starcraft, but not really into it. so dont make me out to be this blizzard-fanatic. you seem to think people are in love with games like diablo 2 just because it was made blizzard? im pretty objective in my opinions, since i havent really played any blizzard games before i played diablo 2 (i havent even played diablo 1 before d2, dont really like it that much.) i am infact in love with blizzard cutscenes.
if you shrug of things like diablo 2's cutscene off as 'bonus', then i dont think there is any point in continueing this discussion. bonusses like these ere what makes diablo 2 so good. plus thats their major way of telling the story in diablo 2. i guess its just a bonus because record of lodoss wars' cutscenes are so horrible you try to think of it as not part of the game. if you really think the dated, washed-out, dull graphics and bad animated and bad looking characters of record of lodoss wars is good, then again, i dont really see the point of continuing the discussion. because you're taste in graphics is then just simply the oposite of mine. so we will disagree into eternity. "quality" is the one thing diablo 2 has.
and who is this "everyone" who seems to agree about the graphics of diablo 2 were outdated? do you make your own mind up or listen to other people's opinions?
i would like to see you comparison of the pros and cons of the 2 games and explain to me why record of lodoss wars has such better graphics (also, what are your qualifications to judge art? can i see some of your artwork. you can usually see by looking at someones own art). and what about replayibility? online play
could you also give me the release date of lodoss wars. diablo 2 was released 29 june 2000. the best i could find out for record of lodoss wars was march 2001. :-?
|
| 25 JUL 2006 at 9:50pm |
CarolineJA+ Overseer
Posts : 16540
Joined: 28 JAN 2007
Location: AU
Status : Offline | I have always felt sorry for developers whose work gets slammed rudely.
They are creative and must be allowed to create their art the way they see fit. It is their story.
However, as they seek to sell that product, they must also tweak their creativity towards what the market wants to buy.
|
| 26 JUL 2006 at 3:17pm |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By percy (25 JUL 2006 12:36pm)
just because you played a lot of games doesnt mean anything, my friend.
At least it shows I know what I'm talking about.
You on the other hand didn't even play Record of Lodoss War, so how can you compare them or even try to judge Lodoss???
most of us here has played just as many games.
I doubt, but I know there are many crazy people like me out there... ^^
i think we are looking at completely different viewpoints here.
Exactly, more to that later, though.
imyself always look at graphics, since thats kinda my area. secondly, i believe gameplay is vital in any game. so far you haven't said anything about the gameplay, and from what i can gather it's not all that.
Graphics in Diablo 2: Ingame - low resolution, low detail, always the same looking dungeons, only plus are the marvelous cutscenes, but again, a cutscene may add to the atmosphere of the game but you see it once for five minutes while you after that play 30, 50 or 100 hours in the ingame graphics. If I would play Diablo 2 with cutscene graphics indeed it would have been a marvelous game at that time.
i dont play WOW, i find it boring.
Oh, its not when you play with the right people. Unless you play the high level instances, they are indeed very boring, as is the item hunting there.
i played starcraft, but not really into it.
You've missed one of the best games ever! ^^
so dont make me out to be this blizzard-fanatic. you seem to think people are in love with games like diablo 2 just because it was made blizzard?
Believe me.. .go to any game forum and tell people Blizzard games are a bunch of crap, you'll be banned in less then 5 minutes after getting 1000 hate replies (no I didn't try that...)
im pretty objective in my opinions, since i havent really played any blizzard games before i played diablo 2 (i havent even played diablo 1 before d2, dont really like it that much.
Yup, they are both boring after a while. Why? Because they don't have a story! You just cut your way through millions of beasts to gather the next best item *snore*. I quite playing both games after only a few hours just for that. Other people however love exactly this item farming while I'm the story guy.
i am infact in love with blizzard cutscenes.
Who isn't? They ae brilliant! But a good or bad cutscene doesn't say anything if its a good or a bad game.
if you shrug of things like diablo 2's cutscene off as 'bonus', then i dont think there is any point in continueing this discussion.
