The first try never really worked but why not try again with AGS team challenge?
For anyone who does not know, AGS team challenge was a competition in which people were put in teams of 5(?) and had to make a game within three months. I think it is a great idea, and that it should be given a second try. What do you guys think?
The team challenge wouldn't be any more succesful if it was done now, IMO.
I think it needs to be much smaller in scope, one month maxiumum, but preferably less. A few rules, would be nice, or better, a theme.
I think a 48 hour competition on a weekend would actually be quite fun.
I'd say yes, but at least one team is still working on their game, believe it or not :P i'm all for it, AGA might not be though ;)
the group im in is still working slowly on our game. we are getting pretty happy with our story and we'll go from there.
Meh. You can try it if you want, but I doubt it's gonna be any more successful that the original was. As for a 48-hour competition, we tried that, remember, scotch, and it ended up taking 6 weeks :P
What I suggest is:
A short or medium length game with free theme for a month in the summer holidays. If enough people want to participate, it could start in July. Scotch, the weekend competition wouldn't probably be good since a team of 3 or 4 people cant make a great game in 2 days howver talented they are. Any other suggestions?
I'm not very hopeful then, one month still seems rather a long time for a random team to stay focussed. People always seem to go for something rediculously ambitious whatever the time limit. We thought ARE would take 2 or 3 days and it took over a month, and look how small that game is.
Perhaps there should be guidelines on how many rooms and other things should go into the game, though even that wouldn't keep things simple, probably.
I hope it does well, but any more than a few days time limit and it'd be too much of a distraction from the other games people are working on, at least it would be for me.
IMPO it wouldn't work, it didnt work the first time, its not going to work a second time..... but a third..... maybe.....
My view is "if at first you don't succeed, give up and go play video games"
EDIT: WOW, this is post number 500 for me...
A few days is a bit too short on time, no? Maybe something between 10-20, though a month seems ok too. I'd be interested in participating, since I wasn't here the first time this wasdone. Were the teams divided randomly or by role in game making? I think a random division is more challenging, and I believe that's how it was the first time, though I don't know for sure. But I agree about having guidelines that the game shouldn't be very big, just a game with a few rooms, and try not to take up too much time in the pre-production phase. I'd say the summer holidays are a good time to do this. :)
M0ds, you were the one who held last one, right? Waddya say?
I'd join ya.
I'd like to join again...
that is if it's very well organized
and yes AGA I'm still working on SF from time to time :P
I'll send you some of the latest sprites soon ;D
Could anyone tell me the exact rules of the last one, please?
Originally, I think it was along the lines of having SIX weeks to create a totally original game with your team. The games will then be judged by a panel of judges. Length of the game is irrelevant, but it must feature an intro, cutscenes and an outro as well as of course all the gameplay between.
I imagine you'd get marked on;
> Good gameplay
> Inventive systems, like GUI's etc, death options
> Inventive and original puzzles
> Persistent art styles
> Music, sound etc
At the end of it, once they've been judged, I can host the games on the Screen 7 site!!!1
So, if you want to do the challenge, do it!
Isn't this kind of like MAGs...with teams?
Hmmm.. how were the teams decided?
I think it'd be a good idea to not have the teams just making an original game, but making it accroding to a few rules and/or a theme, closer to mags. I find that themes and other rules make it easier to think up a story etc, because there's a direction and you don't need to just wait for ideas to pop up. It should be quite a free theme though.
And if the competition is to be shorter, there shouldn't really be a requirement for having cutscenes, maybe just and intro and outro, with of course, pre-scripted scenes, but I wouldn't call them cutscenes. What do you think?
And yes, how were the teams decided? Random? Something in my memory involves putting the names in winamp as if they were songs and then telling winamp to shuffle and play. Hmm..
First there was a thread in which everyone who wanted to take a part gave his/her name. Then after a month or so the names were put into Winamp playlist and then Winamp was put on suffle so it picked the names in random order.
Haha, that's a brilliant method to choose names randomly.
hehe, thats great pete.
I think AGS team challange would really be worth considering again, in my experience the secret to sucess is planning. And if you got a solid plan down, which was then sent to the rest of the team a team challenge could be more than possible.
So, I see that many people would take part. Any volunteers for organizing this one?
I think people should be divided into groups on what skills they have, and a random person picked from the artist group, one from the scripter group, onne from the music group and so on. Would proabably end up with more balanced teams that way.
Assuming you can get enough people in each group.
Good idea, scotch.
I'm up for it (the whole AGS Team Challenge idea). I'd be a good storywriter and puzzle designer.
Scotch, but some people may do more than one component well. In that case?
Then they get put in the category that needs them most, if there are less coders than artists, then an artist-coder would be put in the artist group.
I'm not really sure if that's the best way, but some weighting toward balanced taems would be good ,imo.
Heh, I was going to bring up the case that someone is good at two areas of game design too. I suppose dividing by team role is a way to make more balanced teams, but what if there are 5 coders, 5 musicians, 8 story writers and 3 artists? Such a situation might come up,and it'll be difficult to divide this way. One of the challenges of a team challenge was to work with what was available, if there were two writer's on one team, and 2 artist on another, different areas of these teams games might have different quality. Then again, more than one coder on a team isn't useful, it's very difficult to pass coding from one to the other, because of style and other issues.
forget it, I'm just rambling. I'm sure whatever the organisator tries will work eventually. :)
There will be a theme/rules, yes?
I am with scotch on this one.
Also, I am completely against the theming - the plotwriters should be able to come up with their own ideas.
As for the length of the game, I think that it should be short-medium. BTW, the time limit WILL be 4-6 weeks, yes?
