| 19 FEB 2009 at 12:49pm |
ags-sshIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 16
Joined: 20 MAY 2008
Status : Online | As a beta tester for this game I can tell people that it will appeal to both Adventure and Casual fans alike. If you like both, then you'll be in clover!
For the latest on all things about Adventure Game Studio, [url=http://ags-ssh.blogspot.com]read my blog![/url]
|
| 19 FEB 2009 at 9:17pm |
JelenaPrivate Detective
Posts : 587
Joined: 30 SEP 2007
Status : Offline | I've been waiting for Emerald City Confidential ever since I read about it over on Adventure Gamer's forum and today I bought and downloaded it!
I've only played a little bit since I still want to finish S.H the Awakened before really digging into this (what I hope to be) gem.
I have to say that everything looks promising. Normally I'm not a fan of "cartoony" games, but this style of art appeals to me and the fact that I have a soft spot for Noir themes and femmes with attitude makes me really look forward to playing it.
Temporary guest in your life.
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 8:10am |
| Deleted User | As I simply adore skits and spinoffs with a twist on fairytales and existing literature, (Like American Mc gee's Alice ) I would definitely be interested in this one.
I see there is a demo available, so once I've done Overclocked, I'll give it a try. Pity the demo only works for an hour. I'd have to find a peaceful uninterrupted hour for that - or does the timer only run while you are in the game, and stop when you exit, enabling you to continue later?
Oh, and is the full game 80MB?
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 8:37am |
JelenaPrivate Detective
Posts : 587
Joined: 30 SEP 2007
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By TheTraveler (20 FEB 2009 8:10am)
Oh, and is the full game 80MB? I believe so.
Temporary guest in your life.
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 8:53am |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By jelena (20 FEB 2009 8:37am)
Originally Posted By TheTraveler (20 FEB 2009 8:10am)
Oh, and is the full game 80MB? I believe so.
Oh, goodie! That sounds like a bargain, then! Thanks, Jelena! 8-)
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 8:05pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | After seeing some blackwell shots this guy's work is really on my radar. I actually had no idea Emeral City Confidential was coming from the same guy.
Considering how utterly tired I am of dissapointing retail adventures I may have to try out his games starting with Blackwell.
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 10:52pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Apparently Playfirst doesn't allow the game use on multiple machines or any way to back up your game for future use.
They gave some nonsense about prevent score manipulation(umm, this is an adventure game) and piracy.
It is more like renting the game when you can't backup your game or use it on 2 systems. I was really excited but I cannot support this game in these circumstances.
I suggest more people speak up against this nonsense.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 10:59pm |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (20 FEB 2009 10:52pm)
Apparently Playfirst doesn't allow the game use on multiple machines or any way to back up your game for future use.
They gave some nonsense about prevent score manipulation(umm, this is an adventure game) and piracy.
It is more like renting the game when you can't backup your game or use it on 2 systems. I was really excited but I cannot support this game in these circumstances.
I suggest more people speak up against this nonsense.
I for one, am quite happy to speak up about it, (as I have quite fociferously in the past), but could you perhaps give me a suggestion where I could speak up against it where anybody who matters would listen? Meaning anybody who has the power to make any difference in publishers implementing this kind of bs?
Well, after seeing Shadow's post, I now have second thoughts about this game. I'd be happy to try the demo, but the DRM is already leaving a bit of a sour taste in my mouth.
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 11:17pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By TheTraveler (20 FEB 2009 10:59pm)
Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (20 FEB 2009 10:52pm)
Apparently Playfirst doesn't allow the game use on multiple machines or any way to back up your game for future use.
They gave some nonsense about prevent score manipulation(umm, this is an adventure game) and piracy.
It is more like renting the game when you can't backup your game or use it on 2 systems. I was really excited but I cannot support this game in these circumstances.
I suggest more people speak up against this nonsense.
I for one, am quite happy to speak up about it, (as I have quite fociferously in the past), but could you perhaps give me a suggestion where I could speak up against it where anybody who matters would listen? Meaning anybody who has the power to make any difference in publishers implementing this kind of bs?
Well, after seeing Shadow's post, I now have second thoughts about this game. I'd be happy to try the demo, but the DRM is already leaving a bit of a sour taste in my mouth.
Absolutely. Email them at Playfirst and then don't buy it. I don't stand for the idea that I purchase a game to rent. The ironic thing is that this kind of restriction only encourages rampant piracy. Who wants to BUY a game just to NEVER be able to play it again in the future?
Terribly terribly disappointing.