If you indeed think a game is good because it has a good fmv then all hope is lost. In that case you're no gamer but just a viewer. I recommend you stick to Final Fantasy Advent Children and Co and stay away from text adventures... ;-P
bonusses like these ere what makes diablo 2 so good. plus thats their major way of telling the story in diablo 2.
It makes them a tad better but certainly in no way affects the game and gameplay itself. Besides both Diablos have a story? Sorry I couldn't find anything of a story in them besides the few minutes cut scenes (as you said yourself) both games only contain monster slashing from a to z.
i guess its just a bonus because record of lodoss wars' cutscenes are so horrible you try to think of it as not part of the game.
Indeed the intro was pretty bad but it was also very short so no worries it didn't affect the game a lot.
if you really think the dated, washed-out, dull graphics and bad animated and bad looking characters of record of lodoss wars is good, then again, i dont really see the point of continuing the discussion.
You saw them yourself or some screenshots? Plz try out the original game before you judge. I had a look on the net and all I could find was some dull dungoen shots who don't represent the game in the slightest. I couldn't find any of the fortresses and castles or the surface and so on. Besides that when I played RoLW I really thought this looks so much better then Diablo (2) Of course I didn't have a look at both games for about 5 years and the both will look worse compared to then.
because you're taste in graphics is then just simply the oposite of mine.
I doubt it is. I just think you only see diablo for its cutscenes and RoLW for some poor screenshots you found.
so we will disagree into eternity.
Unless you check out RoLW for yourself some day and ignore the intro in both games but just see the game.
"quality" is the one thing diablo 2 has.
In the cutscenes yes, in the game, no.
and who is this "everyone" who seems to agree about the graphics of diablo 2 were outdated? do you make your own mind up or listen to other people's opinions?
It had a low resolution like 640x480 at a time I was usually playing 1024x786 games on the PC. And I remember clearly many game magazines here wrote and many fans said it, too that the graphics is outdated but that it doesn't matter since its a Blizzard game.
i would like to see you comparison of the pros and cons of the 2 games and explain to me why record of lodoss wars has such better graphics
Check out RoLW and see yourself!
|
| 26 JUL 2006 at 3:25pm |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By percy (25 JUL 2006 12:36pm)
(also, what are your qualifications to judge art? can i see some of your artwork. you can usually see by looking at someones own art).
Are you kidding me? But if you want to know.. I'm a photographer so you could say my art is to reflect reality as much as possible ^^ Hmm on the other hand I also like cartoons...
and what about replayibility? online play
Lets face it, when Diablo 2 came out you played games offline. And slashing millions of monsters without a decent story told inbetween is boring especialyl when each level looks exactly the same.
could you also give me the release date of lodoss wars. diablo 2 was released 29 june 2000. the best i could find out for record of lodoss wars was march 2001. :-?
You got me, RoLW came out December 12th here but the Japan release was about half a year earlier, so I played Diablo 2 first and then RoLW. Says a lot then that I found RoLW so much better even after playing Diablo 2, right?
|
| 26 JUL 2006 at 9:57pm |
percyIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 9
Joined: 20 JUL 2006
Status : Online | ok, i see your points, and i respect them. so ill just give my thoughts on the graphics and leave it at that. (since my major problem with your 1st post was the "bad graphics"
before i begin, heres how i look at graphics: i just recently played warcraft 1 for the 1st time (a few months ago) and i fell in love with the graphics. to me, it has excellent graphics, and i love to really look at how they pixelled every little detail of the game. so, to me, it doesn't matter if the graphics are "dated" or "low-resolution", it all depends on how well it was done in that specific resolution, the colours they used, the amount of detail, and the techniques used, the "appeal" factor of the graphics and the atmosphere they create. i know a lot of people today will just look at warcraft 1 and say, wow, those graphics are crap.
warcraft 1 doesn't have worse graphics than games today, since it took just as much skill to do (sometimes even more), they just had less to work with and a much lower resolution.
