Adventure Game Studio

I've noticed that a few production games are being advertised as 'Commercial' rather than Freeware.  To be honest theres no way I'd buy an AGS game no matter how good it looked (unless It gained such status that It became available in ComputerGame shops and I rarely buy them).
So whats the general opinion? Would You buy one? or have you bought one? and if so which one? and was it worth it?

I'm gonna buy The Zone from simulacra, if he comes to the Finnish AGS meeting next summer. Apart from that I haven't bought any. Besides, there aren't many commercial AGS games anyway...

I would honestly love to pay for the Apprentice games, I believe that Herculean Effort worked very hard on them, and I have enjoyed them as much as any commercial game I've bought. 

Like with shareware, payment of an AGS game is a way of encouraging the creators, letting them know that you appreciate their effort and hope that they continue.  If each of the 20,000 downloads they recieved paid only $1, they could probably become full-time game creators.  :)

But no, I never actually bought any AGS games, I've never seen one for sale that I thought looked interesting.  :P

I'm very much thinking of paying for "The Zone". And also "How to become a Ninja", seems very promising.

My idea of this community is that AGS is here for the love of the adventure games and not to make money. At least this is what I'm getting from the members, and I totally respect that.

Logic dictates, that Adventure games are outdated and the graphics with AGS will be outdated so there is little chance of financial success. But again there are games with 20,000 downloads and as Hollister man said, this could mean success! So...

BTW, if this is about your game, you have to consider so many things (for example the copyright breaches, which are huge in your case), that won't allow you to really make any money out of it...

Quote from: Nikolas on Wed 21/12/2005 17:25:21
BTW, if this is about your game, you have to consider so many things (for example the copyright breaches, which are huge in your case), that won't allow you to really make any money out of it...

LOL God no, I dont belive in using a freeware games creator to make money, I like making games for the love of them, not love of money. 
If I created a game from scratch and had a team of over 100ppl working for over a year then yeah It would be a commercial game, but I'd rather just pitch an idea to a computer game company and get them to do the hard work lol. Theres no way I'd use any existing franchise such as tomb raider to make money 

I paid for Ghostlady's Haunting of Mystery Manor, and was quite disappointed by it. (I didn't think it met the potential it had.) This has somewhat soured me on the notion of paying for AGS games.

I'm not saying I would never pay for another under any circumstances, just that something about it would have to really impress me, and I'd have to be fairly certain it'll live up to that promise. While the ones currently in production to be commercial have their good points, none of them really grab me enough to get me to fork out for them - certainly not while there are quality games being made for free.

I'm not suprised about ghostladys game, it just didn't look worth it to me.

I bought Fatman, and have never played it more than a few minutes. It's a good game, but I bought it more to support the idea of ags games being sold. I have no problem with it, if they are worth it. This to me means that when I look at the game info I can tell the author has worked damn hard on it, and at least it will come off as tidy and proffesional.

I didn't see that with Ghostladys game, it seemed about as good as any ags game. It did have (in my opinion) low-level 3d renderings, but 3d never impresses me much, unless it is well done....

I would buy other folks game though...

no, i wouldnt. since i have no way to pay. if i was rich, then yes, i wouldnt mind.

I paid for Fatman just before the removal from the marketplace was announced.  I would've considered it worth it if I'd ever gotten my copy.  Since then, I've acquired the ISO for it, so I suppose I got my money's worth out of it. 

I'm not quite a graphics-junkie but there's got to be real work put into some visual aspect, whether it's outstanding backgrounds or terrific animations.  If I get something impressive to stare at and a decent game, I don't mind paying.  After all, it's a pretty significant portion of their free time a person's investing.  How to be a Ninja will probably harvest my hard-earned buckazoids, but I'd prefer to try a demo or something first.

I paid for the SE version of 5 Days a Stranger and it was money well spent. But I didn't just buy the game outright and I probably wouldn't unless it was extremely cheap, and very easy to pay (I only bought SE 5 Days because I could use paypal, and I had some spare change sitting in my paypal account).

Honestly, I don't want to pay for a game unless I feel it's been IMMACULATELY beta tested and has an absolute professional quality to it. Of course, on top of that, it has to grab my interest too, and I tend to be really fussy and picky so that's a huge task in itself.

Nothing would annoy me more than paying for a game and finding a scripting error or spelling mistakes. I was VERY pissed off when that happened to me with Quest for Glory 4 (luckily I got ahold of a patch but that error kept me from playing more than 5 minutes into the game for a couple of years). It also happened to me after I bought a CD with Lure of the Temptress on it, and I had to get a patch for that.

Just these two examples of -professionally- made games has soured me. This just makes me a hundred times more skeptical of paying for a game created by an amateur (ie. Not a well established company, games aren't available on shelves).

So, I guess the general answer is 'no'. It would have to be incredibly impressive to even make me consider getting my wallet out.

I've said it before but to reiterate, I really like the way Yahtzee did things. I played the -whole- game for free, but I could pay a small amount of money to get something extra. I really dislike the idea of buying chapters, or buying after a demo.

Yes.

I already bought the SEs of 5DAS and 7DAS, Hauntings of Mystery Manor, and The Zone.  I've also bought several other indie adventure games that aren't made with AGS, like Delaware St. John vol. 1. In general, I've been quite happy with what I got. Five bucks, or even fifteen or twenty, once every few months is just pocket change anyway.

The only indie game I regretted buying was Hauntings of Mystery Manor. That game is just broken. The interface is barely functional (several mouse interactions have been disabled, and hotpots seem to be assigned at random) and ugly as hell, the story makes no sense, there are bugs everywhere (at least I think they were bugs, but it might just be the way the game is supposed to work) and the graphics are wildly inconsistent. I don't know what that JA+ reviewer was smoking. If the Adventure Gamers review had been out sooner I could have saved my money and got a couple of burritos instead.

I don't mind paying for AGS games, though, and the possibility of getting a dud now and then is just a risk you have to take.

I'm more likely to donate money when they have a donate button on their website along with their games.
Then pay for the game.

I have not bought any AGS or other indie games...yet. Purchasing the Special Edition versions of 5DAS and 7DAS is somewhere on my calendar, and I have every intention of buying Al Emmo and the Lost Dutchman's Mine the day that comes out. Speaking of the latter, I believe I would be more inclined to buy an indie game from a person or team that have previously made exceptional titles, as is the case with Himalaya Studios. Whenever there is money involved, there is an issue of trust. Someone releasing a commercial game whom I've never heard of, registered last week and made four posts in GiP, would definitely not get any of my cash even if the demo was good.

I'll echo a lot of other people's statements and say I'd buy one if it had a good demo.

I didn't buy Fatman when it was first being sold, but probably would have, if I had a credit card back then. Recently, though, I played the game. While good, I'm not sure whether I would've found it to be worth the money.

Didn't Adventure Gamers give Fatman a bad review as well?

In contrast, Out of Order (yeah, yeah, not an AGS game, but admit it, you loved it anyway :)) was supposed to be commercial (or at least shareware), but at the last minute, its creator decided to make it freeware. As a result, it got played by a lot more people than it probably would have otherwise, and ended up winning a lot of awards.

I, too, like the idea of donations pages. I have been known to actually make donations after playing games I thorougly enjoyed. Come to think about it, I even have my own donations page on my website. Maybe when my next game gets released, people will actually start using it.

I think I would of paid for  Cubert Badbone, P.I. but it was free.  ;D

Quote from: CoveredInSLUDGE on Thu 22/12/2005 05:23:05

Didn't Adventure Gamers give Fatman a bad review as well?

Yes. Yes it did, and the game didn't sell but maybe one or two copies after that.

Well, I guess in hindsight I should have known better than to bother with trying to sell a game. The fact is to make a game of commercial quality it takes either years, a good team or both. Fatman sucked about two years out of my life. I'm glad I made it and all but from now on I'm sticking to just having fun.

Sorry, you never got your copy YakSpit. Give me a pm w/ your address and I'll see if I can dig up a cd-r with it eh?

Don't look back in sadness!

If anything you totally did it man!

woot woot

I bought fatman and do not regret it. It was brilliant and am pleased to have supported it.

I haven't ever bought a commercial AGS game, but I would buy the SE 5 Days.. etc. if I had a paypal account.
Same story with Bad Timing, whenever it comes out.

Quote from: Ionias on Fri 23/12/2005 21:15:36
Sorry, you never got your copy YakSpit. Give me a pm w/ your address and I'll see if I can dig up a cd-are with it eh?

Appreciated, but . . . Merry Winter New Year! It was the community support I was going for and I've got the actual product (since acquired ISO) so everything's square.  I hope the experience didn't squish your adventure game making spirit, because I'd love to see another game or sequel. 

It was funny, too. Because Fatman probably would have been praised if it was free, but god forbid you attach money to it.

I intend to buy amatuer games when I have the money.

-MillsJROSS

I just can't spend money on commercial AGS games, when I can have as much(or more) fun with free AGS games.  Plus, I don't have the money to buy this kind of stuff, it's just not worth it.


Sorry if I hurt the feelings of those that create commercial AGS games.

I'd love to spend money on an AGS game, but the quality of the free titles amost always outshine the commercial ones.  How can I buy Mystery Manor when I can get No Action Jackson for free?

Fatman was a good quality game, you could just tell by looking at it, you would have a hard time finding a similar quality game for free, but there are some.

Now Mystery Manor or what not just bugs me, because it just felt like a pile of crap game with some decent 3d backgrounds....it even had the defauly gui, which the creator said was left because they preferred it, but I think it was lazy. No way should you pay for a game with the default Gui, there shouldn't be default anything....

Quote from: YakSpit on Sat 24/12/2005 04:16:35
Appreciated, but . . . Merry Winter New Year! It was the community support I was going for and I've got the actual product (since acquired ISO) so everything's square.Ã,  I hope the experience didn't squish your adventure game making spirit, because I'd love to see another game or sequel.Ã, 

Cool.

As far as making another adventure game goes. I must admit the wind has been taken out of my sails. I've been limping along with my last idea for a fan game for a few years now. Heh, but someday, someday it will get finished.

Quote from: MillsJROSS on Sat 24/12/2005 05:00:28
It was funny, too. Because Fatman probably would have been praised if it was free, but god forbid you attach money to it.

Indeed. In hindsight I really really wish I had NEVER tried to sell the game. I got a lot of hate mail and forum bashing for trying to make a buck. The cash just isn't worth it. So if anyone wants my 2 cents, don't bother. Just do it for fun or don't do it.