I would give it a go. 4-6 weeks sounds ok. I think having a basic theme and some rules would help people as they will then have a better idea on what to do. Also having a theme might help judge decide on the winner.
Just had a thought.
Don't know if it's good or anything, so take it for what it is.
What if project leaders and/or writers sign up first, then put out a synopsis of the game and recruit the other members of the team that way? Would at least prevent that you have any "Screw this! I don't want to make a Sci-Fi game!" kind of things happening...
But isn't making up a story from certain rules more challenging, and yet something that gets the creative juices flowing? I can see how a theme might be too much, but what about a few elements that need to be included in the games? Still, it doesn't really matter either way, making up a story from scratch is just as good.
I agree about the game length, though of course, a game shouldn't be disqualified if it's a bit too short. 4-6 weeks, or a month is the ideal time In my opinion.
Btw, I forgot to mention another thing about the teams, sometimes the whole team will want to write the story together, not just one person. I guess that had better be decided in each team seperately.
Good idea YOke.
I think that when the teams are decided, they should make the plot outline toghether(of course, it is their decision whether to). That should take care of the 'oh, I don't wanna make a MI clone' thing.
The outcome of a project like this will depend on how seriousöy people take it, and how "big" the whole thing gets.
First of all, it needs to be administered by some veteran in the project department, someone like Mods or DG. Secondly, it should be given great attention; weekly updating, articles and perhaps sample screenshots, just to keep up the spirit. When kids do projects in school, they success to a greater extension if they have to hand in reports regularly.
I do think the project is a great idea, because it inspires people who'd never thought of creating their own game to get involved in the game making procedure.
I say, if we go for a second round, we have to put the first round behind us; rebuild the teams, put away the original material. Start out fresh. Let a small board of trusted veterans work out rules, teams and eventually judging.
Go for it!
Couldn't have said it better myself, Andail.
I dont know if i should post this here or on the personal forum, but i'm giving a appeal(???) to my team and others who arz0r still working on their games ( 1 year and some months later... :P :P)/ suggesting that we try to make the best with Harvey Danger till the new deadline?
If it is not clear:
What i mean is to take the new deadline as valid for the old teams. What do you say?
Thats what I was thinking. we would just be included as our already team in this one.
I think that the teams will be mixed so, I guess that's a no.
I'd love to participate, however, I have a lot of events comming up. Four weeks is way too much for me! I think a week is good. These games dont need to be amazing. Heck, many people that enter MAGS only work for a week. :-/
Hm, methinks I'd like to participate too. I can definitely do scripting, but my art ability is only slightly greater than a scrambled egg.
So, who'll host? (I could)
man, that does sound most inorexicaly splangeriffic! this kinda thing must get started again, cos i like the sound of it, takes the other jobs off you so you can concentrate onyour feild of expertise. id love to do animtion /. bg art or voices.
Yes, enough questions.
Vel or m0ds or anyone must take initiative cuz this will then turn up to be another AGS-TV thread(not that it aint progressing).... 8)
But i think us old teams should be able to continue, i dont see why not, maybe we should be disqualified, but believe me, we didnt do THAT much, we(mostly Scumm :P) have made a 5 hard day work in this year and a half... :P So we aint in much advantage.
There is the idea and basic plot progress with some basic BGs.... not too much.
Tho i know LGM and the team have almost half of the game(as I've seen :P)...
Enough talking, let's do business.
I could, but someone else'd have to cast the die, because I want to participate too.
Vel, I endorse this project whole-heartedly.
You go ahead and participate, I can be the official "host", if Mods doesn't want to. Or if he wants to participate. This might also inspire those people who have problems with doing anything related to the name of Vel. Sad but true, this could be an issue to some.
Andail, I already started the thread, and scotch is casting the die via Roger on IRC, so I gess you can be the host/judge. Or maybe there should be open voting?
As for the voting; in my opinion, a jury has many advantages over an open voting.
Firstly, the jury is guaranteed to give each game the same amount of attention, and base the decisions on the same premises. In an open election, everybody can cast a vote just if they like the name of the game; nothing ensures that they have given the games an honest chance.
Secondly, the jury will be more or less uinbiased, in contrast to all those who can vote who are also involved in the project.
The jury's decision will also come with a motivation.
Lastly, an open elelction runs the risk of being awfully overdued, because of low participation.
So, IMO, a jury is much better in all aspects.
Please give me your views.
PS:
Mods, I also want to know whether you want to a) help organising the project (like jury-duty or similar), b) participate in the project or c) have nothing to do with it.
O-kay, so I guess a jury of five or so people would be just fine.
How many teams will there be? I'd like to host the completed games on the Screen 7 website. I don't think I'll be able to host a website though, my web creation capabilities on this computer are limited. I'd like to participate, too.
I can look after the actual running of the challenge, setting the teams, the start - finish dates etc, but I think someone else should create a website where as said, reviews, progress reports etc can be uploaded.
?
:D
m0ds
Mods, Vel already set the dates, and I believe Scotch will arrange the teams with some sort of random generator.
Right now it seems to be quite many participants, judging from the amount of people who signed up since only yesterday.
If you by participate mean compete in one of the teams, let me handle the administration and focus on your game instead.
Otherwise I'd love to see you host the project.
I will also select a good jury with trusted, experienced game creators/players.
If everything stays as it is, there will be five teams, but my predicion is that there will be at least 7 or 8.
Quote from: Vel on Sun 27/06/2004 22:50:06
...someone else'd have to cast the die...
Excuse my ignorance, but what is "The Die"? (I wasn't able to be on IRC last week)
A slangword for dice
Its the singular of dice, as far as I know.
Dice is the plural of die, actually :P
He means someone else will have to pick the teams, and that will be Roger, in IRC, in jsut under a week.
yes, thank you for correcting me