Also, make a post on wadget eye's forum complaining. If enough people complain to Dave and Playfirst, maybe they will open it up, just like they did with Mass Effect.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 20 FEB 2009 at 11:52pm |
ShanyGuild Master
Posts : 3313
Joined: 19 JUN 2003
Status : Online | Isn't there an option to buy a backup CD when ordering the game? I don't know whether there are any restrictions on it, though.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like download-only games and will probably wait for the retail version myself.
In fact, just today I sent an e-mail to a developer about wanting to retrieve the CD-key of a game I bought 2.5 years ago. Since I have no physical proof of purchase, I don't think I'll be able to get it (I know it's my fault for not keeping e-mails, but this was years ago!).
EDIT: After checking the somewhat confusing FAQ it seems that the backup CD still connects to the internet to validate your purchase. It does not say whether or not it has any restrictions on the number of installs.
|
| 23 FEB 2009 at 12:33am |
papillonSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 340
Joined: 3 JUL 2003
Status : Online | A lot of casual games will be released on multiple portals and will end up having different terms and conditions depending on where you buy it. So you may be able to get it somewhere with less restrictive terms than Playfirst's.
As a developer myself, I help people recover their game downloads even if they lost their receipt emails if they can give me enough information for me to find them in my records (correct name, email address, etc). But practices vary a lot. Some download sellers are very strict, or so busy that they don't have time to hunt down stray records. It's definitely worth looking into the terms before buying.
[url=http://whineaboutgames.blogspot.com]I Whine About Games[/url]&&&&[url=http://www.hanakogames.com]Anime Games[/url]
|
| 24 FEB 2009 at 5:36pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Seems very strange to me that an indie dev would choose such a strict DRM method. I mean the only ones buying this game are gamers outside the mainstream....so why do this? I mean if it's on shelves I understand, but not as an online-only niche indie title.
He's shooting himself in the foot if you ask me.
|
| 24 FEB 2009 at 7:07pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | From what I can glean, Wadget Eye Games have taken up the opportunity & funding needed to produce this game for Playfirst & therefore don't ultimately call the shots on how it's marketed.
Playfirst seem to be a prominent casual game's producer & casual games seem to be big business at the moment, so Emerald City is more than an on-line niche indie title & should do a lot better! Like other casual game producers, including Big Fish, fans can subscribe to packages which offer downloadable games very cheaply - the catch being that you can't save the games to disc without future activatation.
I do understand that there may possibly be a disc version of the game to follow sometime!
|
| 24 FEB 2009 at 11:09pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | From my understanding, PlayFirst paid for all the development and approached Dave to come up with the design/story/script. They got and paid for the artwork, voice work, coding, etc. It's essentially PlayFirst's game.
No need to bust on the developer for how its distributed as he had no voice in that I think. Listen to Dave's podcast he's linked to on his site, it explains pretty much everything. ave is probably one of the nicest dev's you will ever meet or talk to, so no point in trying to drag his name into the whole DRM thing as him being responsible for it.
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 5:44pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ivinia (24 FEB 2009 11:09pm)
From my understanding, PlayFirst paid for all the development and approached Dave to come up with the design/story/script. They got and paid for the artwork, voice work, coding, etc. It's essentially PlayFirst's game.
No need to bust on the developer for how its distributed as he had no voice in that I think. Listen to Dave's podcast he's linked to on his site, it explains pretty much everything. Dave is probably one of the nicest dev's you will ever meet or talk to, so no point in trying to drag his name into the whole DRM thing as him being responsible for it.
I don't think I ever mentioned Dave, so I am assuming you are responding to the other guy.
Let's not fool around here though.. He knew, when creating the game for them, what their distribution method was going to be. If not, it would be his fault for not being informed before signing the contract. Are you to say that he is an innocent victim here?
I live in the world with actions and consequences. Unless Dave was manipulated or lied to, he would have to have known how the game would be distributed and playfirst's policies. If he knew this and chose it anyway, then he is responsible in some way. Maybe not for personal creation of the drm, but for allowing the game to be made for someone with those intentions.
I am all into supporting indies, and I do so all the time. If an indie creates a game that is only pay to rent with no way to back it up, I think people should have the right to know that ahead of time.
I am in no way telling people not to buy the game. Playfirst's site is a bit vague on this, and had I not emailed them before buying, I would have been very very upset. It isn't the money, it is the principle of buying and being able to keep a game for the future. As long as people know this going in, that is completely cool to me.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 6:26pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2350
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | If I had a choice between a) making a fun game and getting paid for it and b) not getting to make a fun game and losing out on some money on top of it, I think I'd consider some less-than-ideal DRM just the price of doing business. Sometimes you just have to get your opportunities where you can get them, and I don't think we should bear Mr. Gilbert any ill will on that score. Ultimately it's PlayFirst who perpetuate the use of DRM.