I respect you for trying, Ionias! I'd still love to sell a game commercial, made with AGS or not. AGS is pretty much the only engine I use so looks like if anything it would be with that!! The thrill of the business and knowing that people want a touch of quality - something thats been slaved over a little (or lot :))... Which is why I think you did well, you did go through a lot of effort to make a nicely sized adventure game. You weren't asking the world for it either, and when it was practically hand-crafted from scratch there's not really place to complain. It'd be great to see a freeware Fatman sequel, tho ;) :D

As to the main point, I haven't actually bought an amateur game myself yet, but there's still time... I would have been happy to have bought Fatman but was lucky enough to receive a free copy. I'd pay using PayPal, but I don't think I'd pay for just a download. If I'm getting something collectable out of it too, I'm far more satisfied :)

Mystery Man0rz to me suggests someone trying to make a quick buck! Along the lines of those eBay AGS compilations :p

I certainly would pay for an AGS game, if it was something special and I thought it would promote future efforts. In particular, I pay for stuff that is targeted at a smaller market to support such productions. What matters is the result, not the engine used.

When making The Zone (http://interactingarts.org/thezone/enterthezone.html), I decided to ask people to pay for it. While my original intention was to give it away for free, there was no way I could justify working on it as much as I did.  :-[

Now don't get me wrong. I don't have a regular job, I spend my time working on projects such as The Zone and other wierdness. Most projects are for free, but they end up limited in scope as I have to work with more profitable projects to finance the free ones. The Zone turned out to be a bit too time and resource consuming, so I decided to go commercial and do the full production scheme: a 70 minute soundtrack, several custom made costumes, video footage and so on.

I don't expect to earn any money from the project really, but I hope to cover some of the costs to be able to produce more stuff in the future. Another reason for goin commercial was to try the business model suggested in the Scratchware manifesto (http://www.the-underdogs.org/scratch.php).

And Fatman looks great!  :=

Intrigue At OakHaven Plantation (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=24103.0) is a scam. Be warned.

The Butler Did It! (http://www.draconus.com/games/butler/) is a commercially AGS game like Clue. It was made and released beneath the AGS radar, so it's not very known.

Quote from: jet on Sun 25/12/2005 14:44:23
Intrigue At OakHaven Plantation (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=24103.0) is a scam. Be warned.

Jet, how can you ever know that? I don't believe you have played it. Since it's not even released. (http://koti.mbnet.fi/paapeli/rsmiley/shifteye.gif)

Please explain your opinions...

It's called common sense.

Q: How do you know those pill that make your penis longer don't work if you haven't tried them?
A: Common sense.

Maybe it's just the reputation of the author.

In my opinion that's not fair to Ghostlady. I don't think Hauntings was a scam, and so I don't think Intrigue is, either. I bought Hauntings and hated it, but its flaws seem much more like ones of inexperience (or perhaps limited talent, if we're being harsh) than of not caring. It's clear that a lot of effort was put into it. Besides, some people (http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/HauntingsOfMM/MysteryManor.shtm) liked it.

I think charging for it, especially $15, was an error in judgment, though. If the game had been offered for free people would have said "good effort for a first game, these are the problems with it, looking forward to your next project!" But when it's being sold people expect more, and there are some negative feelings about it.

I think it's really sad that people like Ionias and Ghostlady are being vilified because they're trying to make money off their games. Criticize the games, by all means, and if you don't think they're worth the price, you don't have to buy them. But don't you think that if someone is successful at selling their home-made adventure games, it will encourage more people to try, and try harder? That would be a great consequence, to my mind.

Heres the difference between Ghostlady and Ionias:

Ionias made free games for a while, and was pretty well known in this community. He spent a good long while on the game, and the ags community anticapated it. You can tell he knew he wouldn't try to sell it if it wasn't the best he could do. I really feel that he did his best, and it came off very presentable.

Ghostlady just popped up, grabbed another person to do 3d art for her (?) and started charging cash for her first game. From everyones opinions, I think most people felt gipped by it, and felt that it was a very amateur game. And now, after that first game that most everybody felt screwed by, she is announcing another commercial title. Sounds like she is just in it to milk a few bucks out of people.....

That's not entirely accurate. Ghostlady may not be an oldtimer on the AGS Forums, but her website has been running for years and is reasonably well known. I think she's also a regular on some of the other adventure communities that are out there. And she clearly has a long association with the artist for the game, given that some of the backgrounds have been available on her website for years.

I really doubt that homemade adventure games are an effective way to "milk a few bucks out of people". Didn't she say that the reason she charged for the first game was that she'd paid for the music used in the game? I have no reason to doubt that that's true.

Now, I agree that charging people for Hauntings was a serious mistake, and I question the wisdom of making this new game commercial (if for no other reason than I doubt many people will buy it this time around). However, she does appear to have listened to some of the criticism of the first game, and from the screenshots this looks like a much more polished affair.

It seems unnecessary to accuse her of running a scam when all we really know is that we didn't like her first game and don't think it was worth the price she charged for it.

If everybody starts making their AGS games commercial the AGS community will collapse  ;D

And anyway, I don't believe you can use a free program like AGS (generously made by CJ) and profit from it. I mean he practically programs eveybodies game here.

i aggree with buloght. this is such a cool community because people are here for the love of making adventure games, and not for the love of money. dont ruin that. im also one of those people who people who probably needs the money, since i dont have a job, but i refuse to make anything commercial unless im working for a games company and this was actually my job. (and im not good enough, hehe)

but i prefer to keep it a hobby.

theres a lot of free games that looks much better than the commercial ones. it also seems like every 2nd 3d game is commercial. why, i dont know? have u seen todays standards of commercial 3d games? we are past the time when any 3d game can be sold, look at stuff like final fantasy. 3d should be an art form. not just boxes with textures on.

I don't think you can really be angry with Ghostlady. Those who were willing to go first and buy the game for fifteen dollars, must have known that the game might have been a bomb. I'm not commenting on whether it was or not, as I didn't play it. But if they didn't like it, then they will be free to not buy her next game. I mean, before I spend my money I research a games reviews, and wait it out until I'm sure it's worth the money. You gusy who paid the money, happen to have done me a great service. So you should feel all warm and gooey for helping me out.

I think a commercial effort on an AGS game shouldn't be looked down upon. If a person, or a group of people, produce a game that is worth the money, I will buy it. If your just making a game as a hobby, you probably won't be making a professional game. But if you're serious and make the best game you possibly think you could have, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to sell it.

-MillsJROSS

There is nothing wrong with trying to make money off an amateur adventure game. Making a game takes time and effort, and it's reasonable to expect some sort of reward for your efforts.

The problem lies in the fact that many high-quality amateur adventures have been and are being released for free. Therefore, we have the mindset that for a game to be worth our money, it must rise above and beyond the best of the free games.

Quote from: buloght on Mon 26/12/2005 19:32:41
If everybody starts making their AGS games commercial the AGS community will collapse  ;D

I don't quite agree with this sentiment. On the contrary, if everyone were to start making their AGS* games commercial (or at least scratchware), I have a feeling that AGS games will demonstrate an increase of quality as a whole. That might be a good thing in some respects.

* This statement applies to all other engines too.

AGS wouldn't have a shadow of the good atmosphere and spirit we have now if it was all based on money. I'm not saying that Ionas & company did wrong by charging for their games, but in my heart I believe that if everybody would charge for their games, the community would be a less friendly place to be. I'm just glad that this community is full of people who are willing to make great efforts to create something they expect no reward from, apart from the satisfaction of having created something they're proud of.

My personal favourite games would never recieve good reviews under professional circumstances. The average game-consumer would probably not consider them good purchases, and hence I would likely have avoided them.

i aggree 100% with what andail said.

Quote from: Andail on Tue 27/12/2005 17:07:23
AGS wouldn't have a shadow of the good atmosphere and spirit we have now if it was all based on money. I'm not saying that Ionas & company did wrong by charging for their games, but in my heart I believe that if everybody would charge for their games, the community would be a less friendly place to be.

I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Are you implying that all people who want to make money are unfriendly greedy bastards?

And charging money for a game does not make its development "all based on money", because if it were, then we wouldn't even be making adventure games in the first place. What if the developer(s) actually are developing the game out of love, and the money is just a secondary benefit?

I think you can make adventure games for money, no prob, I just don't think AGS is the way to do it.

Quote from: CoveredInSLUDGE on Tue 27/12/2005 21:14:06
I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Are you implying that all people who want to make money are unfriendly greedy bastards?

Yes I am, very good observation. I'm just that narrow-minded and rude.

Or, I could imply partly what I said, that games which are made with no intentions to yield a profit will certainly be different, often for worse, but sometimes for the better, which is the case with some of my personal favourites.

When you intend to make money on your games, you need to make them perfect. No glitches, no inconsistency. Some people prefer the artistic touch of non-perfection.

For clarification (to prevent any more suggestions as to what I imply) I could mention games like Mom's Quest and Aaron's epic journey. Those are games which I love to death, I just adore them, yet they would never stand up in a professional arena, because they simply lack what people in generally would consider paying money for.

hey hey hey we're all friends here!

/me does a little tap dance

also:

I think it would take an exceptional AGS game for me to buy it... I don't mean awesome art or MIND BLOWING 3D  (http://www.winternet.com/~wingnut/img/bryce/Coke4a.jpg) but just something that can snag me by the brain and make me need that game...

It could even be a text adventure for all I care...

to build off of Squinky mk. I's comment, I wish some more serious, more professional game developement groups would use AGS with the intent to sell just so they could forge the way for other people.

I might add, in case CoveredInSludge misinterpreted my intentions, that I don't want to defend AGS against any other engines or communities or whatever; my defensiveness was totally non-competitive. I have nothing against SLUDGE, in fact I know absolutely nothing about it, and I'm sure it's a great community. If it so happens that you charged for your game  - which by the way looked really cool when I skimmed through some screenshots somewhere - I have nothing against that either. So don't take anything personally.

I just wanted to say that AGS has a very friendly community, and I like to think that the general absence of monetary interests is partly the reason. If you want me to explain why, I'd gladly ramble on in my next post.

I think even with a very good game charging money, few people will play it, certainly not as many as would have played it if it was free. I, for one, had no bank account up until recently, and found it to be too much of a hassle to buy over the internet anyway. If there's a game I'm really looking forward to and I think it's worth the money, I'll probably go out of my way to buy it, but this is the case for only a few games. It's also nice to have a good game in a box and on cd, rather than just downloded from the internet. Kinda reminds me of an essay we had to write at school about replacing regular books with e-books, which I consider a bad idea.
As for Special Editions, I think they're a great idea. Having something extra on the game cd, or in the game box itself, is a wonderful bonus. :)

No offense taken. I'm honestly just not sure as to how the friendliness of a game-making community is related to wanting (or not wanting, rather) to make money.

My personal experience (which consists of SLUDGE and AGAST, though I've poked around WME a teensy bit...) is that other adventure game making communities are just as friendly as AGS is. I've never encountered any hostility, even by people who make games of commercial quality. This, I suppose, is the source of my bafflement. In other words, ramble away!

