Messages

I do have halloween pictures, but as I performed in the Rocky Horror Picture show for halloween....



Cropped because your eyes would bleed if you saw the rest of the guy on the left's costume.

Flippy: AGA mentioned your spelling of one word.  The rest of the post was directed at everyone.  He is not coming down on you in particular.  If you expect to see some behaviour, you'll probably see it whether it's intended or not.

HOWEVER, this is off topic. So I continue

remonstrate
quixotic
haberdashery
superfluous
mercurial
foreasmuch
bamboozle
abashed

It's fast enough to play any new games I want to play, but it's too fast to play DOS games without DOSbox.
It shows pretty colours.
I haven't run out of memory yet.
It isn't broken.
I can watch DVDs on it.
I can burn CDs, but don't
It has a nifty drive in the front that lets me put my camera's memory card right in the computer.
I have a flat screen monitor.  I bought it seperatly but it's still the same colour as my computer. Which is coincidently the same colour as my stereo and my refrigerator.

I am Luddite, hear me roar!

Or you could just draw white pixels. Those make really good stars. If you want twinkly stars, make a "+" shape of white pixels.

Your drawings are very blurry. Looking at them makes me feel like I'm wearing glasses with the wrong perscription. There should me more definition between objects. For example on pic #2, the altar blurs into the pool of magma.  This really makes no sense.  The altar is above the magma, but it looks like it's in the magma as well. More defined lines between objects are good.

For the earth, I would add some swirly clouds. From space, most of the earth is covered by clouds.  Use an airbrush tool or a semi-transparent layer so that you can sort of see the land beneath the cloud cover, but it's still obscured.

Spend some more time on your backgrounds. Being able to churn them out in ten minutes is great, but it's better to have a few really high quality ones that you put a lot of time and effort into than a lot of "good enough" ones that you made quickly.

1) If you add other ones, it stops being QFG and becomes Dungeons and Dragons or something.

2) No levels! Levels are very artificial. They work when you have to compare a group of characters who can grow and learn, like in a multiplayer RPG.  In that situation you need to be able to quickly compare the various characters, and having "Level 5 fighter vs. Level 7 theif" instead of "Fighter with 20 strength, 14 weapons skill, 19 parry, 22 dodge, 15 communication, 0 stealth, 10 wisdom..." and so on and so forth.

But in a QFG game you're only controlling the main character, and the other characters will most likely be static, because they don't interact with anyone but you.  You aren't being ranked, so levels serve no purpose.

3) Cheating is bad, though easter eggs are good (x-ray glasses anyone?)

4) This doesn't really matter to me.  Yes, it would be cool if the character is supposed to be wearing chainmail and you can see the chain mail.  But it wouldn't ruin the game if it doesn't change. However, if you have something like a helmet or cape equipped, it's imporant to be able to see that.

5) I would advise not trying to switch between places too much.  The countries in QFG were all very distant- the hero needed to use magic to travel between them (either portals, summonings or magic carpets). It wouldn't make sense to switch back and forth between the various countries, though a progression from one to the next might be possible.

6) Real time.  Turn based works if you're controlling several characters and have to think of strategy, but one on one it's just stupid.

I think you aren't looking at it in the right light when it comes to live action vs. CG, but your opinion is yours.

The reason I mention live action vs. CG is because from that trailer there was almost nothing else to discuss other than the eye candy.  We get some longer shots from movies that have already been made, and then a series of "oo, pretty!" shots that go by so quickly you can barely identify what's going on.  And I wasn't impressed by the "oo, pretty" shots because they looked fake.

Investigating the actual proposed plot, yes, that looks interesting. We're finally getting to the story I've been looking forward to for the past however-many years. But the trailer looks flat and dull.

LGM, Sure maybe you would like to see the originals as they were, but if that is how he wants them what good is any form of boycotting going to do? He is an artist, of sorts, and ultimatley he makes the call of what goes into his art.. Who are you to say what he should and shouldn't do? If you don't like it fine.. just don't watch them..

Boycotting and not watching them is the same thing, just with a different name.

