Has anyone ever paid for a commercial AGS game??

Mordalles · 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.

i dont think there has been a game around here that could be commercial in my book.

no offence intended. just my opinion.

The Inquisitive Stranger · Tue 03/01/2006 02:37:29

Why is money evil?

Unilin · Tue 03/01/2006 03:32:34

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

Gilbert · Tue 03/01/2006 03:36:49

Because Unilin enjoyed shop-lifted food.

Nikolas · Tue 03/01/2006 08:01:25

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!

Neil Dnuma · Tue 03/01/2006 09:35:10

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.

simulacra · Tue 03/01/2006 14:52:13

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.

Mordalles · Tue 03/01/2006 21:02:20

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

simulacra · Tue 03/01/2006 21:13:11

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.

Mordalles · Tue 03/01/2006 21:35:25

good for you, mate.

Pumaman · Wed 04/01/2006 21:05:48

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.

Mordalles · Wed 04/01/2006 21:31:54

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,Â

Pumaman · Wed 04/01/2006 21:40:17

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.

Mordalles · Wed 04/01/2006 21:43:18

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

Helm · Wed 04/01/2006 21:59:39

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.

Mordalles · Wed 04/01/2006 22:06:43

yeah, it always does that. why?

Snarky · Wed 04/01/2006 22:12:29

To protect you against yourself.

LimpingFish · Wed 04/01/2006 22:28:46

There has to be an incentive to 'Create'.

Money/love/boredom/need.

Delete as applicable.

The Inquisitive Stranger · Wed 04/01/2006 22:32:56

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.

MrColossal · Wed 04/01/2006 22:36:54

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

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