If you're curious, by the way, I was originally intending to sell my upcoming game, but decided against it partway through development. Why? Because, as I realised, there are tons of high-quality free games out there that I stand no chance in surpassing; to be able to justify charging money for the game, I would have to create something of the same quality as Project Joe or Juniper Crescent. Although I'm a huge perfectionist and strive to make the best games I possibly can, I know my limits, meaning the talent, time, and energy I possess is not enough for such a high standard. Therefore, I'd have much more people playing my game if I gave it away for free than if I sold it, since as demonstrated on these forums, not many people would buy an amateur adventure game unless it were THAT mindblowing.

Heh, maybe I'll write a blog entry on this subject, seeing as I have so much more I can ramble about...

I bought 'The Adventures of Fatman' after it dropped to $10, and I enjoyed that game quite a bit. I feel it was worth it to buy it. I am (somewhat) happy to purchase a game made in AGS, as long as it is actually a good game and of a higher quality than free games made in AGS available at the time. 'The Adventures of Fatman' had a full speech pack, and for me that was what seperated it from other AGS games enough to be worth my money. However, I am not so certain I would pay for Fatman today as Apprentice 1 Deluxe also has full speech, even if it is a bit buggy at times and the puzzles and dialogue are of a high quality. The length of the game would be the main seperating factor in this case.

The only other adventure game I have purchased over the internet is Samorost 2, which I thought was worth it due to it's extremely high-quality graphics and the general experience recieved from playing the game.

Man, I am totally for people making their games commercial....It's just I was against the certain author that I mentioned before.

I have, and probably most of us, have thought of making a commercial game. It's just one of those childhood dreams really...If i ever tried it I would do it knowing people would be bitchy with me, and I would almost go so far as to release it under an alias...

The only way I would do it would be with a team of a few people, and I would want to do a full box and manuals and the whole deal. No matter what I'd give people something to read on the can...This probably isn't economically sound....but still....

And I agree with andail about there being some pricless amatuer games out there, that never would have happened if the creators were worried about quality...

Quote from: Squinky on Wed 28/12/2005 00:45:57
I have, and probably most of us, have thought of making a commercial game. It's just one of those childhood dreams really...If i ever tried it I would do it knowing people would be bitchy with me, and I would almost go so far as to release it under an alias...

You see this is just the problem. You add money and people start moaning, yet they'll glady plunk down hard earned cash for McDonalds or a trip to the movies.

I'm all for commercial games myself. I know that was my dream all along. The one you've mentioned above. Yah know? Make money, maybe even enough to support yourself or your dream doing what you love. It may even be possible, who knows. Don't give up if that's what you really want, but just remember ... when its a job its a lot less fun and lot more work.

Hey Squinky, once I'm done TGTTPOACS, we should totally make a commercial game together, seeing as I'm just as much of a sucker for great game documentation as you are. We could call our team "Squinky & Squinky". That'd be priceless.

Quote from: Ionias on Wed 28/12/2005 01:51:18
I'm all for commercial games myself. I know that was my dream all along. The one you've mentioned above. Yah know? Make money, maybe even enough to support yourself or your dream doing what you love. It may even be possible, who knows. Don't give up if that's what you really want, but just remember ... when its a job its a lot less fun and lot more work.

Agreed.

QuoteYou see this is just the problem. You add money and people start moaning, yet they'll glady plunk down hard earned cash for McDonalds or a trip to the movies.

Exactly. I could easily spend 20 dollars on a dinner and a movie, without blinking an eye. I think AGS made adventure games can turn a profit. They need to be a great quality game, for one. But also, most of selling would consist of going to other communities and trying to get your name out. The average age of AGSers hovers around 20, I'd imagine. Because of this, the AGS community isn't an ideal place for selling your games, because many of us are in a situation where it's food or games.

Also...we're spoiled. By that I mean, the industry has been pushing for games to become longer and longer, and because of this, if a commercial adventure game isn't on an epicly long scale, people don't want to play. This makes it difficult for amatuer developers. If you look at some older games, like KQ, the games are relatively short. I could beat the first one within an hour, knowing what to do. Wheras, a game today, even if I didn't listen to all the dialog, might take three or four hours, with knowledge beforehand. I'm not really saying lenght is a bad thing...I'm justing pointing out some of the problems with trying to make your own commercial games.

The great thing about making free games is that the author is free to do what he/she wants. They can insult whomever they want. They can be as raunchy and lude as they want. They can spell as bad as they want. They can be as creative as they want. It is because of this, that has lead to some very entertaining games that couldn't be produced commercial, but are just as good in their own right. I don't think commercial games ruin this...and I think people will always be making games for themselves and for free.

-MillsJROSS

Squinky, (it's odd typing that) That would be wacky and cool....But maybe play my games first...heh. They are pretty amateur. Might rethink that offer then....

Also, I think we both know if we work on the same game/occupy the same space/or other cliche's we will cause a disorder in the space time continuem and possibly kill every single damn Kangaroo on this Kangaroo dependant planet...

But god, I hate how they don't put cool crap in games nowadays. You open up a box you just paid 50 bucks for and find a paper slip with a cd or two in it, with maybe a website reference or a one page installation guide. Screw that! I want a cool-ass map (if applicable) and a nifty manaul with cool art and maybe some short storys. I espically love games that make you really need that documentation (like Zack McKracken, it had a newpaper in it and I think an acme catalouge....It was awesome, I have a sweet idea for a game that comes with a tabloid giving hints to the player....but it will probably never happen).

You've shattered my hopes of professional game design Squinky...You won't buy my games because I can't include cool stuff like the cloth map for Might and Magic something.  :'(
Would a lollipop suffice?  Sucker!

I don't think it's a good idea to try to compete with the Hollywood of games. They'll just outresource you, and sell people a longer game with 3D graphics and whatnot (except cool print supplements). You need to compete with them in areas where they are weak to provide something that is so different that it's worth it. I am talking niche games here. What about it?

Squinky, not that one but the latest posting one (:=) Can't be worse than cubert badbone! (Joke.)

Quote from: simulacra on Wed 28/12/2005 11:34:03
I don't think it's a good idea to try to compete with the Hollywood of games. They'll just outresource you, and sell people a longer game with 3D graphics and whatnot (except cool print supplements). You need to compete with them in areas where they are weak to provide something that is so different that it's worth it. I am talking niche games here. What about it?

Scratchware is what we need. Shorter, less technologically-advanced games for a fraction of the price of AAA titles.

Quote from: Squinky on Wed 28/12/2005 06:01:55
I espically love games that make you really need that documentation (like Zack McKracken, it had a newpaper in it and I think an acme catalouge....It was awesome, I have a sweet idea for a game that comes with a tabloid giving hints to the player....but it will probably never happen).

Already been done my good man. :)

Space Quest 4-6 all had a tabloid paper that gave hints about the game. It was mostly a copyright protection gimmick, but it had some funny stuff. Space Quest 2-3 had comic books and even Space Quest 1 had a few coupons. I wanted to include a comic and have a boxed game of Fatman, but the costs are insane. The reason is you have to order in bulk and that's a large hunk of cash to lay down on the line if it doesn't sell.

... boy I'm quite the pessimist eh? Mr C. is right lets dance!

*Ionias does the jig.

Nah, I've never paid for one, but I plan on making a bit of cash by selling my game at my school for a price for around AU$10, with a few extras, on a disk.  But it'll still be free on the net, just secretly to my idiotic game hungry schoolmates.  MWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

I agree with Andail that it would be a shame if a commercialization of the AGS community meant that we wouldn't get the quirky, personal, unpolished gems that have no money-earning potential whatsoever.

However, I don't think there's any risk of that happening. As long as AGS remains free to use, I'm sure people will continue to make their own crazy, dopey games. Commercial/scratchware AGS games would be in addition to the general, free games.

In order to make enough money to make it worth the effort, your game would have to be quite popular, so I think you'd mainly see the more experienced, ambitious, already semi-professional designers (the ones who win AGS Awards) move towards charging for their games, with now and then a one-time attempt by others.

The reasons I think this would be a good thing include that it would push the most disciplined creators up another level towards more professional efforts (the way it seems to have pushed Tierra/AGDI/Himalaya Studios), give people an incentive to publicize their games more and maybe that way bring more people to the community, and provide something of a bridge from creating games as a hobby to doing it as a career, which would benefit both the industry and the hobby.

i dont aggree. money already ruined the adventure genre, and it will probably ruin the independent adventure scene. money is evil. dont underestimiate it.

i dont think there has been a game around here that could be commercial in my book.  :P no offence intended. just my opinion.

Why is money evil?

Because money is forged from pure evilium, mined in the seventh layer of Hell by small Welsh children.

Because Unilin enjoyed shop-lifted food. :=

All money that don't belong to me are evil!

My money are angel like! hehe

But seriously I agree with Andail on this. I think that the best part of this community is that the members help each other with nothing financial on their minds. If I was to know that I helped to create a better game for someone (either with paintovers, or music, or ideas, or critisism, or the production forum) and the game was being sold, I would've reconsider doing so...

On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with someone trying to make some profit over a game he/she spent a year or so working on. There are cases of games being sold and there's nothing wrong with that.

The word profit is what's wrong with it. Cause a man's got to sleep, eat, fuck, go out sometime, pay the bills, pay the rent, buy food, and shit paper, and every other thing that comes into real life. If he can pay all these and still save a penny left, then he's got himself profit!

Quote from: Nikolas on Tue 03/01/2006 08:01:25
sleep, eat, fuck, go out sometime, pay the bills, pay the rent, buy food, and shit paper,

I don't have to pay for all this, but I guess it varies.

I have a little theory about these things. The idea is that you can adopt different attitudes/priorities towards your work and think that is what we are discussing. It's not as simple as commercial/non-commercial.

Here are my list of attitudes and their consequences for artistic work.

Profit The primary reason for doing the project is to get money. The author charges as much as possible to get profit. The scope of the project is limited to what you can gain profit for, which means you have to limit production so that it does not keep you from getting profit. This attitude also suggests that you do stuff that many people potentially would like. No niche stuff here, you have to be mainstream and polished to succeed (which is one reason why there are so many similar games in the store).


Idealistic The primary reason for doing the project is to get the work done and done good. The author charges nothing for her/his work. This means the author either must limit the scope of the project, be rich (and have all the time in the world) or gain money from an external source to pay for basic needs. This often results in the author burning him-/herself out in an ambitious project, trying to cram regular work and artistic work into a small time frame. This not only damage the quality of the project, but the author as well.


Non-profit The primary reason for doing the project is to get the work done and done good. The author charges very little for her/his work, just enough to sustain a living. The author does not have to limit the scope of the project as long as minimum living costs are provided for. More work gets done as there is no conflict between having to work to get money for basic living costs and working on the project. If the author can get this model to work, he/she can go on with one or many projects over an extended period of time and still be able to produce niche stuff that wouldn't be profitable under other circumstances.


