Messages

InCreator has a thing about penises, if I recall Farlander's GIP thread. Tits are okay, though!

Ah, the good ol' AGS show! Now there's a blast from the past. Fortunatly the Benidorm edition remains locked safely away on my mp3 player to be heard by NO ONE, vla ha ha.

I am not sure what PPElbo Mix is though, but I am sure that it's nuffink to do with me guv!

I'm struggling with the info-dump problem right now and I think while writing this post I just decided that if I feel like I'm saying too much in the beginning... Just cut it. Tell the character the important stuff they need to know now and forget about the back story. The back story can be sprinkled throughout the game.

This is exactly the same problem I've been having with Oswyn, and I think it's absolutely crucial to avoid infodumping at the start of a game because as soon as the player gets overwhelmed with text the "Sorry, Don't Care!" switch gets flicked and you find yourself reaching for the alt+f4 combination. It's a nightmare to balance, but I'd definatly advocate cutting down any introduction to it's bare minimum yet still keeping the elements that will engage the player, and then finding ways to reveal all the juicy back-story and details of the 'world' you've created for your characters through interactions and whatnot that the person playing the game has control over.

It's dangerously easy to waffle on and on in adventure games - not just in the introduction - so it can really help to take a step back and ask yourself if you're making things too wordy and uninteresting!

Probably not a definitive list, and there never will be one as there's too much music in the world, but here's some that I'll never get tired of:

Steve Reich - Phases
Frank Zappa - Hot Rats
Aphex Twin - Drukqs
Boards of Canada - Geogaddi
Amon Tobin - Foley Room
Tom Waits - Rain Dogs
The Beach Boys - Pet Sounds
Radiohead - OK Computer
John Coltrane - A Love Supreme
Kraftwerk - Computer World

Dialogue options on a GUI in a text-box, allowing for nicer customisation of topic selection without having to write an entire custom system.

"We could not calculate driving directions between Manchester, Lancashire, England and Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco, CA, USA."

Curses! Looks like I might have to miss this one, surely there's a North Californian lurking around these parts though... it sounds like a fun oppertunity you'd be crazy not to attend.

I think the majority of people who initially made this place a community back at the turn of the millenium have all more or less moved on, for various reasons. This is not unnatural, the internet is a lot different these days. Hobbyist adventure making is no longer new and exciting, and I think a lot of people have either grown out of wanting to make games or have come to the conclusion that making a good game is too much work. The standard is considerably higher than it once was.

But yes, when it started out people were using the forums in a more bloggy way, and generally mucking around as for many it was the first community they'd been part of. I think the forums are more of a functional place now, as there are other places to get that 'community' fix. A lot of the friends I've made here over the last six years I socialise with in a more direct way now, outside of the forums, so it's no longer a place to kick about and chat for me. It's no big deal really, it's just the way things change.

Edit: In conclusion, I think people generally are less interested in making games and investing in a community than they once would have been.

Edit: Something tells me this thread will come back to haunt me one day when I'm applying for a job.

Perhaps if you end up relying on cannabis as some sort of creative crutch that makes an okay idea really good, as you're implying you do already. Maybe some alarm bells should be ringing there... I mean, you're not going to be able to get high in the workplace if you're having trouble fleshing out ideas or solving a programming problem.

Just another opinion from an artist that I've never heard of (or downloaded).  Sounds to me more like somebody trying to get their point of view about the "evils" of downloading rather than any real-world example.  But, having no clue who the "artist" is I don't really know.

The exact response I expected, "don't know him, don't care!" so the reality of a well known, respected musician getting screwed over by people downloading his music and not understanding or caring about the consiquences can be brushed aside as 'not a real world example'.

It's not just a difference of opinion, these are real people being affected by the mentality that you can take as much music as you like and nothing will happen other than some executives not being able to buy another BMW to replace the one they bought last month. I can post more stories and examples if you'd like, although you'll probably not have heard of the musicians in question so it's probably not worth it.

The stance you take on the price of music has some elements of truth to it, but the way you have turned it into a strawman to justify taking your entertainment for free without giving it back shows nothing but contempt for musicians such as me and Nikolas, which is why we get so wound up about it. It's just totally greedy.

