Has anyone ever paid for a commercial AGS game??

[m0ds]

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)

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

[LimpingFish]

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?

[Andail]

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.

[Ionias]

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.

[m0ds]

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.

[Andail]

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.

[The Inquisitive Stranger]

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.

[Helm]

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.

[Ionias]

Thanks for the kind words.

But 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.

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.

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.

[simulacra]

Well, it took me about two years to make The Zone 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 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 and Fabel Förlag 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 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.

[Vince Twelve]

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!

[TheYak]

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. 

[Nikolas]

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! 

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

[Erwin_Br]

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

[Ninjas]

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.

[Helm]

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.

[Erwin_Br]

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

[Ninjas]

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.
     

[Renal Shutdown]

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.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

his 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.