It is of course hard to see where one model starts and another ends. They are more like extremes rather than exclusive states. Personally, I use and support the "non-profit" model, which is very common among artists, musicians, activists etc. And in Scratchware. They would not be doing what they were doing if they had a day job (at least not as much). I have tried the "idealistic" model and noticed that it doesn't work out very well in the long run if you want to make more ambitious stuff, since there is always a conflict between what you should do and what you want to do. I am happy for those of you who have the economic capabilities to work this way. I refrain the profit model, as it has more to do with greed rather than artistic ambitions in my opinion.

From a consumer's perspective, it can be very hard to know if the person charging is working for non-profit or profit. It could be anything, all I see is that I'll have to pay. But is the sum reasonable? Does the author live on a tropical island? Is he secretly an agent of Microsoft? These are questions that are not easy to know the answers to if you don't get a statement from the author, which is the reason why I have included links with my game project to the Scratchware manifesto which I agree on.

That's my five pennies.

isnt ure game commercial! of course ure gonna be on the "pay for ags games" side.  :P

No, I am not. That was the whole point of my post.

I have not and probably will not make any profit out of making AGS games. Nor will I endorse commercialism on the behalf of games that are made just for the sake of it.

good for you, mate.

Quote from: Mordalles on Tue 03/01/2006 01:42:52
i dont aggree. money already ruined the adventure genre, and it will probably ruin the independent adventure scene. money is evil. dont underestimiate it.

Care to explain your comment?

Because as far as I see it, without money and the incentive of profit, the adventure genre would never have existed in the first place.

Do you think Ken & Roberta created King's Quest I out of love for a genre that didn't exist yet? No, they did it to make some money to pay their bills and buy their food.

If it wasn't for money and profit, we wouldn't have any Monkey Island, we wouldn't have any Space Quest ... and therefore in all likelihood we'd have no AGS, no SLUDGE, no WME and no free adventure games either.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with people wanting to make money out of their games. But as others have said, in order for me to pay for a game it really would have to be up with the same quality as commercial releases.

Which is another reason why AGS is free. If it wasn't, it'd have to constantly keep up with all the "competition"; there'd have to be 3D character support, 25-channel surround-sound audio and all the rest of it. At which point it becomes a job, not a hobby.

because companies want money,they hurry to finish a game, leaving out good story and gameplay, and sell it with high detailed 3d graphics. hoping that the graphics will make them the money. and they know that the kids these days will buy the fps's. so why make adventure games when theyre going to make more money in other genres. I'm talking about the time after the 90's when sierra and lucasarts were so successful.

and why the hell wouldnt we have free adventure games? or adventure game genre for that matter? you think that lucasarts and sierra are the only people capable of thinking up this genre? adventure game genre would have existed, money or no money. somebody somewhere in this world would have made an adventure game.

go quote somebody else. if you read closer, i wasnt all that serious in the 1st place. just wanted to say money is evil, cause it is. if you dont know why, then ure a retard. now coming here and trying to make me explain myself. the nerve.Ã,  :P

Quote from: Mordalles on Wed 04/01/2006 21:31:54
just wanted to say money is evil, cause it is. if you dont know why, then ure a retard.

Can't argue with reasoning like that. :P

thx for the sarcasm. i wont make a joke anymore, otherwise somebody might just quote me again. in fact, ill just stay quiet.

QuoteWhich is another reason why AGS is free. If it wasn't, it'd have to constantly keep up with all the "competition"; there'd have to be 3D character support, 25-channel surround-sound audio and all the rest of it. At which point it becomes a job, not a hobby.

Don't forget lens flare. We need the lens flare.

Mordalles, your post was edited for txt-style spelling.

yeah, it always does that. why?

To protect you against yourself.

There has to be an incentive to 'Create'.

Money/love/boredom/need.

Delete as applicable. :P

Well, I guess I'm a retard, then. Although I understand why the pursuit of money above all other goals is wrong, I have trouble grasping the concept of money in general being evil. Can someone please explain it to me?

By the way, how does txt-style spelling get edited around here? Is it automatic, or do the mods* do it manually? At this other forum I visit, the mods adopt the alter ego of a little spelling fairy comes around and edits people's txt-style posts while inserting snarky comments at the end. That always amuses me. However, said mods have been a little lax with the spelling fairy these days. That makes me sad.

* I'm talking about moderators, not m0ds.

It's automagic! And, with most automagic things, it is less than perfect!

But yes, file me as a retard too, please!

Squinky, I used to think it picked up on abbreviations and perhaps even just not bothering to use capitals after full stops, etc - but now I'm not so sure thats The Case (by T Hammer-Morton) :P


(PS, I found it! lower case i and lower case m together gets converted to I'm)

LimpingFish takes a deep breath...

It seems to me that most people who have paid for one of the commercial AGS games, or ANY independent/semi-professional adventure game, are more likely to do so out of support for the genre rather than the perceived fabulousness of the individual game.

Or am I wrong...again? :P

CoveredInSludge/Squinky:
Naturally, a certain increase in commercial products wouldn't inherently make the community an evil place. It is simply my personal idea that if you can avoid money, things will run more smoothly and people will be friendlier.

Just as the AGS community is a forum for discussing underground gaming, it is also a training ground. Just as we create finished titles, we also develop together, learn together, help eachother etc.

The technical forum is supported around the clock by techies who can help you with every possibly query. They don't get paid.
Thousands and thousands of aspiring artists have had their works assessed and improved by the resident critics of the critics lounge. They all do it for free.
We beta-test for free, we compose soundtracks, we animate eachothers' sprites, and we never charge for it.

If everybody started to demand money for their games, chances are others would be less inclined to unconditionally assist them. Game creators wouldn't want to share their codes, they wouldn't want share their tips and tricks. They would be more focused on marketing their games.

Ionas wasn't evil because he charged for his game. But he did receive mixed reviews (at least one very discouraging and hurting) because in the commercial world people are less forgiving. Gratis, his game wouldn't have had to stand such critcism. He did receive complaints from people who had let him play their games for free. And when he finally released the game for freeware, people who had previously paid for the game complained about that.

Money isn't evil, but it makes things very complicated. And of all evil things that happen in the world, not counting natural disasters, I can't see any situation which isn't directly or indirectly caused by money, and the desire to obtain it. Sorry for being melo-dramatic, but I tend to always put things into huge political proportions.

Quote from: Andail on Wed 04/01/2006 23:01:10
And when he finally released the game for freeware, people who had previously paid for the game complained about that.

Listen to this man, he knows what he's talking about. I've already said it in a post prior but it bears repeating. I wish I had never released Fatman as a commercial game. There is a reason CJ doesn't charge for AGS and he's smarter than me, I had to learn the hard way.

But at the time you had a vision of turning SOCKO! into something more, I admired that. Its sad that you totally regret it now. Though I can completely understand it burnt you out for a while, I'm a little surprised that it seems to have completely turned you off from game-making. I would have thought Fatman would have given you ways to make it better the next time round. Of course, there's nothing bad about "To hell with that, back to freeware" ...commercial AGS games, to me, show a gauranteed level of professionalism. All it takes is the right person to deliver that, and unlike the creator of Mystery Manor, you are one of those people. I think Chris admires whatever we make with AGS & is happy to leave it to our own devices to decide what we do with it and how we distribute it. The source code is safe, as are compiled games. Chris has nothing else to worry about.

I agree. Sorry if I rubbed it in your face, Ionias (even if you said you agreed with me :) )

Fatman was still a very professionally carried out project, and if the commercial aspect of it has discouraged you, we're all sad to miss the prospect of more released Socko-titles.

Quote from: Andail on Thu 05/01/2006 00:29:20
Fatman was still a very professionally carried out project, and if the commercial aspect of it has discouraged you, we're all sad to miss the prospect of more released Socko-titles.

Hear, hear.

Thanks for your well-reasoned argument above, by the way.

This has been more or less covered in this thread but I think it's useful to underline clearly: exactly because many or most ags games do not strive  to be sold, there's certain conditions between user and creator that do not have to be met. There is no consumer, as there is no product. This means that one can move away from the 'let's make a professional quality game, 1990 style!' and more on to 'what do I really want to do? What do I like to see in games?' That's a whole different perspective from which one creates games (the one where you really don't cater to any type of target audience and just hope people will like it since you like it), as you're excused to indulge in various odd or personal wants in the design. These games are for me the ones that stand out more than their attempted commercial ones. For example, I found Anna (first OROW competition) far more intriguing than say, the Stargate game and Aaron's Epic Journey more worth my attention than the Kings Quest remake or Apprentice. We have a very special niche, freeware developers, and that makes for some idiosyncratic apportunities as long as we don't get in the mindset of freeware being a stepping stone to commercialware. This might be a training ground for some, but it's also a whole different ball... park ...ground... something... you catch my drift.

Thanks for the kind words.

QuoteBut at the time you had a vision of turning SOCKO! into something more, I admired that.

I did have some grand plans. Well, I guess I'd rather be a failure at something I love than a success at something I hate. I don't think the game would have turned out any different if it hadn't been commercial. I made a game I wanted to make. A 320x200 old school true adventure game. Well, perhaps it wouldn't have had the voice acting. I'm quite proud of the game itself.

QuoteI'm a little surprised that it seems to have completely turned you off from game-making. I would have thought Fatman would have given you ways to make it better the next time round.

I did try just that. After Fatman was turned into Freeware I went about trying to release another commercial game. I started working a few more hours at work in order to save up some starting cash. I started hunting around for team members. I took some art classes. At one point me and Shawno were almost going to make a commercial Rodekill game. Then one day I suddenly realized I wasn't enjoying myself anymore so I just up and took some time off. My love of adventure games not to be quelled, I came back about a year later and started up a Space Quest fangame. However, that too quickly became a chore as people expect a certain level of quality from a fan-game.

So guess what I'm trying to say is ... I'm not turned off from game making, but my god I sure am burnt out and I can't help but think that is because I spent 2 years full steam making Fatman commercial.

You see the thing about making Fatman commercial means I had to setup a company. I had to design a website to take orders. I had to setup emails for orders and emails for customer service. I had to do my own taxes, mailing, shipping, ordering etc... Let me tell you that is the part that gets old quick, very quick. There is nothing more depressing than reading email after email of people that claim they sent me a check and I never got it ... (I actually had to stop taking check orders through the mail because of this.) ... or emails of people that thought my game should be free ... or finding out that the printer you dropped $500 on can only print about 25 cds before its out of its ink.

So I guess the bottom line is don't make your game commercial, unless you're ready to deal with the repercussions of such a decission. It's all fun and games ... until you add a price tag. :)

Well, it took me about two years to make The Zone (http://interactingarts.org/thezone/) and half a year to make the things around it run as well. And I am still not done with all the things I'd like to do (US CD version, soundtrack ...), so I can clearly see what you have been up against. If I hadn't made the project semi-commercial (see my previous post in this thread), The Zone would either have been released now but not been what it is today (which is very close to the vision I had in the beginning) or not yet released.