I think Radiohead have almost gotten it right with In Rainbows. The system I would use would be:

* 160kbps MP3s you chose how much to pay for.
* 48khz/24-bit FLACs and high res downloadable artwork, £8 (for the folks that want uncompressed, high quality tracks)
* 2xCD with bonus tracks, 2xVinyl and artwork, free MP3 and FLAC downloads, other bonus items, £40 made to order.

So you have your casual iPodders covered with satisfactory MP3s that they can judge how much is worth, the more quality-concious folks can get better-than-cd-quality digital files and the high res artwork, and the fans that want everything get bonus material, hard copies that will probably be eBayable and retain their value.

The reason why artists are suffering now is because the recording industry just doesn't know how to respond to the majority of people no longer caring about CDs, or being able to get music for free. It's the independant artists and labels being run out of flats or at a low profit who CARE about music that are really suffering here, and not the RIAA or the suits who made monies selling everyone their old record collection back to them on CD.

Piracy isn't going to go away, so musicians and labels are going to have to get their heads around this and find an incentive to give people to actually purchase music rather than go and download it from a torrent site. In Rainbows is a massive step in the right direction.  

Here's a reality sandwich for everyone to chow down on:

well the debate about illegal downloads has obviously been raging for some time.  some blame it for the crisis the music industry is currently facing, others herald this as a new utopian era for the consumer. contrary to the oversimplified views sighted by both ends of the spectrum I believe this to be a fairly complex issue with radically different implications for different artists and labels.

with this in mind I see no point in entering into debate on the general issue here. nor would I consider it my place to tell people what they should or shouldn't do. all I can comment on with any certainty is how all this has affected me personally and in light of my nearing release this might be of interest to those of you who've expressed an interest in my music.

over the last few months I've received a surprising amount of mail from people who'd downloaded 'foley room'. the comments are very positive and many encourage me to "keep on doing what you're doing" for which I am thankful.

today, the release date for my album, it's unlikely that you will see it in most high street shops and after the initial run it's unlikely that you will be able to order a copy even from online stores. this is because in-spite of more people having access to and apparently listening to my music than ever before, the predicted sales of the record were so low that it didn't justify the manufacture or distribution to any significant level. strange? not when you consider how hard it might be to convince any retail outlet, physical or digital, that they should try and sell something everybody could already get for free months beforehand.

so what does this mean in the wider context? who the fuck knows. like I say I won't speculate on the wider picture and you can draw your own conclusions as to what this means with regards to my own future output. again I stress that I'm not talking about what should happen here. I'm not saying I should be able to 'keep on doing what I'm doing' or even that my record deserves to be bought. all I'm saying, mainly for the benefit of those who might otherwise have been unaware, is that if you personally like what I do and wish to continue hearing more then the only way that will happen is if you support it.

Bottom line is no matter what elaborate excuses you make up to make you feel better about being a cheapskate, no matter how archaic you percieve the recording industry to be, if you pirate music the artists will suffer.

Edit: Unless they're dead, in which case go nuts!

Ben Jordan: Scourge of the Ski People

Grundislav fends off rumours that he's merely re-using ideas to get the last two games done quickly.

Just pretend you're buying TF2, Portal and EP2 for £25 and whoops, they accidently gave you extra copies of HL2 and EP1!

I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS!

As an athiest I can tell you resolutly that I do not fear my own death in any way, and when I have experienced troubles or tragedies I have found hope in friends and family, tangible things that I can touch and see and talk to. Seeing as you have dug this thread up, would you like to elaborate as to why you believe what you have just stated, and whether you'd be open to reviewing your opinions if faced with conflicting accounts? They are rather sweeping generalisations after all.

I'm going to buy the boxset, because i'm a Radiohead fanboi.

I wonder if I can resist opening it to sell on eBay in 10 years time?

Botique guitars made now will still retain their value I expect, Rickenbackers, Fenders, Gibsons not made in Asia or Mexico will probably never diminish in value. You get what you pay for with musical instruments! Of course, a new Stratocaster will never fetch as much as one from the 50s...

Squier's pretty much a budget knockoff so you're probably not going to be able to sell it anywhere near the price you bought it for.

After some musing on the subject, I thought I'd better expand on my original post a bit.