Personally I am interested in getting the game, but the distribution method does give me pause. I shall have to make enquiries.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 7:08pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By JKing (25 FEB 2009 6:26pm)
If I had a choice between a) making a fun game and getting paid for it and b) not getting to make a fun game and losing out on some money on top of it, I think I'd consider some less-than-ideal DRM just the price of doing business. Sometimes you just have to get your opportunities where you can get them, and I don't think we should bear Mr. Gilbert any ill will on that score. Ultimately it's PlayFirst who perpetuate the use of DRM.
Personally I am interested in getting the game, but the distribution method does give me pause. I shall have to make enquiries.
No ill will is given, just the acknowledgement that he wasn't an innocent bystander. He knew that DRM would be used ahead of time.
It is just a shame that an interesting game like this has such a ridiculous system for what should be a simple game sale.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 7:22pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (25 FEB 2009 5:44pm)
Let's not fool around here though.. He knew, when creating the game for them, what their distribution method was going to be. If not, it would be his fault for not being informed before signing the contract. Are you to say that he is an innocent victim here?
I live in the world with actions and consequences. Unless Dave was manipulated or lied to, he would have to have known how the game would be distributed and playfirst's policies. If he knew this and chose it anyway, then he is responsible in some way. Maybe not for personal creation of the drm, but for allowing the game to be made for someone with those intentions.
I think you are being over-judgemental here shadow. Who exactly do you think create the games for companies like Playfirst? Many ex AG developers I know are involved - they need to earn money like everyone else & it's more lucrative than working in the AG industry.
Are you saying that they are all responsible? or do you just want to pick on the one guy you can name who will hopefully now have more resources to continue a little more comfortably with his superb, non DRM, series of Blackwell games.
You are so unrealistic & so unfair as you do not have to buy the game! I will just mention that Playfirst do quite often release boxed versions of their games.
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 7:38pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By loobiloo (25 FEB 2009 7:22pm)
Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (25 FEB 2009 5:44pm)
Let's not fool around here though.. He knew, when creating the game for them, what their distribution method was going to be. If not, it would be his fault for not being informed before signing the contract. Are you to say that he is an innocent victim here?
I live in the world with actions and consequences. Unless Dave was manipulated or lied to, he would have to have known how the game would be distributed and playfirst's policies. If he knew this and chose it anyway, then he is responsible in some way. Maybe not for personal creation of the drm, but for allowing the game to be made for someone with those intentions.
I think you are being over-judgemental here shadow. Who exactly do you think create the games for companies like Playfirst? Many ex AG developers I know are involved - they need to earn money like everyone else & it's more lucrative than working in the AG industry.
Are you saying that they are all responsible? or do you just want to pick on the one guy you can name who will hopefully now have more resources to continue a little more comfortably with his superb, non DRM, series of Blackwell games.
You are so unrealistic & so unfair as you do not have to buy the game! I will just mention that Playfirst do quite often release boxed versions of their games.
There is no judgment whatsoever.
Fact: He created the game
Fact: The game was created knowing that DRM is the chosen distributive method.
I don't understand how stating the truth could be twisted into a "judgment."
"Are you saying that they are all responsible?"
I refer you to the 2 above stated facts. If they do not make him responsible, then who? He signed the contract.. there was no coercion...
I'm not judging whether this was a right or wrong thing to do. Just didn't understand why it was being portrayed that Dave had nothing to do with it. In agreeing to make the game for them, the decision was made.
I wish him to make money, which is why I complained in the first place. 1. People have a right to know they are renting the game. 2. It will turn people off and lose sales for a good game.
Hopefully a boxed version will come out down the line so I could support him.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 8:05pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | I feel totally the same way about download games with DRM & don't support that method unless the cost of buying the game is very low - so I'm waiting for a boxed version - but the game does come under the umbrella of the casual games market.
Ultimately Dave was doing 'paid work' for a company that are doing nothing illegal. Whether he knew about the way they distribute games is neither here nor there. You have the choice to use that company or not - I don't see why he should be deemed responsible in any way at all because you (or I!) don't like the way that company operates!
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 8:12pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By loobiloo (25 FEB 2009 8:04pm)
I feel totally the same way about download games with DRM & don't support that method unless the cost of buying the game is very low - so I'm waiting for a boxed version - but the game does come under the umbrella of the casual games market.