I run a freelance business called Verkligheter (http://verkligheter.se/) and mostly work with different projects. Sometimes I don't have money for the rent or food, but being able to work with this sort of thing still beats the hell out of flipping hamburgers or designing advertisements. You have to do boring, tedious tasks as well, but it's not like any ordinary job would be less boring. And there are plenty of methods to reduce that kind of work, such as having Lulu.com (http://www.lulu.com/thezone/) and Fabel Förlag (http://bb.fabel.se/) handle manufacture and mail order so you can concentrate on creation. I also have a accountant bureu that handles taxes and stuff. (And they actually enjoy doing such things... wierd people.)

Another issue to consider is your current level of insanity. If you are crazy enough, even the boring stuff will seem worthvile doing since they are steps toward your utopian goal. Masochism and perfectionism also helps here. I am probably all of these things... I did, for instance, just spend three hours getting a five second tape rewind sound just right for the first expansion released (http://interactingarts.org/thezone/update.html) for the Zone.

The first time you do these things, it is overwhelming since it's more common to under- than overestimate work needed on a project, but gets easier with each production. It's like training a muscle - you will be in pain if you try to exert it too much too soon. In time, large projects and administration is less daunting.

Quote from: Helm on Thu 05/01/2006 10:36:50
For example, I found Anna (first OROW competition) far more intriguing than say, the Stargate game

Actually, second OROW competition, but thanks!  And the sequel can be yours for only $9.95!

I'm wondering how often a game has made a transition in the middle of the workflow.  It doesn't seem a horrible way to go about it: Do a demo of good length, get feedback, check out the interest level and decide from there - a game that'll be out sooner for free or a higher-quality commercial venture in which you could potentially afford to hire slightly better than amateur talent. 

Quote from: Vince Twelve on Fri 06/01/2006 00:41:00
Actually, second OROW competition, but thanks!Ã,  And the sequel can be yours for only $9.95!

Which would provide instant milk for your baby Robocop for one week!

So everybody when this get's released go ahead and buy it!  ;D

(Not to mention that I too found Anna very intruiging...)

Quote from: Andail on Wed 04/01/2006 23:01:10
CoveredInSludge/Squinky:
Naturally, a certain increase in commercial products wouldn't inherently make the community an evil place. It is simply my personal idea that if you can avoid money, things will run more smoothly and people will be friendlier.

Just as the AGS community is a forum for discussing underground gaming, it is also a training ground. Just as we create finished titles, we also develop together, learn together, help eachother etc.

The technical forum is supported around the clock by techies who can help you with every possibly query. They don't get paid.
Thousands and thousands of aspiring artists have had their works assessed and improved by the resident critics of the critics lounge. They all do it for free.
We beta-test for free, we compose soundtracks, we animate eachothers' sprites, and we never charge for it.

If everybody started to demand money for their games, chances are others would be less inclined to unconditionally assist them. Game creators wouldn't want to share their codes, they wouldn't want share their tips and tricks. They would be more focused on marketing their games.

People would be less inclined to help? Strange... My job is .Net developer (I'm MCAD certified, still studying for MCSD) and when I run into a problem when developing something for a client, I always visit various forum communities populated with other Microsoft developers who, just like me, get paid to create something. They don't get paid to answer my questions, though, and yet they are always willing to provide me with code examples if needed. They even share tricks and tips. I really don't see the difference with this community, to be honest. So why would people be less inclined to help, I wonder?

--Erwin

First let me say that some of the AGS games I have played have been really great. The community seems really nice, and I think it is great that these smaller, quirkier games are being made.

I am a professional artist, and instead of working as a bootlicker on someone else's project I decided to take some time off and do my own game. I entertained a number of different game engines, but AGS seemed like the best choice for my first game. The reason I joined the AGS community was only because I was interested in doing a commercial game. Like many pro artists I don't see art really as "fun" anymore. Art is just something I must do, because of who I am.

I see that a lot of people on these AGS forums are hobbiests who are doing games for fun. That is great, and some of those games are really enjoyable. Most of these games are also not even close to the current professional level of quality. Me making games for a living is not really at all the same as someone making one for fun, the same as anybody can pick up a pen and doodle a picture, but you would be a fool to think anybody can sell what they draw.

The adventure genre is on life support, yet some of the best selling games of all time were adventure games. Why aren't there good commercial adventure games now? I'll tell you why. It is because the big companies like EA think the money to be made in the genre is too small to care about. And all us folks who love adventure games? Thanks to the efforts of people like CJ we can make them ourselves.

AGS as a tool is more than able to do commercial quality games in its current state. 3D games are great, but 2d games are made all the time and they do just fine. Street fighter 3, or Guilty Gear come to mind. It is technically very simple to make decent looking games using AGS. AGS is an amazingly refined production environment, and learning it was a snap compared to some of the other tools I use like 3DS Max or even Photoshop.

One of the things I noticed about the AGS community is that so many people here seem to be stuck in the past. New commercial adventure games can be made, but they don't need low rez graphics or be able to run on a 386 Dos machine.

That is what is great about AGS. It is for everyone who loves the genre. For the genre to grow and find a new younger audience, it will take professional artists that can make a living off selling the games they make. For all the fans who like their games in the classic style, there will always be the more casually produced titles for free.

Ninjas, you talk about being a professional artist and how most people wouldn't and shouldn't dream to sell what they draw. How about the writing in your game? Is it up to professional standards? The sound? Music? It's one thing for a game to appear commercial-level because the first thing you see are graphics, and another thing entirely for the game to actually be up to par in all respects.

Although I do agree a lot of people's games here are fueled by nostalgia, there's also other reasons a lot of them use low res graphics and 8-bit music and whatever else, and that's because there's a certain computer game aesthetic that they might find pleasing and fitting to their project. Game design (even professional game design) is not an one-way street dictated by technological progress.

Quote from: Ninjas on Sun 08/01/2006 03:24:09
Like many pro artists I don't see art really as "fun" anymore. Art is just something I must do, because of who I am.

So you're not having fun, for example, working on a project for a client? Maybe I'm too young or something, but I actually enjoy going to work. Okay, I don't *always* enjoy work, and I wouldn't say that I can't wait until it's Monday, but I hope you get the point. I enjoy what I do for a living.

--Erwin

Quote from: Helm on Sun 08/01/2006 09:13:17
Ninjas, you talk about being a professional artist and how most people wouldn't and shouldn't dream to sell what they draw. How about the writing in your game? Is it up to professional standards? The sound? Music? It's one thing for a game to appear commercial-level because the first thing you see are graphics, and another thing entirely for the game to actually be up to par in all respects.

     This is a good point, but programming and art are obviously harder to get to a commercial level in games than music or writing. Not just because game art and programming are highly technical, but also because the music and writing in most commercial games simply isn't that good. The gold standard for whether a game counts as "commercial quality" from what I have seen in the gaming press is graphics.
     I personally don't care about the graphics so much, as long as they are fuctional and have some character.


Erwin:
     I think it depends on your pay, work hours and client. Certainly I enjoy some of my work, but work is work. I like work as an artist better than any other work I have done. At the end of the day though, if I don't get my work done I don't eat. That level of motivation is totally different than someone doing games as a hobby. It takes some of the fun out of it.
     

Ninjas:

What commercial games are you thinking of that have a bad story or music?

Remember, a lot of non-adventure games don't require much of a plot.  It doesn't mean they don't put effort in, tho.

And as for music, the quality is good.  Sometimes it just seems out of place.

Quotehis is a good point, but programming and art are obviously harder to get to a commercial level in games than music or writing. Not just because game art and programming are highly technical, but also because the music and writing in most commercial games simply isn't that good.

I respectfully disagree here 100%.  That's an entirely subjective argument on your part.  Example- I find programming to be very fun and easy to do, but let's say (picks an agser at random) Squinky finds it downright awful and pukes nails whenever he sees a for loop.  Extreme example yes, but it points out that different people have different concepts of what is easy for them to do and what isn't.  I also have no problem with the music in 'most' commercial games (are we talking every genre here or just adventure games?).  The music in Kyrandia was sex, for example.  Again, that's my opinion but your point was a matter of opinion anyway.

As far as paying for a homebrewn game, well...That's how video games began, kids!  I know Helm mentioned that when you make something free vs. commercial there are a different set of conditions (ie what you want to see and what the consumer wants to see)- but it wasn't ALWAYS that way.  Most of the early geniuses behind some of the classic games of all time made the kind of game they WANTED to make and then sold it with great results.  You can find a wealth of information about such stories on the net if you wanted to look.  Producing a game for commercial release today is certainly different, since gamers in general have grown more demanding visually, (and purely in my opinion) less demanding plotwise.  The wealth of kill-everything-with-legs-and-a-gun games with paper thin plots that make a slew of cash keep the developers going in that direction.  I miss games with quirky and inventive gameplay mechanics and platformers that FEEL like platformers- Like the venerable Ninja Gaiden.  This has devolved more into a rant about my opinion on the current state of gaming rather than the topic so I will stop it.

I wouldn't love video games so much if they all had awful stories and music. Is it really a challenge to write a better story than the one in MGS 2? Most American video games have techno type music, which I have to say, just about anyone can write.

I don't know what to say if you disagree and think techno music is hard to write, or that MGS 2 had a great story. You could think human feces taste great and love the sound of a fork on a chalkboard also. Personal preferences are beyond logic.

One of my favorite games is Ico; a game that has no english dialog. Shadow of the Collossus (by the same team) has much more story and is the worse for it. Why? Because the story makes no sense at all. I could have written half a dozen better endings than the one they had.

While there are a great number of successful games that have had bad music and terrible story, there are none that I can think of that have had awful graphics.

actually there's amateurish awful mediocre techno music, and there's competent interesting techno music, as in any other genre, and it's not difficult to spot the difference.

As to MGS2, all it had going for it in my opinion was the story, so eh

...Which again, is your opinion rather than fact.  Wolfenstein and Doom had terrible graphics imo but they still sold well- and I'm talking about when compared with games out and around at that time like BASS (at least I think it was).  Wing Commander had awful visuals in battle (again, the overly scaled sprites) for the time, but damn I loved those games.

Some people (not me) greatly enjoyed MGS 2, and have argued furiously with me about it.  I don't think their like is 'beyond logic' as you seem to believe, but rather a different standard for the game.  Going into MGS 2 I was looking for a taut espionage thriller with a realistic plot-and didn't get one, so I was disappointed.  But others were attracted to the quirky turns the story took. 

And be careful what you say about Shadow of Colossus lest you incur the Privateer's wrath!

I have no idea what you are talking about ProgZmax. Wing Commander had cutting edge graphics when it came out. Doom had game journalists gushing about how immersive the 3D environments were. I bought the first Gamepro, and recieved the first Nintendo Funclub News. I remember the prevailing views on these games at the time, and I simply think you are wrong.

Helm:
So what type of techno music do you usually see in games? The interesting type or the amateurish?

Quote from: Ninjas on Sun 08/01/2006 20:15:12
Most American video games have techno type music, which I have to say, just about anyone can write.