i think what you are referring to is the fact that most of diablo's graphics were implemented into the game around 1996, and the game was only released in 2000. that made the graphics a bit blocky, "outdated" etc. (and what people talked about, even fans. but this has nothing to do with how well the graphics themselves were done.)
however, i still think the graphics are excellent and extremely detailed. i dont find the levels boring or repetitive. and not "bad" as you put it. when i run through the world i often just look at the backgrounds textures and the amount of detail painted into them. and there are so many kinds of debris and background objects in each level, etc. that i really like. they really concentrated on the little details in the game (like blizzard usually do in their games, thats why they do have such a well earned reputation, and rightly so) the characters themselves are detailed as well, and i love the way they modelled the werewolf, werebear and necromancer, very stylistic. even the lighting effects, spells and animation is really awesome in my opinion. im in awe of the graphics. the cutscenes, of course, are brilliant. imo there is no way that you can call the graphics "bad" in diablo 2, because they simply aren't. you can argue that they are outdated, but thats a completely different arguement.
as resolutions go, 800x600 is hardly low. having a fairly old pc myself, i have never played a game before in a higher resolution on it. however, 640x400 or 800x600, it doesn't make a difference on what i think of the graphics.
when you said "low detail", i dont know if you meant low resolution, or the graphics themselves just dont have a lot of detail. i completely disagree with the 2nd meaning, since i think the world is rich with detail.
no, i dont play the game just for cutscenes. i play it for the gameplay (which i have mentioned in both my 2 previous posts). diablo 2 to me is the most replayable game i have ever played, and also addictive. and that is why so many people love it. having said that, the cutscenes of games like warcraft 3 (and diablo 2 at the time it was released) is almost worth the price of the game itself.
i can see your points with diablo 1, since that to me is repetitive too (both in gameplay and bg levels), but diablo 2 definitely not. you have 7 different classes, each class has almost 7+ ways to play them. all this in a richly detailed world. and the best thing about the game is playing in hardcore in hell. i dont play online (due to lag), but thats another example of the games durability.
i have played starcraft (and finished with terran), so i atleast haven't missed that much. starcraft too to me has really awesome graphics. im not that much into scif-fi though.
so, sorry if i was a bit mean with some of my comments. these are my final thoughts, and ill leave it at that. hope you understand where i am coming from.
|
| 26 JUL 2006 at 10:58pm |
| Deleted User | Thanks for that post Percy!
So maybe I should explain more what I like. For me the story is extremely important. Probably because I'm a writer. And I think both Diablos and practically all action games fail in that department (however I thought F.E.A.R was quite gripping for a shooter). When it came to graphics I also think especially at that time playing a game in 800x600 or even less was already out of the question. I already had a large computer monitor back then and I remember playing some rare games in 1024 already in around 1995 but they were few then (Star Trek - A final Unity was one if I remember correct). In 2000 anything less then 1024 was kinda awkward for me as is now less then 1280. So I just think games who are behind in resolution are technically poor compared to the standards of the time. If you leave that away and I didn't know Diablo and play Diablo 2 as timeless just knowing this is an old game now I guess I would say "great game" and I don't care much that it has a low resolution but else looks great. On the other hand I also would presumably think it was released around 1996 ^^.
Oh and if you like Diablo 2 so much gameplay wise as well please have a look at Guild Wars! My favorite game since early last year and no competitor in sight as well. My guild boss there is also a Diablo 2 addict, he played it for over 4 years practically on a daily basis... crazy guy... ^^
|
| 27 JUL 2006 at 1:24am |
KoriSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 399
Joined: 27 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | To Percy and Ogre
A question: Since you both are heavy game players I would like some suggestions if you have any.
I have motion sickness in a bad way. Many game players have the same thing. If you took a survey, you would probably find a high percentage of game players have mild to heavy motion sickness.
So you are saying, not me, and so what. Well, I could play many of the adventure games and some shooters back in the 90s, but slowly, all the games are shutting me out with 3d graphics, lots of 360 camera movement, and fps. I have a shelf full of game I bought but could not play because I got sick after about half a hour.