I've been discussing Halo 3 with colleagues recently, and we were all trying to figure out just why we're not excited about the game at all. We came to the conclusion that it was because it didn't offer us anything new... as seasoned gamers who have been playing these types of games for the majority of our lives, we've Seen It All Before. I've played every major FPS since Wolfenstein 3D, so the single player campaign (at a whopping 6-8 hours in length!) doesn't appeal as I can expect exactly the same gameplay that I've experienced countless times before.

The same argument could be applied to Bioshock of course - the core gameplay hasn't advanced from the foundations laid out by Doom (aside from some pseudo-RPG elements and an obviously massive leap in narrative and concept), but the excecution and delivery of the additional and original gameplay elements managed to hit all the sweet spots for me (which I'm sure was helped by mostly being derived from System Shock 2, which is one of my all time favourite games). The problem with the Halo series is that I've already shot at legions of aliens wanting to cause me much harm in Prey, Half Life 2, Duke Nukem 3D, Unreal, Gunman Chronicles, Gears of War... er, Redneck Rampage... it's not a concept that grabs me by the balls and screams "YOU MUST PLAY THIS GAME NOW!" anymore

Similarly the online play doesn't interest me as deathmatching is not a new concept in my life - lord knows I've wasted so much of my life playing Quake 2, Unreal Tournament, Half Life, Counter Strike, Natural Selection and countless others, and now I want to experience something different which is not something that Halo 3 is going to provide. What I am looking forward to though is Left4Dead... looks like co-op heaven to me! And hopefully battling friends online in Guitar Hero 3.

This is not to say that Halo 3 is a bad game worthy of some sort of anti-hype backlash. There's a whole generation of gamers that have never played Duke Nukem 3D, haven't spent weekends hooked on Quake 2 deathmatch and capture the flag playing on a 56k modem, not sunk dozens of hours LANing Unreal Tournament with a bunch of mates, and the Halo series has been the first that has been able to provide this enjoyable and addictive experience to a whole breed of gamers that have never had the chance (or ever wanted to, because online gaming is such geekery) to do it before. This is probably why Halo 3 is as massive as it is, it's the refinement of 15 years of 'traditional' FPS gameplay that everyone can enjoy. Those of us that have Seen It All Before will just have to sit around waiting for something else to come along that will satisfy our increasingly hard to please tastes, while millions of other people will be getting on with having fun! 

Footnote: After reading this you may be wanting to ask "if you've Seen It All Before and want something new from video games, why do you hang around on a forum dedicated to retro gameplay that has not only been Seen Many Times Before but has long since collapsed in on itself due to it's own inherent flaws". My response to this would be "Um..." and to disappear in a puff of hypocrasy!

[entirely in bold]

Before i start i would like to add that i am fully aware that Halo 3 stands against almost everything we love about retro gaming

I don't think the gameplay has advanced past Doom, so it's pretty retro in that respect. It's good that games can still get people excited in such a way, it's always fun to be part of the hype of something I guess. Halo has never really captivated me (I gave up the first game half way through due to the extreme repetition in the level design), but neither has Crysis which as also supposed to be some sort of video gaming deity. Perhaps I'm just a big ol' cynical gamer as I seem to be in the minority here!

By the way, there's no need to make your post entirely in bold as it comes across as very attention-seeking and makes it much harder to read, which you don't need to do here as you're not having to shout your opinion of the game over the masses of other people doing the same thing as in most gaming forums at the moment

I think it's very dangerous for everyone to be playing detective and speculating what actually happened to Madeline, because at the moment all we know are a few scant facts and a lot of heresay. This new magic evidence seems to be far from conclusive, and yet pretty damning at the same time. If it turns out to be baseless then this will be a horrendous cock up in a long line of cock ups. If it turns out that the McCanns accidently killed their daughter, then well... they'll have defrauded a heck of a lot of people. Either outcome will be an unhappy one.

A the moment both the kidnapping and accidental death scenerios seem to have equal numbers of flaws in them, neither make much sense to me any more. I would suggest everyone to keep an open mind until there's more concrete evidence to suggest what actually happened. If the DNA evidence in the car turns out to be Madeline's blood then that'll be pretty difficult to explain away... but if it's anything else that could have been secondarily transferred from the parents it'll be a very weak basis to base any allegations of murder off of.