I have a challenge for you.  Pick an American video game, and a certain section of it, and write a "Techno-type" piece of music to fit that scene.  Since you think anybody can write it, I'd assume 24 hours is plenty of time.  Let's see how many people think it fits well.

Also, it's not just down to graphics, story, music and whatnot.  It's gameplay that really makes things do well.  Evil Genius had neat graphics, and good plot and perfect music.  It also had a sense of humor. It still got let down by the fact that it wasn't as fun as it could be.

QuoteHelm:
So what type of techno music do you usually see in games? The interesting type or the amateurish?

The personally unnapealing but definately competently produced.

No-one writes techno music, do they? I thought it was more like, you come up with a "beat" and work on it until you have, what some folks would call good, music.

And as to MGS 2, the story is not supposed to be "realistic", but rather colourful. If they wanted a realistic game, it wouldnt be called "metal gear solid", but "nuclear bomb" or "terrorist attack".

Quote from: Iqu on Sun 08/01/2006 21:34:53
I have a challenge for you.Ã,  Pick an American video game, and a certain section of it, and write a "Techno-type" piece of music to fit that scene.Ã,  Since you think anybody can write it, I'd assume 24 hours is plenty of time.Ã,  Let's see how many people think it fits well.

I'm actually pretty busy right now with real work, but when it comes time to do the music for my game I'll be more than happy to hear everyone's feedback on the music I create for it.

LimpingFish dances the Off-Topic dance...

But, I don't think I'd ever pay for an AGS game.

I got asked the other day by my day-job boss how much time I'd put into the game, and when I finally did the math I realized I've invested 8 months of my life so far, at approximately 800 - 1000 man-hours of my personal time put in on it.  I'm only about 1/3 completely done, but I think I'll finish by June.  And yet, I'm still giving it away for free, because I love adventure games. . .it's probably going to be one of those 500 Meg games due to all the graphics and animations and s'forth.

I figured the farthest I would go is just saying, hey, if you can't download my huge-sized file, I'd accept maybe four bucks or less just to cover the cost of a CD and shipping so I can send it to the dial-up AGSers.  Don't want anyone to be deprived. :)  I'd even been thinking about throwing in a jewel case with cover art just for that.  Or Paypal donations from people who enjoyed it and want to encourage future games would be acceptable to me.

Eh.  It's worth it to me, money or no.  Adventure games need to keep being made.

What the hell is "techno type music"?
People who can't tell difference - let's say - between trance and house and call every synthetic piece of crap "techno", better shut up or educate yourselves first.
No, it's WAAAY not something anyone could write.
Yes, some genres of electronic music sound like they're MADE for game background music. It just depends on genre.

Well, with the thousands/millions maybe loops around in the net and CDs/DVDs, it does get a little easy to compile something.

There is no longer need for production skills or anything. You get a ready made drum loop at 120 bpm and a bass loop at 120 bpm and you're almost done. If you add a simple synth above all, you get something... And I use the word something, as I can't find a proper label to put here.

Doom and Wolfenstein had kinda awfull graphics but the atmosphere was all that counted, after all...

A good games is consisted of all the different aspects, of course... Amd usually music is left a little behind, along with the explositions and stuff and guns and all, and the stunning graphics, that are easy to see and do. This is the way that music works in films also.

There is a problem with making a game in AGS.

Since it is free you cannot get to spent 40 hours a week to do what you have to do to make every aspect of the game perfect. Then there is the problem that it is rather imposible for one single person to be very good at all aspects. I can write music and come up with puzzles and stories. but can't draw shit! The same goes with 99% of the people! And it is only natural, as I spent practically all my life being a musician, which has given me the talent to write music. Havent done the same with drawing...

Even worst to have 4-5 people (at least) that you need to cover ever ydepartment of the game and have them being commited as they should to provide a good "service" is extremly difficult. There have been AGS games that have been succesfull in all areas, but still it is difficult for them to reach the standards of todays commercial games... In every aspect.

Which brings me to the most important point of this post:

I don't buy only the latest music and disregard the rest (and actually every CD I buy, I listen to it forever...). Why couldn't I doi the same with computer games? Why do I need cutting edge graphics, or fucking great music, or 3d or anything like that? I personally don't (every time), so I would definately buy AGS games (and I will, starting probably with the Zone) ,adn going to Ninja and Al Emmo and other games. They definately seem worthwhile... By my standards. And my standards are not based by compering commercial games, made by spending millions, with one mans job! I respect the one man who did what he did, immensly!

[offtopic]
Compile? Yes, like this program Dance eJay, the shame of everything electronic out there.

But is that so-called "making" or "writing" music?
I'd say that this is mixing music, not really making it. Like DJs do.

I'm not saying that it's as hard as singing opera, for example.
But I hate when people label about 100 genres of music under a word "techno". These people can't tell techno apart from cutting wood. If you take one genre of electronic music, and another, and compare them, it may simply be that they're as different as... er... punk rock versus japanese national songs?

And. Depends what you call "techno". Of course, anthem trance or  some kind of ambient techno are nothing to make. But they neither fit for any game aswell!

Nikolas -- what's that thing with 120 bpm? That's the speed of hiphop and maybe some quite slow house. Most of synthetic music starts usually at 135 (real "techno", pop hits from early 90s, mostly from Sweden artists) and ends at 145 (real trance, extinct for today).

Ah, there's a guide which gets things quite right. What was that link again? See yourself, infidels

http://www.di.fm/edmguide/edmguide.html

[/well, that was offtopic indeed]

[still off-topic]

I'm interested in this conversation now it's about music!

Five or so years ago I started, as you'd define it, 'mixing' music. It was someplace to start with no actual experience. I'd write my own lyrics to it and sing over it. This was done with PS2 programs. Sure enough... it wasn't very good and after making lots of songs with pre-made loops I finally came across music 3000 on the PS2 and I could create my own stuff! There were pre-made stuff but I shy away from it as much as I can. I am still nicking little bytes of sound off there, like a small synth, and then expand on it and write the chords. Some say this is still not my own stuff to some degree, but how is it any different to a pianoist using the piano's pre-made sound? I'm telling you, if someone tried to make the same songs as me on the same program they'd have a very hard time doing so. Sure... this has been mostly just about me.. oops sorry!

Speaking of techno, a friend tells me this song of mine has techno elements to it, is this true? Is it techno? Increator, please listen to "Denial"  and wait until the first verse has ended to hear the techno bit. Is this techno? I made the beats, riffs, loops, sounds etc from scratch. Hm? Oh, i'll check out that guide anyway.

http://www.myspace.com/manicmatt3uk

You can talk about music, its not off-topic because in some ways its related to the topic.

Talking about commercial game music, and speaking as a composer - a lot of in-game music is tacky, really un-impressive & extremely repetitive. You just don't notice it as much because of the action & gameplay. So yes, just about anyone could write music for in-game moments. Call of Duty 2 for Xbox 360 springs to mind. In-game music there is somewhat lame, apart from a cut-scene or menu sequences. To be fair, anyone can create a string part, a brass part and a snare that goes tat tat tat tat tat tat.

As for making or mixing music, the only time I would consider someone to be making music is if they are placing each part note by note. Dragging in samples, using eJay and what not isn't making music at all. It's making tracks with a bunch of resources at your finger tips. It requires you to think about what sample works after another and what works with another. In no way does it actually ask for any real musical talent in CREATING melodies, riffs and so forth. In my opinion, you need to have a grasp of harmony to even start to class yourself as a musician :P

QuotePeople who can't tell difference - let's say - between trance and house and call every synthetic piece of crap "techno", better shut up or educate yourselves first.

I think you'd find that most people over 40 in the UK WOULD class any thing with a boom boom boom beat in it as techno. Don't get tetchy about people calling "trance" techno or "jungle" "gabba" - it really doesnt matter. They all follow the same structure. A by the beat drum beat, some samples & a repetive melody. And occasionally a woman singing or a man shouting. Thats why people say it so. Also, in twenty years time, I doubt you'll really care about all the different types - and trust me by then there'll be so many I doubt MANY people will really care whether they're listening to metal trance, plastic trance or bi-carbonate of soda trance.

Actually, when it comes to just plonking loops together to 'make' a song, I've heard some songs made that way that sound utterly shit, and some that aint half bad. (I'm excluding myself in that list for this example) So I feel there is SOME talent required, if not much. Just general know how for how a song should sound I suppose.

Sure, there certainly are some awesome tracks made through sampling and what not, but the thought process really isn't as hard as that of composing raw material. I agree, knowing how a "song should sound" is one of the main aspects.

Ninjas: I don't follow at all the electronic scene, so I had no idea at what bmp the tracks are. 120 was just an example.

mOds: No it's not that easy to create a string part, some brass and a snare going ra ta ta ta. At least not at a level that it can sound decent. Not to mention that I consider music to be a languade. And as any language you have to be taught in order to speak and write. Not listen. It could be self-taught or taught in a college, but still taught somehow. You cannot expect from someone who has never done any music to write a string part. No way!

And of course I don't see any reason to label music. Especially music that has been done with care and love and not to be labeled on it's own...

Sampling is fine, just fine...

And of course when we talk about game music, we compare it to what? Films? Classical concerts? Symphonic music? Pop techno/trance/whatever genre? U2? NIN? A rather difficult comparison indeed. How many composers do you know that can succesfully evade and if not win a confrontation with Trevor Reznor? All music that tries to be like NIN (spring Doom for example), in the end will kinda suck! Kinda! Cause Trevor is just amazing!

...And Matt knows that!

Trust me, if you've heard Call of Duty 2's in-game music, then you'll understand what I mean about that string & brass part ;) It really does sound like it was composed by an AGS n00b. :P But then I would say that, because I am at a level where I can compose quite good music. I don't disagree, for a normal person it would be hard to make a string/brass/snare tune that is in tune, but simply making it, wouldn't be hard. The tools out there exist for everyone nowadays, so its only a matter of giving it a go before you can start to make something reasonable. Anyway, I don't even know what I'm debating now so i'll shut up...

My main reason for replying was to ask you not to swear, please :) safe

Well, what I tried to say that this is not just kick-hithat-kick&snare-hithat neverending loop. This is a very large portion of music/modern culture, and when digging in - learning terms and styles, a whole science... Well, atleast in Europe.

It's quite underground too. Most of what makes techno and its roots good, is actually underground, and something you'll never hear on radio. And radio... well, radio really plays shit. Usually because people don't get deep into the music that's primarily meant to dance to. They want something simple and memorable. So deep, complex tracks never gain popularity and unpopular things are not on air. And no one knows the jewels then. So overall prestige of genre will be low for people who take music seriously.

There's some genres and songs that, well, I think - they are *meant* to be for background music. There's lots of really good stuff and some of so complex compositions that they may easily be compared to classical concerts. But usually it's art of using simple things to make something complex. Simple melodies, pads, beats, etc combine to make a memorable, even psychedelic tune. Often just one instrument and one melody is used. But by adding few filters and effects (like Flanger of Phaser) and using it professionally, it gets a whole new "face" and the short piece of melody gets used extremely well. It's absolute opposite for classical music, where melodies come and come.


