AGS team contest?

[InCreator]

What happened to team challenge, anyway?

I know that in 2004, entries barely made to the deadline and most teams broke apart, but isn't that's the challenge?
Trying to stay and work together and finish the thing?

How about trying again?

[Radiant]

I would potentially be interested, depending on what the rules and restrictions are.

(perhaps you can link to the 2004 contest?)

[InCreator]

I found those links...
ATC 2004
ATC 2004 - official thread
ATC 2005 - signup

I think that strict rules and short deadlines were what made ATC so hard, and why so few entries made it to the final day.

Community has been growing every year, so why not try it again?
If you look at middle link, you see that there were some pretty high-quality games in work... For for such short time, they were never completed.

I think that if ATC could be ressurrected (if there's enough people to participate), the rules should point out minimum AND maximum number of rooms for a game, so teams would go filling these with actual game, instead of starting a never-ending string and missing deadline after.

I don't offer to host ATC myself, but I would simply love to participate in one.

[Vel]

It would have about the same percentage of games finished, about 10-15%... I'd say give it a go though.

[Radiant]

I think that strict rules and short deadlines were what made ATC so hard, and why so few entries made it to the final day.

Whoa. I just red up on that large rulebook, and if we're using that, count me out. This is way too much of a hassle with formalities and bureaucracy.

[LimpingFish]

Some of the rules do seem a little overly strict, but I'm sure certain points would be flexible.

Either way, and providing a window opens in my hectic schedule of doing nothing, I'd give it a go.

[Ishmael]

I'd be in this time 'round. Give it a go, with some changes based on what potentially went wrong last times, and we might a slightly greater percentage of the games done, too.

[CodeJunkie]

I've been secretly hoping this might get resurrected.  Consider me very interested (despite our team's spectacular failure last round  ).  Is this the wrong topic to mention the OROW too?  It always had lots of entries and good quality too, would be a shame not to see it again.  Another one seemed about to go ahead but finding a good time and host didn't happen.

[Tiki]

The problem is that summer is ending, and so is the ideal window for the team contest.

It would make most sense to wait until December, when most people have free time.

[radiowaves]

Hmpf, I can't believe these kind of things fall apart! I've been on some 72h GDCs and those were fun!

I kow I am new here, but I got my skills and I would definately be interested! Maybe even make the teams country based, so estonians could win!

December sounds good, and there is plenty of time to organize the damn thing, forums etc...

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Judging by the last one I wouldn't be interested, it was just a big mess.  OROW and MAGS work much better since you don't need to rely on anyone to do a job.

[Ozzie]

When I look at those rules then I think that they should have helped to get things done in time.
For example, showing off a screenshot and giving a plot synopsys is something to work towards to.

Instead of giving a progress report in the last week it might be a better idea to have already a completable build done by that time, so the last week is there for fixing things (a progress report might be an optional thing, though). This would add to the pressure for one and the games would be in a mostly bug-free state.
Both winner games of the past competition were just released after additional features were added and bugs resolved.

Overambition was a big problem of the competition in 2004. Too many rooms and a plot that was too extensive. In one team the story wasn't even written to the end. It also seems that leadership and organisational planning were lacking, both things which shouldn't be underestimated.
This competition is all about working in a team and meeting deadlines.
I guess this sounds tiresome, but it also is the idea, in my opinion.

[radiowaves]

I think the period of time should be not longer than one week. So the members wouldn't lose motivation. It shouldn't be who gets the most rooms or longest storyline, it shopuld be the originality captured in given theme and adaption of gameplay!

[Ishmael]

I think the period of time should be not longer than one week. So the members wouldn't lose motivation. It shouldn't be who gets the most rooms or longest storyline, it shopuld be the originality captured in given theme and adaption of gameplay!

It might just take that one week to properly organise your team for this sort of stuff. So the deadline should in my opininon be further away.

[Ozzie]

I think a team name and logo shouldn't be necessary or even encouraged.
The first two days would be just about figuring those out.
Something like "Dave Gilbert Team" would have been enough, I think.

[Dave Gilbert]

Most ATC teams will probably fail.  Experience has taught us that.  But, the experience can teach you a LOT about development, working as a team, etc.  It certainly did for me.  If it weren't for the 2004 ATC (and "Two of a Kind"), I never would have known what it was to lead a team, and never would have considered entering game development fulltime. 