I used to play some shooters that did not have too much movement back in the 90s. I played Doom and American Mcgee’s Alice. I did play War Craft. It never made me sick, but I got tired of it after about a year of it everyday. I guess I could still play games like that. (What ever they are called.) As for adventure games, I played many of them over the years simply because the shooters made me so sick, but now the adventure games are going 3d and even they are making me sick. I bought The Longest Journey 2, recently and it make me sick after half an hour. Same with Myst3, 4, 5.
I tired moving my CRT refresh rate up to 120herz and that helped some, but now I am using a 19 inch Viewsonic VX924 with the fast 3 ms. I still get sick with 3d games.
Is there some hardware I could buy to overcome this so I could play game again, (which I doubt will help. Too much camera movement in most games). Or is there a class of games I should start looking at. Perhaps you can suggest a few.
At the moment I have just been playing old 2d games from the past 90s. Games like Syberia I and II, The Longest Journey, Riven, etc. Nothing wrong with that, but sometimes I do feel left out when the new games come out, and it's happening more and more often.
Kori
|
| 27 JUL 2006 at 1:28pm |
| Deleted User | Hi Kori,
I also used to have motion sickness. I'm quite shortsighted and also have a curvatured cornea which made it impossible for me to play Wolfenstein for more then 10 minutes and later Doom for more then 15 minutes before feeling so bad that I really felt like throwing up. The first game it got better was Duke NukeEm 3D which I could play for over 30 minutes before becoming too sick. Since then it got better and better especially since games use real 3D engines. So I guess the only thing I can say about it that either higher resolution and real 3D (Wolfenstein and Doom were more like 2,5D) and getting used to it over the time are the only things that help.
Since that doesn't really seem to help in your case I'm afraid you have no choice but to stick to 2D titles. There is no hardware that helps, though. I would almost suggest you get a Playstation 2 and look mostly for old PS1 titles like Alundra and Co.
Else I'm afraid there is not much you could do unless probably trying to overcome it by time, probably by playing 3D titles that don't have fast movement like some RPG's or strategy games.
|
| 27 JUL 2006 at 4:22pm |
KoriSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 399
Joined: 27 MAR 2003
Status : Offline | Ogre
Thanks for the suggestions. I did not expect much because I have tried just about everything over the years, but I keep asking and trying.
Thanks
Kori
|
| 19 DEC 2007 at 11:05pm |
RaySorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 360
Joined: 21 OCT 2002
Location: US, CA
Status : Offline | EVERYTHING ABOUT YOUR POST IS WRONG, KORI!!!!! YOU SUCK!!!!!!
Kidding!
I agree with every word you said.
Remember, procrastinate now. Don't put it off!!
|
| 20 JAN 2008 at 10:48am |
| Deleted User | alkis21, imo you should become selectively involved. I don't have the money or experience to make games (wish I could), but for years did art and writing in private and recently decided to go more public. One has to thrash out a few issues for yourself, if you're an indie. You started off this thing because you love doing it, its' a creative thing, therefore, on a certain level, intensely private.
What you are doing when expressing creativity, is you are expressing your take on reality for the whole world to see. And the experience of public scrutiny can be a very harrowing experience, because it is going to shatter your little bubble one way or another.
If you want to grow and learn as a human being however, you will don the cloak of a rational positive openess to both praise and criticism. So I think one should read the feedback, but also take it whence it comes from. Some people may simply not be able to understand what you are trying to achieve, or they might not like it, and that's fine, just ignore those, they're not on the same wavelength as yourself anyway.
Here and there though you will find appreciation but with some positive criticism included.
Or there may have been issues that you were secretly "wondering" about, and now someone has brought it out into the open for you.
Or you may have become so involved that you didn't "see the wood for trees" and now that someone has made you aware of it, you reallise that this is a possible issue that you had not thought of before.
These are the kinds of feedbacks, that imo, you should sift out and respond to.
Good luck with your game!
|