Paul Oakenfold - Ready Steady Go -- I can't imagine this song anywhere else than being a theme for background of sci-fi/extreme sports movies or shows... which it is used mostly.

Necros - Mechanism Eight --  I usually listen to this song while going to work at the morning and walking around in city. It just... gives emotions of advanced technology and progress of humankind, it somehow strongly moves me. BTW, it's the background music from original Unreal Tournament, train map. (Futuristic game? It rocked twice as much there!)

Tracks like this do have purpose as background music, though they can be labelled as "techno". But-- they are good! And they fit.

Can't think of any more atm...

When I say "techno type music", I am refering to the type of lame music they put in video games. I have been to enough raves to tell the difference between some lame House music and pumping Goa Trance.

I say writing Techno type music to the level required of a commercial video game is easy because this is what you need to do.

1) Come up with a beat
2) Make a couple of layers for a build-up
3) Fool with it until it sounds right

It does take time, but if you have an ear for it (developed by listening to A LOT of the music you are trying to create) and the patience, it is not hard. Try using 3DS Max at random until you get something that will fit the definition of passable game art and I think you'll start to understand my point.

The tools for writing music nowdays are really amazing (Reason springs to mind, but the lame Adobe Audition which I own is still okay), and there is nothing that comes close to the ease of use music programs have in the 3D art world. But you come back to the fact that music is abstract and 3D is trying to match photo realism, and so 3D must be more complicated.

Can someone point out a commercial game that prominently features 'easy to write' techno music? The only techno soundtracks that spring to mind are the Wipeout ones... and perhaps Deus Ex might be considered too to the average uneducated pop music denzien (although there's not a hint of incompitence in the writing or musical integrity of that specific game, and I will have fisticuffs in the car park with anyone who might think otherwise).

Don't listen to that flash-music-guide thing either, it's riddled with personal bias and mis-information. Where most people go wrong with this kind of thing is trying to pidgeon-hole every minute variation into subgenres, when in fact it can all be piled into 'good music' and 'bad music' depending on personal preference.

And yes, it IS as easy to write a throwaway bit of rat-a-tat orchestral music these days as it is to make something that goes OOTZ OOTZ OOTZ OOTZ YEAH YEAH BABY DUGGA-DA DUGGA-DA DUGGA-DA DUGGA-DA... or a four-power-chord acoustic punk ballard about how much of a loser you are.

In every avenue of music you will find works of art and childish skribbles in crayon and this perhaps holds true with computer entertainment, but I could reel off a list of games that have sublime soundtracks much quicker than I could ones with awful soundtracks.

but, would a bad soundtrack stop you from buying an AGS game?

how about bad art?

How about any other kind of music than "techno"? I don't think none of the games I have played during the past couple of months have had a "techno" soundtrack (and trust me, it's not just a couple of games). Are you able to make awesome orchestral tunes? Laid-back caribbeanish tracks? Sci-fi-ish mysterious atmospheric tunes? Medieval music? Easy-listening? Jazz? Rock? Hmm?

Quote from: Nikolas on Mon 09/01/2006 18:13:54
Ninjas: I don't follow at all the electronic scene, so I had no idea at what bmp the tracks are. 120 was just an example.

mOds: No it's not that easy to create a string part, some brass and a snare going ra ta ta ta. At least not at a level that it can sound decent. Not to mention that I consider music to be a languade. And as any language you have to be taught in order to speak and write. Not listen. It could be self-taught or taught in a college, but still taught somehow. You cannot expect from someone who has never done any music to write a string part. No way!

And of course I don't see any reason to label music. Especially music that has been done with care and love and not to be labeled on it's own...

Sampling is fine, just fine...

And of course when we talk about game music, we compare it to what? Films? Classical concerts? Symphonic music? Pop techno/trance/whatever genre? U2? NIN? A rather difficult comparison indeed. How many composers do you know that can succesfully evade and if not win a confrontation with Trevor Reznor? All music that tries to be like NIN (spring Doom for example), in the end will kinda suck! Kinda! Cause Trevor is just amazing!

...And Matt knows that!

I'm not sure if you are suggesting I "kinda suck" or that I can't evade a comparison to trent Reznor?

Indeed I am unable to evade being compared to his music. Whether that's because it's all many people have heard within that sort of genre to compare it with, or I really DO sound like him somehow, I'm not sure.

But let it be known, after being compared to him a million times I went out and bought a couple of his albums (with teeth, downward spiral) just to see why. Hey, not bad! Totally honestly the only songs I'd heard by him were "perfect drug" and "hurt" and maybe a few others that I can't recite.

But really, I think I just get the comparison because my music is depressing with electronic music in it.

InCreator, I implore you! Tell me what genre I should call myself! Go on! Pweeease!

"Techno" music in games is a turn-off for me.

I like games to have a soundtrack that compliments or underscores the on-screen action or drama.

Hitman 2, the Metal Gear games, the Tenchu series, would all be among my favourite soundtracks.

Generic Techno, or Techno-style tunes, just annoy me after a while.

Someone mentioned Deus Ex, a game that I felt lacked, save for the main theme, any kind of "Musical Identity", something that seems to affect most Techno music in games.

One of the first times I came across a Techno soundtrack in a game was "Streets Of Rage" on the Megadrive/Genesis. People raved about how it was the best soundtrack they'd ever heard. I dunno, it just gave me a headache after a while.

But would crap music stop me buying a game? Hasn't happened yet.

But then, would fantastic music make you buy a particular game?  :-\

Well... there IS a point in that you can (almost) always turn off a game's music, but you can't really turn off the graphics (unless you fumble around with your eyes closed... hey, now THAT would be an interesting gaming experience).

QuoteSomeone mentioned Deus Ex, a game that I felt lacked, save for the main theme, any kind of "Musical Identity"

I couldn't disagree more strongly with this statement. I would elaborate but it would involve much arm-flailing.

yes, you're right DS, there's already too much in your avatar...

But... I have no avatar! Consider yourself counter-zinged!

The use of lame generic techno music at all I think shows that commercial video games have pretty low standards for music. Most games employ one guy for music, but at least 10 guys for art. Really, I thought I was saying something pretty obvious when I said the gaming press won't even review your game if it has bad graphics.

A lot of people on here thought I said that the music in games is all bad, or that all electronic music is bad, or that all electronic music is easy to make and I said none of those things. What I meant was that getting music that is considered "good enough" for a commercial game is easy compared to making art that is "good enough" for a commercial game.

My point was that people saying "I wouldn't buy an AGS game" probably don't even know what AGS can do. Without too much trouble I got some cool frame blended motion blur to work in my game, and paralax scrolling without any plug-ins. I'm no programmer and that is just the tip of the iceburg. The only thing AGS doesn't do at this point is 3D, so people saying they wouldn't buy an AGS game is the same as saying they wouldn't buy a 2D game. And I just can't take seriously the opinion that 2D games are inferior. Have fun playing Street Fighter EX! Ha!

The reason people have this unfair stereotype of AGS is that so many games are created by amateurs in 320x200 rez graphics. That is fine, and some of those games are really great, but AGS can do so much more. I think a lot of people on here don't realize that there are pros out there working with in-house tools with only the most basic functionality (pray you have an undo function). AGS is a dream compared to that. As a development tool AGS is amazing, which lets people focus on the code and art and music, and that lets people make better games.

Deus Ex, musically, well...

Shitty, is a word that springs instantly to mind.

Bland, would be another.

But I think I'll stick with shitty.

Edit: Although now that I think of it, 'Twee' best articulates my feelings on the matter.

Alright Limping Fish, looks like it's going to be fisticuffs in the carpark then :P

Ninjas, I can't help but feel you've been playing all the wrong games to say that commercial games have a low standard for music. Played Morrowind recently? Any of the Thief series? Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory? How about Grim Fandango? The Curse of Monkey Island? Quest For Glory 4? Surely you've played Monkey Island 2? No? Final Fantasy 7? Secret of Mana? The megadrive Sonic games? We can go as far back as Wonderboy 3 if you like ;)

Edit: There'll be a point soon too when the whole weight of the 3D glorifiaction collapses in on itself as it becomes so impossibly technically involved to make games with new technology, and people will realise again that a beautifully drawn 2D game is much more enjoyable than a badly made 3D game. I hold John Carmack responsable for the shift of focus from 'gameplay and immersion' to 'fans that cast real time shadows on the foor in 38582x29451 resolution!'

LimpingFish pauses in lacing up his boxing gloves...

Wonderboy 3! Man, that takes me back. ;D

LimpingFish goes all misty-eyed...

Deus Ex: invisible war had some licensed music by kidneythieves, which is where I got into that band! As for the ingame music, I turned it off..

Quick Adam, punch him now while he's all nostalgiac!

QuoteInCreator, I implore you! Tell me what genre I should call myself! Go on! Pweeease!

Experimental Industrial Vocal Techno with elements of PunkMetal? Or other way around?


Hehe, I don't know. Your songs lack high sounds (beepy sounds) to go under any trance or techno subgenre and the beats go somewhere towards Jungle/Drum'n'Bass.

As many say, the genres usually collide and mix so there's really no strict rules what is what. Making genres is just putting similar tracks together, by bpm and amount of melody. And people don't listen to genres, they just usually scope for "right stuff". For me, "right stuff" is usually Progressive/Anthem/Epic (by this weird guide) trance tracks and lot's of different house. Other stuff is... too hardcore.

But I guess it's quite safe to call it Rave. Sounds like The Prodigy before they released any records and got super famous.

Listening at some tracks, I don't think that you developed an attachment to one genre yet. Add thunder kick drums and 160 bpm of speed and you're doing gabber/hardstyle. Give even more tempo and add ear cutter snares, deeeep bass and lots of tambourine/hithat stuff - you're about to make some dark drum'n'bass. etc.

To continue with this OT discussion... my two cents.

"Techno", to a lover of such or similar kinds of music, means something very specific. "Techno" to anyone else means all that modern music with electronic beats and boom-booms collectively.

Let's not fight about who's right and who's wrong. I don't know what house or jungle is, but I respect people who are into it and understand the different genres. To me, I use the work in the blanket sense. I don't mean offense, but that's what it is in my world, my life. I don't have an interest in it so I don't care. We should always try to see these things from the other person's point of view. My parents don't know one computer game from the next, but that's -fine-, they don't need to. I can see where they're coming from with that.

As for saying "all techno is talentless shit" or something similar... again, that's FINE. You can't say someone shouldn't think that, it's an opinion. In the same vein, they shouldn't assume that someone who IS a fan of techno/jungle/drum and bass is listening to the same stuff they've heard to give them that impression.

I must admit, for the most part, I -do- believe creating "techno" music takes FAR less talent that normal music. I've made techno music... it's pretty damn easy if you have a computer! I can't even play chopsticks on the piano though.

