Messages

I'd say the Harmonica is a fairly easy instrument. You can learn just about anything you need to know to play a harmonica in about ten hours. The only difference between you and a professional player after that would be the amount of songs you know.

I'd also pick the trombone for being one of the easiest and hardest instruments to learn/play. It's easily one of the easiest brass instruments to learn, because the note progression is straightforward. And there are only seven positions you need worry about. Learning those seven positions can take a bit of time, but if you have a naturally good ear, it can be easily attained. Also it's an easy instrument to keep in tune, because if the tuning slide isn't well placed, you can move your slide accordingly. It's also can be very difficult. It's easier for other brass instruments to play quicker notes in succession, wheras a trombone player needs more practice and a faster arm to be able to do this. The higher up on the scale you go, the more you need to adjust your standard positions. The trombone is also one of the most versatile instruments. With a good trombone, you can get a great range. As a trombone player, obviously, my viewpoints are slanted, though.

Also one of the hardest instruments to play, from what I hear, is the French Horn. Because there are numerous partials for every position. But if played correctly, this can have a wonderfull breathtaking sound.

-MillsJROSS

You see this is just the problem. You add money and people start moaning, yet they'll glady plunk down hard earned cash for McDonalds or a trip to the movies.

Exactly. I could easily spend 20 dollars on a dinner and a movie, without blinking an eye. I think AGS made adventure games can turn a profit. They need to be a great quality game, for one. But also, most of selling would consist of going to other communities and trying to get your name out. The average age of AGSers hovers around 20, I'd imagine. Because of this, the AGS community isn't an ideal place for selling your games, because many of us are in a situation where it's food or games.

Also...we're spoiled. By that I mean, the industry has been pushing for games to become longer and longer, and because of this, if a commercial adventure game isn't on an epicly long scale, people don't want to play. This makes it difficult for amatuer developers. If you look at some older games, like KQ, the games are relatively short. I could beat the first one within an hour, knowing what to do. Wheras, a game today, even if I didn't listen to all the dialog, might take three or four hours, with knowledge beforehand. I'm not really saying lenght is a bad thing...I'm justing pointing out some of the problems with trying to make your own commercial games.

The great thing about making free games is that the author is free to do what he/she wants. They can insult whomever they want. They can be as raunchy and lude as they want. They can spell as bad as they want. They can be as creative as they want. It is because of this, that has lead to some very entertaining games that couldn't be produced commercial, but are just as good in their own right. I don't think commercial games ruin this...and I think people will always be making games for themselves and for free.

-MillsJROSS

I thought the movie was OK. Nothing great, nothing bad. It was a little long for a kids movie. And Squinky, I noticed the lip thing, too. The CGI was pretty much spot on, and done well. I don't think that there can be too much CGI, as long as it's done right. The kid actors did a good job...usually kid actors throw me off because they overact. My main complaint would only really be it's length. I found it was good otherwise. It had it's disney moments, but there weren't so many of them to detract from the movie.

-MillsJROSS

I don't think you can really be angry with Ghostlady. Those who were willing to go first and buy the game for fifteen dollars, must have known that the game might have been a bomb. I'm not commenting on whether it was or not, as I didn't play it. But if they didn't like it, then they will be free to not buy her next game. I mean, before I spend my money I research a games reviews, and wait it out until I'm sure it's worth the money. You gusy who paid the money, happen to have done me a great service. So you should feel all warm and gooey for helping me out.

I think a commercial effort on an AGS game shouldn't be looked down upon. If a person, or a group of people, produce a game that is worth the money, I will buy it. If your just making a game as a hobby, you probably won't be making a professional game. But if you're serious and make the best game you possibly think you could have, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to sell it.

-MillsJROSS

It was funny, too. Because Fatman probably would have been praised if it was free, but god forbid you attach money to it.

I intend to buy amatuer games when I have the money.

-MillsJROSS

My dad has jam packed his computer with as many running processes as possible. And norton happens to be one of these things. I was just wondering if it was me or the engine. I probably won't have to worry about it when I come back home, though.

-MillsJROSS

While we're really on the subject, it looks like it might be time to update the logo.

-MillsJROSS

I didnt know that you got presents in Channukah You got a tree too?

No tree, but my parents do give me presents. Not for very much longer, though.