[InCreator]

Whoa. I just red up on that large rulebook, and if we're using that, count me out. This is way too much of a hassle with formalities and bureaucracy.

Why the sarcasm? I simply think that rules should aid success of ATC, not make it harder. Like setting a room count or something else game-specific. ATC '04 suffered from people not being really sure what to do, thus wasting precious time.
Like ozzie said:

This competition is all about working in a team and meeting deadlines

I totally second that. Only strongest teams managed to stay together to hand over a final product.
Also, I'm sure many new(n00b?) members would love an opportunity to work together with our veterans.

It might just take that one week to properly organise your team for this sort of stuff. So the deadline should in my opininon be further away.

Yes, things take time. With international teams, time zones, etc, a week couldn't produce even sufficent communication between team members.

It shouldn't be who gets the most rooms or longest storyline, it shopuld be the originality captured in given theme and adaption of gameplay!

I'd prefer actual content. A game. Puzzles. So there wouldn't be case where team hands graphics over to the coder just a day before deadline and coder barely manages to import backgrounds in time, so result becomes a simple slideshow and not really an adventure game.  :

I think a team name and logo shouldn't be necessary or even encouraged.
The first two days would be just about figuring those out.

Funny as it sounds, it's true. But this could be left into final, testing & debugging week Ozzie told about.

I kow I am new here, but I got my skills and I would definately be interested! Maybe even make the teams country based, so estonians could win!

Members of the team were picked randomly, so there wasn't "ultimate team" made of masters only. But if you're interested in making something together (off-challenge), send me a PM. With you, me, Clip and Kristjan together, it sounds actually pretty cool.

It would make most sense to wait until December, when most people have free time.

Though it sounds a bit pessimistic, I'd rather start ATC now and set deadline for December or something... This case, if someone bails out, other team members have atleast enough time to mop things up...

Also, instead of waiting "something to happen", we should have competitions like this going on all the time. So even at worst, new games would be still popping out occassionally.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

The teams weren't really random, so that's not accurate.  Certain people decided they were team leaders and recruited people they wanted to work with.  I think a random assignment method would have an even lower probability of success.  I also don't think it suffered from people 'not knowing what to do'.  After talking with a lot of people from the different teams (and having been on one myself), I think it suffered more from people who thought or claimed they would have time for the project and then either decided they didn't want to do it or found they didn't have the time to do it, thus teams ended up with large design documents and only 1 or 2 people actually doing the work.  I think ATC projects are a recipe for failure for this very reason, because some people are extremely eager to be on a team with a group of established people and then suddenly realize 'hey, this is going to require a lot of effort and work' and then flake out.  Also, someone mentioned making the ATC a week.  Why?  OROW is a week competition already and you can have a team for that.  You can also have a team for a MAGS game if you like and it's a month long competition, so I really don't see the need or the place for the ATC with both of these competitions going. 

Just wait for a MAGS competition with some basic rules that appeal, get together a group and go for it!  The benefits are not having to worry about a bunch of silly rules like forming a team name, not having such a ridiculous sense of competition weighing you down and you can focus on the only point of game design worth focusing on:  doing it because you enjoy it.

[Ozzie]

It would make most sense to wait until December, when most people have free time.

Though it sounds a bit pessimistic, I'd rather start ATC now and set deadline for December or something... This case, if someone bails out, other team members have atleast enough time to mop things up...

Also, instead of waiting "something to happen", we should have competitions like this going on all the time. So even at worst, new games would be still popping out occassionally.

It certainly would make the competition more sucessful if it would happen when most people have time, logically.
Maybe it also would be a good idea to wait for the 2.8 release of AGS.
The support for a version control system may make team work much more easier and less a mess.
Someone would need to host those, though.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

There's been hits and misses with the previous comp., sure. Lots of teams and entries didn't make it.

But that's not different from any competition. And we musn't forget that it did yield two games, two great games - Two of a Kind and The Great Stroke-Off.

I wouldn't have time to participate, unfortunately, but I'd love playing the offspring of a new comp. I thought that there were specific periods for the OROW and this comp, really...