That doesn't mean I'm making high quality "techno" music though, nor does it mean that just because it's amateurish, someone wouldn't enjoy it. I -LOVE- my own techno music. I think it's awesome, but it wasn't very hard. Not 'hard' when compared to writing music from scratch or playing an instrument, that's for sure.

However, I -know- that there are some people that truly can make fantastic "techno" music, that I don't think just anyone can do. To me, the Jet Set Radio soundtrack features fantastic pieces of electronic music. That shit is just damn funky, and I've been listening to it for YEARS without ever getting sick of it.

In summary: Let's not get angry at other people's perceptions, AND let's not just make full on blanket statements about things (in a serious fashion) when you haven't experienced that much of the genre. If you're being light hearted about it though, go ahead.

Oops, Matt sorry!

I didn't mean it as it sounded... You know that I enjoyed and still enjoy your music, so again for sorry as it went out. My English sometimes fail me... :P I didn't even think of insulting you in anyway, and sorry if I did in the end... :P(x2)

In the end, in any kind of art, anybody can have a go and be succesfull. With the term succesfull I mean something that exists.

Even if I make a game with Roger as my only sprite, I will have a sprite to use. And that's what I want! And some animation. But in the end BB, or ProgZmax will have much much much better sprites than Roger and loomious or inc. or sector or a lot of other people will have better BGs than the ones I will try to draw in MSPaint...

The same goes with music. I have to seriously doubt that most people in here will have the quality of music that Geoffkhan or mOds can produce. (I won't mention myself here... I'm modest!!!! hehe). It's always easy to do something that sucks. The thing is that in most commercial games art (music/BGs/Sprites/whatever), don't suck! And these that do suck, don't sell!

Technology progresses, and so the standards of most people...

AGS is not exactly following todays advances in art. Music maybe, since it can handle mp3 and ogg, but not in art. But I still fail to see why, an old game, or a game with poor graphics or poor music should not be comemrcial or should not sell enough, to at least cover the expenses of one person (the creator...). I mean hell, I would buy TETRIS, or PCMAN or Sokoban, or The apprentice and other games. I can spend quality time with any of these games (and other of course), and if I have a desperate need for great sound fx or CGI or anyuthing simmilar I can always visit the nearest cinema.

QuoteAs for saying "all techno is talentless shit" or something similar... again, that's FINE. You can't say someone shouldn't think that, it's an opinion. In the same vein, they shouldn't assume that someone who IS a fan of techno/jungle/drum and bass is listening to the same stuff they've heard to give them that impression.

If someone says 'all techno is ...' then it's safe to assume he's heard of it 'all' and therefore he IS talking of the same things the fans of techno/jungle/drum and bass are listening to, amongst others. If they mean 'some techno' then they should say 'some techno is ...' Why would anyone say 'all whatever is' when they've got no full grasp of the whatever in question? Could it be because they're... stupid?

And just because someone has an opinion doesn't mean it's alright whatever it is, and that that opinion shouldn't be challenged. It's not FINE to make broad generalizations about anything really, and it's good that people don't stand for those. I can't say someone shouldn't think of that, but I can say why what's he's thinking is the product of being misinformed or ignorant.

So unless your point was 'everyone has the right to be ignorant!' (which they do, but how useful is it to point that out?) I don't understand what you're saying. Especially when you later say:

QuoteLet's not get angry at other people's perceptions, AND let's not just make full on blanket statements about things

... let's not be angry at stupid shit people say, but also, let's not say stupid shit. Yeah, that situation seems to resolve itself, to friction there, quite zen.

Also, ninjas, I think it comes down to something like this: because you deal in and understand art, you put emphasis on 'good' art because you require it personally, whereas music seems is not such a focus. You're projecting your own experience to reality though, because just as you untrained in music find most to be 'good enough samey generic techno' most people find boring basic 3d and omg lensflare to be good enough. And people find generic fantasy writing in games good enough. God, there's people who think Final Fantasy 7 has THE BEST STORY EVER WRITTEN, and for anyone who has ever read something other that the back of shampoo bottles, it's very clear that it's one big melodramatic cliche. And people find generic fps shootemup gameplay enough, strangely. So it's not about the graphics being (more than somewhat) upfront when it comes to quality, it's just that YOU understand good graphics more than the average consumer.

To illustrate how much the average consumer understands in a roundabout way, I believe for example that Flashback is one of the most beautiful games ever made. And I've read reviews where people go either 'the graphics are ok, they do their job' or even 'the main character is nicely animated, but he doesn't have enough colour'. Aesthetic and art direction go right over their heads. The cohesive style goes over their head. The technical proficiency it took goes over their heads.  Just as good electronic music versus bad electronic music goes right over some other people's heads.

Just because someone says "all [blah] is [blah]" doesn't mean they've heard/seen it all... people say that all the time. It doesn't mean they're necessarilly stupid either, they're just exagerrating.

My point, really, was that although I personally don't like people making statements like that when it's clear they haven't explored something properly, I also hate seeing people who are experts on said subject get angry because a lamen doesn't understand the intricasies of the genre. I don't know shit about techno and I don't -want- to understand the differences between all the different kind of music.

QuoteI don't know shit about techno and I don't -want- to understand the differences between all the different kind of music.

This is acceptable.
If you can also avoid "all techno is [blah]" statements, world also accepts.

For example, I picked techno+ music for tempo. I just can't stay listening anything under 120 bpm (of course, there's exceptions) or, I hate vocals (main motto: the less singing, the better) and I get totally unstable and aggressive towards music playing equipment (radio, computer) if I have to listen to some rock-love-songs. Like Bryan Adams, Bon Jovi, etc. Or songs where grown up men sing in female voice (see above and add boy bands).
There's "best ROCK song ever" popular thread in this forum. It seems that majority of members dig metal. I wouldn't click the link even if paid for.

I could say that it's crap and gay (no minority discuss here, it's just typical uber-insulting-rating-to-something for heterosexual men).
I *do* think so, actually.

But I won't go out yelling it.

So, be ignorant but be quiet.

Quote from: InCreator on Tue 10/01/2006 01:25:19

Experimental Industrial Vocal Techno with elements of PunkMetal? Or other way around?


Hehe, I don't know. Your songs lack high sounds (beepy sounds) to go under any trance or techno subgenre and the beats go somewhere towards Jungle/Drum'n'Bass.

As many say, the genres usually collide and mix so there's really no strict rules what is what. Making genres is just putting similar tracks together, by bpm and amount of melody. And people don't listen to genres, they just usually scope for "right stuff". For me, "right stuff" is usually Progressive/Anthem/Epic (by this weird guide) trance tracks and lot's of different house. Other stuff is... too hardcore.

But I guess it's quite safe to call it Rave. Sounds like The Prodigy before they released any records and got super famous.

Listening at some tracks, I don't think that you developed an attachment to one genre yet.

Thanks for listening! Actually, this pleases me that you can't put a label on me! Maybe my music isn't attached to one genre because i listen to and can't help but be inspired by so many different styles of music? (Mostly with singing though)

A friend had came up with the term "gloomcore" for my music but now I see from that link you printed  that the gloomcore label has already been taken!

I'm not into dance related music myself (Unless Roni Size, Kosheen, and EBM count) but at least we both agree that boy bands suck. I hope the same applies to girl bands too. *Shudders*

Also, any fools that don't write their own lyrics. (For example a gay bloke singing he loves a girl, DO YOU KNOW WILL YOUNG EH?? And those boy-bands saying how they love this girl. What? All of them? All five members love the same girl?)

One game I bought mainly for the soundtrack was Silent Hill 2 which has one of the best soundtracks ever. Though I found the game a bit repetitative, the soundtrack actually saved a rather dull gameplay.

The Silent Hill series was a great inspiration for me when making The Zone (http://interactingarts.org/thezone/) and I actually spent more time on music and sound than on graphics (excluding video footage). I realised that this was sort of dangerous, because of gamer fixation with graphics, but in retrospect I think it was a good choice be cause it added very much to the emotional aspects of the project.

I wanted some parts to have percussion and have a trashy electro sound - very much like the Fight Club soundtrack only much more twisted. (Some of these attempts can be heard in the demo of The Zone (http://interactingarts.org/thezone/downloads.html), especially in the intro, the air raid shelter and under the bridge.) These ambitions proved to the hardest to achieve. Looping samples is very seductive, since you lots of music very fast though loops get boring very quickly. I think it turned quite all right, but percussion scares the hell out of me.

(And you're welcome to play "Pick the genre" on my music as well)  ;D

Helm,

I'm really not talking about myself (and my musical tastes are as refined as anyone I have met including pro musicians). My point really is about the views of game journalists.

Ninjas: okay.


Kinoko:

QuoteJust because someone says "all [blah] is [blah]" doesn't mean they've heard/seen it all... people say that all the time. It doesn't mean they're necessarilly stupid either, they're just exagerrating.

Then they should stop exagerrating. Isn't that a better solution that other people putting up with loud ignorance?

QuoteMy point, really, was that although I personally don't like people making statements like that when it's clear they haven't explored something properly, I also hate seeing people who are experts on said subject get angry because a lamen doesn't understand the intricasies of the genre. I don't know shit about techno and I don't -want- to understand the differences between all the different kind of music.

Then don't discuss techno. The layman can stick to what he likes and not loudly condemn what he doesn't get in sweeping generalizations.

It's not that I'm going to cry when someone says something ignorant. But I just think it's going to the other extreme to 'learn to tolerate' ignorance just because it's widespread. I simply think you are wrong on this.

After having written two pages of post (the usuall), I deleted everything.

I don't see any argument here...

Any music can be easy to write. Good music is difficult to write. Any music in the end can sell, with extremly good managment and advertising. Good music, might not actually... Repeatition is not always easy to do, btw.

Quote from: Helm on Tue 10/01/2006 18:18:05
Then they should stop exagerrating. Isn't that a better solution that other people putting up with loud ignorance?

Ignorance is fun... the world would be a dull place if everyone thought before they spoke ;)

Well said.

I listen to techno sometimes, but I'll say "Pff, techno sucks" if I feel like it. My favourite bands are Queen, Kiss and David Bowie but if someone goes "Pff, Kiss blow" or "Queen and David Bowie, man, those guys suck", I might sent a witty quip their way or insult them casually, but I don't care enough to want to educate them on why they don't get the music. Or, more in line with what we're talking about, someone might say "Pff, I hate rock music". Now, I know very well that's saying you hate about a hundred genres of completely different music right there, and I know that person can't possibly have listened to it all.

People say that stuff all the time. I think as long as they aren't saying it in a really serious way that's actually gonna have some effect, people should be allowed to say things like that without being labelled as 'ignorant' (unless, they're being labelled so in a jokey way).

I personaaly rhink the best way to 'make money' if u where into that (I just enjoy makin the games) then you could release a demo game to get interest, and then a paid for full game...