I didn't know it was possible to not know that...

Actually, it's a U.S. thing. Presents aren't really associated with the holiday or it's meaning. It was more of an effort to make sure Jewish kids didn't feel left out when all their other friends got presents and they were just stuck with aftertaste of latka's. So it's quite possible not to know that.

-MillsJROSS

There's no need to be insulted, really...

First off, I haven't been insulted. My post was more of a rant, and while yes your post might have contributed to my rant, it wasn't specifically targeted at you or anybody. It's just a trend of thought I've found many adventure gamers have, including myself at times. Your absolutely correct, "using one's brain" doesn't necessarily coincide with intelligence. However, I do not think society has been pushing people to not use their brain power. It's alright for people to like watching violence and explosions. It's okay for people to acquire money and look good. These are entertaining!

I do not think that all FPS's are mindless drivel, however. They do require using your brain. Some of them are simple, shoot and kill. Others require you to know strategy. How do you get around the one hundred or so guys trying to kill you? It takes a strategy of picking people out, and covering oneself. You can't just go in, guns ablazing, and expect to remain alive. You have to learn how to continue to move and fire your weapon in a fluid way. There are constant strategies that you have to develop over time. The difference between adventure games and FPS, isn't using one's brain. It's that FPS's puzzle's are mostly physical, and are generally reflex based and repeated several times. And then there are strategy games like Warcraft, that sell very well.

I do not agree that society is pushing people to not use their brains, insofar, as gaming is concerned. In all media's there is mindless drivel...yes. There is also some thought provoking concepts in all media, and in all genre's of the gaming market.

-MillsJROSS

I'm still having problems when exiting the game. Sometimes it works flawlessly, othertimes the program just hangs around after I've quit and I have to stop the application through the task manager. If anyone can shed any light on this, it would be much appreciated.

-MillsJROSS

I strongly disagree that we assume that because people aren't playing adventure games that they're not using their brains. How very snobbish of us to say that people who don't enjoy our games aren't intelligent and don't use their brains. I am an avid reader, and perhaps kids aren't able to stimulate their own imaginations as much...but the truth of the matter is that they don't need to stimulate their imaginations as much. I mean it's handed to them, and why shouldn't they be able to use what is placed in front of them. So what if they decide to read or not. Who's to say that a book stretches the mind more than a movie or a show can. Kids don't need to wrap their minds around things around sensory details because we are now capable of producing those details ourselves. I seriously think that television has the capabilities of being just at intelligent as books. And while not all shows are mind blowing and intellectual, the same can be said of many books, which consequently are under the same obligations to appeal to the public or not be published. And tv has influenced the publics viewpoints on poignant matters such as sexism and racism, and has in many ways influenced a more open minded public.

I've known several people who play adventure games that I don't consider intelligent. So I think we need to get off our high horse of intelligence and try to focus on something better. Entertainment! Games should focus on entertaining the consumer, and whether we like it or not, FPS's appeal to people more on an entertainment level than Adventure Games. They allow people to get their aggressions out. They step into the characters realm and if they have a problem they can handle it with precise aiming or a happy trigger button. Instant gratification. Adventure games are a little more difficult. You step away from your world and your own problems only to go into someone else world and their problems. Getting rid of their problems is a little more difficult, and most people would rather there be a simple solution to everything...which is generally opposite of real life. Games are a way to step outside one's own life and have an enjoyable experience. What I'm getting at is Adventure Games don't need to be intelligent to appea to people. They should be well written, yes. Have an interesting or intriguing plot, yes. Have likeable characters that develope as the game progresses, yes. Most of all the game has to be fun. And fun can be had by the intellect as well as the average joe.

So if anything adventure games need to evolve to be entertaining to more than just the intellect. Sorry if I ranted a bit.

-MillsJROSS

I think people have a misconception when it comes to selling adventure games. The selling of adventure games hasn't been drastically altered. The market for adventure games is generally about the same. The Longest Journey sold about 300-400 thousand copies of their game, which was a popular and failry decent adventure game that's relatively new. Compared with SQ3, I believe, that got game of the year with about 200 thousand sold copies. So it's apparent that there isn't a lack in people willing to buy these games (assuming the game is actually good...considering some companies put out tons of horrible games, but at least their trying).