Just finished watching the trailer. To be honest, I'm not impressed.  Most of it looked like computer graphics with the occasional live actor.  You'd think that after the amazing sucess of using live actors for monsters in Lord of the Rings, they might realize that live actors can look a hell of a lot cooler than CG stuff.  The pan across the bad guy soldiers made me laugh.

However, the Wookie Army looks cool.  But they're played by real actors. Coincidence? I think not!

Here lie the remains of Christine Jones
Nothing left here but her bones
Her name was McLeod, it wasn't Jones
But Jones was used to rhyme with Bones.

This rhyme is actually on the grave stone of one of my ancestors, except that "Christine McLeod" was originally "Sarah Brown."  It's the coolest rhyme EVAR!!!

I don't know about anybody else, but for me, the hints forum was the most important one!Ã,  I'm not a game creator, I just love to play.Ã,  Couldn't you get rid of the "popular threads" forum instead?Ã,  Or even THIS one?Ã,  I for one would rather be able to post hints instead of useless conversation.Ã,  But, that's just one person's opinon.Ã, 

To me, this forum has always seemed mainly directed towards people who use the engine to create games, and the accesability to players is an added bonus.Ã,  To creators, the discussions about upcoming titles, better ways to make games, what has worked in the past and so forth are very important.Ã,  If the Adventure-Related Talk and Chat forum disappeared, a lot of what's important about the forums would go too.

However, there are other forums where you can ask for hints, such as at Adventure Gamers(many AGSers are also members of Adventure Gamers, so you're even reaching a lot of the same audience) or Just Adventure+.Ã,  Many game makers even have their own forums, such as Gaspop, AGD Interactive, and the Reality-On-the-Norm games.Ã,  You'll find plenty of people able to help you out there.

The GTD topics are an excellent resource for adventure game makers.Ã,  However, with the forum being a little delicate right now, I'm personally a bit worried they might end up dissapearing into cyberspace.

Paranoid? Me? Never!

Anyway, some bits have dissapeared, because pictures are no longer linked to.  The mise-en-scene discussion is a bit hard to understand without the stills from Citizen Kane.

So here is my thought.Ã,  Adventure Developers has just risen from the grave. They need content. Would anyone object to the discussions being posted there in a sort of interview style (each post being credited to the person who wrote it)?Ã,  This would be with random messages about how the discussions would work or questions on where to find more GTD's edited out.

Pros:
-AD benefits: they get content
-Forums benefits: some of these discussions are huge, and they'll no longer need to be in the database
-other developers benefit: they might not have any reason to look through the forums, so they wouldn't be exposed to these points of view.
-The threads can be archived without losing things like screenshots or movie stills that are hosted elsewhere

Cons:
-not as easy to continue discussions, which is what the threads were all about (solution: people can continue to discuss in the AD forums or the comments section)
-some people may get ticked off at having their words published without permission (some no longer read the forums and wouldn't know about this) and the discussions might not make sense if their contributions aren't there.Ã,  It's impossible to properly credit them when they're only known as "Riot" or whatever. (Riot was a guest who posted several times in one of the discussions)

Your thoughts, ladies and gentlemen? I'm specifically interested in hearing from people like Barcik, Ginny, GG, Bionic Bill... the people who posted in these a lot.  After all, they're your words.

Uh oh... does this mean I'm going to have to completly overhaul my video collection again? Grrr...

Seriously, it does sound quite nifty.  And much more convenient than having a 5 disc box set of whatever.

Farl: A chroma-key requires a very certain shade of blue or green in order to be picked up by most programs.  I've tried using a blue screen (it was actually a wall painted with chroma-key blue paint) where the light wasn't balanced properly, and ended up with a circle of light blue in the upper corner of the shot.  An actual screen would be the exact right colour.  Also, if the wall got dirty, we couldn't clean it properly; scrubbing removed the paint.  We ended up having to repaint about once a month. A screen would have the colour actually part of it, so there's less worry of fading.

Also, it's much cooler to say "well I have a green screen!"