Ultimately Dave was doing 'paid work' for a company that are doing nothing illegal. Whether he knew about the way they distribute games is neither here nor there. You have the choice to use that company or not - I don't see why he should be deemed responsible in any way at all because you (or I!) don't like the way that company operates!
He isn't responsible for you or I disliking the method.
He is responsible for actually creating the game knowing it had DRM.
I don't get the confusion.
"Whether he knew about the way they distribute games is neither here nor there"
That is at the root of the discussion, unless you are trying to discuss something different than I.
"No need to bust on the developer for how its distributed as he had no voice in that I think."
I then explained that he created the game knowing the method of distribution ahead of time. This is a fact, unless he was lied to or misled. When he signed a contract to make a game, it only makes sense that Dave read the terms of the contract and knew about Playfirst's policies before developing for them.
I just didn't like how it was insinuated that Dave was some victim here that had no idea and nothing to do with the DRM.
By signing up to create the game, he consented the DRM.
Again, his choice, but that ultimately makes him responsible.
An example-
If I sign up to write a book that will only be sold a certain way, I agreed to make the book with those conditions. Would you say the book company would be the one responsible with me having no responsibility for it?
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 8:15pm |
Jenny100Guild Master
Posts : 3510
Joined: 12 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | There are privacy issues with Playfirst that go beyond the DRM.
Can you honestly read everything on Playfirst's Privacy Policy page and say you are OK with all of it?
http://www.playfirst.com/privacy-policy.html
I wonder if even the boxed versions of games that Playfirst publishes include this "tracking technology" that reports back "date, version, the timing and tracking of mouse clicks and keyboard actions, scoring, game progress, and system information." I wonder what happens if you have your game playing in a window while you do other things on your computer -- would they log your keystrokes outside the game? I doubt they'd admit it if they did, so not much point in asking.
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 9:43pm |
loobilooPrivate Detective
Posts : 598
Joined: 3 APR 2008
Location: UK
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By shadow9d9 (25 FEB 2009 8:11pm)
Originally Posted By loobiloo (25 FEB 2009 8:04pm)
I feel totally the same way about download games with DRM & don't support that method unless the cost of buying the game is very low - so I'm waiting for a boxed version - but the game does come under the umbrella of the casual games market.
Ultimately Dave was doing 'paid work' for a company that are doing nothing illegal. Whether he knew about the way they distribute games is neither here nor there. You have the choice to use that company or not - I don't see why he should be deemed responsible in any way at all because you (or I!) don't like the way that company operates!
He isn't responsible for you or I disliking the method.
He is responsible for actually creating the game knowing it had DRM.
I don't get the confusion.
"Whether he knew about the way they distribute games is neither here nor there"
That is at the root of the discussion, unless you are trying to discuss something different than I.
"No need to bust on the developer for how its distributed as he had no voice in that I think."
I then explained that he created the game knowing the method of distribution ahead of time. This is a fact, unless he was lied to or misled. When he signed a contract to make a game, it only makes sense that Dave read the terms of the contract and knew about Playfirst's policies before developing for them.
I just didn't like how it was insinuated that Dave was some victim here that had no idea and nothing to do with the DRM.
By signing up to create the game, he consented the DRM.
Again, his choice, but that ultimately makes him responsible.
An example-
If I sign up to write a book that will only be sold a certain way, I agreed to make the book with those conditions. Would you say the book company would be the one responsible with me having no responsibility for it?
Yes! But you either go along with it or you don't sell your book! The buyers of it have the choice to buy under the conditions of sale or not but that doesn't make you as the author responsible for those conditions even if you know about them & as long as you are not aware of any deceit on the part of the book company.
And responsible for what? & to whom? It does imply some sort of expected consideration which on completing your book/game should pass onto the book/game company. I don't understand what you are on about - are you saying that because a developer is contracted to make a game for a company he is responsible for that game being produced with the terms & conditions attached? This game from what I understand has only been produced because it was 'commissioned'. It wasn't made & then deliberately offered to the game company for distribution rather than any other way so I don't really understand your point about responsibility! [smiley=laughing.gif]
|
| 25 FEB 2009 at 11:05pm |
shadow9d9Sorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 295
Joined: 17 JUN 2006
Status : Offline | There must be a word or 2 where we seem to have different definitions of.
Let's just leave at that. I honestly don't know of another way of phrasing it to bridge the gap in our mutual understanding.
We both get the basic jist though, so it's fine.
Disclaimer:&&&&Please do not take my opinions personally. I have strong opinions that may differ harshly with other popular opinions. I also have a rather direct way of expressing them. Keep this in mind when reading and do not get upset!
|