I think adventure games suffer internally rather than externally. By this I mean that the sales and money gained is relatively the same. However, the cost of making games today has drastically gone up.

The demand for better graphics is one of the reasons that adventure games are struggling. It costs more money to produce games with the 3d realism sought after, then it did with the two-dimensional look of the past. Companies are employing bigger teams that are able to handle this task.

Not only are graphics affected, but game length is affected, too. People want longer games. This takes more production time, and, again, costs more money.

Probably the worst thing for adventures, though, is that other games can be produced with the same cost but appeals to five or more times the target audience. So it's only intelligent for companies to produce games that make them the most profit. It's the same with movies. All the companies produce blockbusters with little depth or artistry (not in all cases), that appeal to a wider audience.

The good news is that while graphics have been increasingly getting closer to realism, the tools to make these graphics have been becoming easier to manipulate, and eventually, a few artists a couple years from now will be able to accomplish what a huge team of artists had to do before. This should make it less expensive to make adventure games.

Do adventure games still have to evolve? Yes and no. I know one thing when I play adventure games. That I don't mind action oriented puzzles. What I do mind is while trying to solve a puzzle I have to worry about being killed. FPS have employed some puzzle logic in their games...however, since these games don't appeal to me, I don't desire to play them. So if adventure games evolve that direction, that it's not necessarily good for me. I wouldn't mind if a player was able to slam theirselves against a door to open it. I don't mind timed puzzles. I don't even mind if I die in a game. But I'd prefer to die because of something I've done, rather than because I was blown up. I don't really think it's necessarily even FPS meshing in that would bother me so much. It's because when I play FPS I'm always in fear of my player being killed. And while employing fear isn't a bad tool, if it's spread throughout the game, it almost loses it's meaning.

-MillsJROSS

I'm looking forward to Channukah, which begins on christmas night!

I got a few books out of my parents already, so I'm not really concerned with presents. It's just good to be home and have some free time before I begin to get overwhelmed with work and college.

-MillsJROSS

Not that I am a scripting expert, but wouldn't that be a simple matter of
if (character[blackrook].x==character[whitepawn].x){?

This would be a solution, but since I don't know how he coded the pieces to move, it might not be so. Of course, you'd have to build a while loop around the if statement, but it wouldn't be too difficult. And it seems he found a solution.

-MillsJROSS

I think Ueffo Bleeblenarf, the monolith burger guy from SQ3, rolls off the tongue much better. But then, there's no accounting for tastes these days.

Other than that...Ace Quest of course!

-MillsJROSS

No...actually I'm getting another error, so I might as well share that.

When exiting after testing, sometimes the program does not exit correctly. Sometimes it does. This sounds more like it's comming from my system rather than AGS, but I'm just trying to establish if it's a problem from others. I am using vs 2.7 (the one from the main page). This might be because I'm testing often, as I usually do, and my dad's a process running whore, which could be causing the program to stall, as it has to compete with 50 oddsome processes.

The problem before was that the monitor wasn't able to take in the resolution. I figured it was something along those lines, so when I got back on to the computer I changed the system's resolution, and it worked fine.

-MillsJROSS

I fixed the problem, already.

Sorry about the bad grammar guys, I had written out a longer more in depth thread earlier, but I accidently closed the window, and was angry so I just did a short quick thread instead.

-MillsJROSS

After downloading the s.7 vs of AGS and completing  a quick begin game options room, I wne to test and make sure everything was working, since I didn't use any of the new scripting. The full mode wouldn't display the graphics, but CTRL+Q seemed to work fine. Windowed mode showed everything. Neither allowed AGS to shut the program down properly, to which I used a quitgame(1); function call. Thanks for any help.

-MillsJROSS

To answer his questions. Yes it is possible to have 16 characters in AGS. While it would be an enormous task to undertake, making graphics as well as just the game itself. Like most people have suggested, it's generally a good idea to start out with a small game, and work from there.

And while I'm too busy to help, I'm sure you'll find the help you need.

Good luck!

-MillsJROSS

And your cell phone didn't suffer any shock damage?

IMPRESSIVE!

My phone is fairly robust...I drop it all the time. Knowing the I was clumsy, I chose a phone that could take a few hits.

-MillsJROSS