I realised that (as far as I know) no 3d point'n'click game was ever made: Monkey island 4 or Grim fandango are not point and click games as far as I am concerned- they can be refered to as "move character by keyboard and use actions by keyboard too".

Gabriel Knight 3.Ã,  Character movement and interactions controlled by mouse, keyboard could be used in conjunction with the mouse to alter camera views, completely 3D environment. (GF was prerendered, never played MI4).

There is even a freeware engine for making this kind of game. http://3das.noeska.com/ It's only in alpha, but if you're interested go and use it, pestering the makers to work on it.

Edit: Ooo! I thought of another one! Castle Master! This was a 3D game for DOS/Atari/Commodore 64.  It had minimal interaction (pick up things, throw rocks, flip switches, open doors). It was first person, and you could move around by clicking on a set of direction arrows. This does, however, come dangerously close to direct control.  However, all interactions were, as I recall, by mouse.

Man, that was an awesome game.

Jeeze, SSH, you just had to mix the penis metaphor with the warts metaphor, didn't you? Ick.

Mostly: I don't think that me saying my game is crap has anything to do with me being a girl.  It's more to do with me being a bit of a perfectionist.  I know what I like, and Wanderer was something I did NOT like.

You know what this thread needs?

Greek people, with long hairs growing out of their heads.

Oh GAC members, where aaaaaaaare you?

The one and only game I've made, Wanderer, was never reviewed anywhere, but the comments on it were interesting.

Most people said "This is very good for a first game," or "I liked the character." Only one person had the guts to say that it was a crappy game.  Three or four people attacked him for being horrible before I logged on to defend his point of view.

The game WAS crap.  I couldn't figure out how to get rid of Roger, so he became a guard that floated over a castle wall. The animation frames didn't line up, and I couldn't figure out how to add pictures for the inventory, so I actually used the pink poster and said it was flowers. THE PINK POSTER for god's sake. And I used it TWICE.

Where am I going with this? People sometimes really don't want to hurt other peoples feelings, so they are too darn nice.  I'd rather get a bad review on my bad game than a sugar coated good review.

I love love LOVE long hair. Mine and other people's.

-It's fun to play with
-it gives you an instant sense of individuality
-you can change your look five times a day (currently favouring pigtails)

For years I had rediculously short hair. From about grade 3 to grade nine my hair was never longer than chin length, but it usually only came to my ears. Ã, Then my mom started making me pay for my own hair cuts. The length of time between visits to the barber got really long, and therefore so did my hair. Ã, It's about halfway down my back, now.

I get it cut about once a year now... if I remember.

Dart: That is an awesome hair cut. It is, however, a reverse mullet. Where a mullet is uncool, your hair is cool.

I just finished reading the first chapter.  You have a very nice writing style; the words seem to flow easily, and dialog is very natural.

I only have two problems with what I've read so far:

1. Show, don't tell.  This is one thing you'll probably hear a lot if you study writing fiction. You're writing at a very close point of view, almost right inside Kerryn's head.  She wouldn't be amazed at some of the things she sees, and would think nothing of them.  The paragraph where you describe the glider is an excellent example of this.  Instead of just listing the components of the glider, have her interacting with it.  "She checked the wedge shaped wings for signs of wear.  Everything seemed fine, from the foot-wide silver tags at the ends to the hub at the centre where they met."

2. The actual format of the document was driving me nuts.  Indenting paragraphs, rather than just inserting a break, makes it much more legible.

However, I am quite hooked on the story. So it's all good.

I've never been able to have more than a sip of beer- or most alcoholic drinks, for that matter.Ã,  I do, however, like to drink mead when I can get my hands on it.

Mmmmm... viking booze...

Trafalgar Brewery makes a very nice Raspberry Mead, and their blueberry isn't bad either.  Most of the time, though, you can only get mead from homebrewers.

I have heard of medieval cities with complex streets as a defensive measures- not necessarily a maze, but just rather twisty interconnecting streets that made it impossible for an advancing army to make a charge on the castle in the centre.

Even if your story is only something mixed together, it sure sounds interesting!