Instant Action....and so it begins
by Derek Smart · in General Discussion · 10/11/2007 (10:00 am) · 114 replies
I just got a news bulletin which didn't leave me surprised in any way, shape or form.
No offense to anybody, but yes, what you are reading from the above bulletin is exactly what I've been saying all along and which most of you (too scared to utter a word) haven't. That being...
Whats old is new again (Or some nonsense like that) meaning that anyone hoping to see a new type of games cropping up on IA, other than the same style of games already found here, is going to be disappointed.
Yes Virginia, its just GG, with new paint (which looks great btw!!), a little bit more money and whatnot. Another player in the already crowded casual games market.
My guess is they'll lose money hand over fist and everything will head South once the bean counters at IAC start staring suspiciously at the bottomline.
.....or maybe they have access to another type of casual gamer waiting to be set free of the bonds of the existing crop.
However, Torque 2, does sound interesting. We'll see how much of a mess and disparity all these various Torque versions creates.
Bye!
No offense to anybody, but yes, what you are reading from the above bulletin is exactly what I've been saying all along and which most of you (too scared to utter a word) haven't. That being...
Whats old is new again (Or some nonsense like that) meaning that anyone hoping to see a new type of games cropping up on IA, other than the same style of games already found here, is going to be disappointed.
Yes Virginia, its just GG, with new paint (which looks great btw!!), a little bit more money and whatnot. Another player in the already crowded casual games market.
My guess is they'll lose money hand over fist and everything will head South once the bean counters at IAC start staring suspiciously at the bottomline.
.....or maybe they have access to another type of casual gamer waiting to be set free of the bonds of the existing crop.
However, Torque 2, does sound interesting. We'll see how much of a mess and disparity all these various Torque versions creates.
Bye!
#82
I'm pretty sure they will charge a monthly fee (they could charge up to 14.95 and get away with it), and provide a long list of original games.
The reason game tap took so long to take off was because it was just a client with really old games that people have already played. It wasn't until they started offering exclusive and recently released games that game tap started to rake in the dollars.
I am very certain (at lest I hope) that the guys at GG are signing up studios left and right to bring games to IA that you won't be able to find anywhere else. Then you'll go to IA to play the exclusives, and you will stay for games like MBU.
10/13/2007 (8:50 pm)
I'd just like to say that I predict IA will be a success (and by success I mean turn profit). Well, they will be if IA does what I think it's going to do.I'm pretty sure they will charge a monthly fee (they could charge up to 14.95 and get away with it), and provide a long list of original games.
The reason game tap took so long to take off was because it was just a client with really old games that people have already played. It wasn't until they started offering exclusive and recently released games that game tap started to rake in the dollars.
I am very certain (at lest I hope) that the guys at GG are signing up studios left and right to bring games to IA that you won't be able to find anywhere else. Then you'll go to IA to play the exclusives, and you will stay for games like MBU.
Quote:Correlation does not prove causality.If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...
#83
By golly! You are right. That's what I meant.
Thanks for your feedback and answers. Potential numbers just don't mean much to me. I am interested in HOW a company plans to tap INTO that money pool. What in their product do they feel differentiates them from others?
I fully understand your reluctance to discuss anything which you feel is inappropriate.
Please note, I do honestly care about this as I, too, work in Eugene and want to learn and understand what is happening within our little software community we have in town. I don't want to come across negative or anything, but I am truly interested in what this is all about.
Charlie Malbaurn wrote:
Wow! That's exactly my same thought.
10/13/2007 (8:53 pm)
From Stephen Zepp:Quote:3) I think you mean "using the IA API"
By golly! You are right. That's what I meant.
Thanks for your feedback and answers. Potential numbers just don't mean much to me. I am interested in HOW a company plans to tap INTO that money pool. What in their product do they feel differentiates them from others?
I fully understand your reluctance to discuss anything which you feel is inappropriate.
Please note, I do honestly care about this as I, too, work in Eugene and want to learn and understand what is happening within our little software community we have in town. I don't want to come across negative or anything, but I am truly interested in what this is all about.
Charlie Malbaurn wrote:
Quote:This is one of those things that could work. But the thing to keep in mind here is that just because you can do something really cool, it doesn't mean that people will care for it. Or for that matter are ready for it.
Wow! That's exactly my same thought.
#84
An astute observation Anton, and one I'd like to build on.
What kind of game do you make for those gamers who were hardcore 10 (or fewer) years ago at school and in college, but have since gotten jobs and started families (and thus have less time for games and fall into your definition of casual)? Former hardcore, if you will. Zuma and Bejeweled aren't gonna do it for someone who cut their teeth on Quake or Tribes or Unreal Tournament.
We believe that market is fairly large, and is only going to increase as more gamers "grow up" (no offense to those "grown-ups" who still manage to play games for several hours a day... I envy you!)
Speaking for myself, since I am an example of the person I described above, I want a game I can jump into and out of at will and that is easy enough to pick up, but that still provides a level of competition both when played alone or with friends. Something that doesn't require hours of dedication every day to either advance your character (insert MMO/RPG here), advance your ability (insert FPS here), or advance the storyline/campaign (insert pretty much any retail game here), and something that doesn't make you feel obligated to continue playing past your wife's/child's/dog's bedtime (insert any team/guild game here).
However, I still want a game that takes skill to master (but the skill gain vs. time required ratio should be higher than your average FPS), and that facilitates sh*t-talking to friends while schooling them at it. :)
That's the kind of games we're looking to publish on InstantAction. That's not to say that we won't cross the line on either side of the fence and publish some "casual" and some "hardcore" games, but we're aiming for the gap. And above all else, we're looking to publish high-quality FUN games.
And you all are welcome to label those games however you like. "Casual", "hardcore", "gap", "core casual", "a new kind of casual game", whatever... they're all just words that aren't really going to mean much until you get a chance to play the games. But to dismiss them out of hand before you get that chance because of an arbitrary label, well... we think you'll be missing out. :)
10/13/2007 (8:53 pm)
Quote:Games are categorized as Casual and Hardcore based on their targeted customers. Casual gamers and Hardcore gamers. Casual gamers play games as one of many hobbies or activities. Hardcore gamers don't just play games, gaming is part of their lifestyle.
An astute observation Anton, and one I'd like to build on.
What kind of game do you make for those gamers who were hardcore 10 (or fewer) years ago at school and in college, but have since gotten jobs and started families (and thus have less time for games and fall into your definition of casual)? Former hardcore, if you will. Zuma and Bejeweled aren't gonna do it for someone who cut their teeth on Quake or Tribes or Unreal Tournament.
We believe that market is fairly large, and is only going to increase as more gamers "grow up" (no offense to those "grown-ups" who still manage to play games for several hours a day... I envy you!)
Speaking for myself, since I am an example of the person I described above, I want a game I can jump into and out of at will and that is easy enough to pick up, but that still provides a level of competition both when played alone or with friends. Something that doesn't require hours of dedication every day to either advance your character (insert MMO/RPG here), advance your ability (insert FPS here), or advance the storyline/campaign (insert pretty much any retail game here), and something that doesn't make you feel obligated to continue playing past your wife's/child's/dog's bedtime (insert any team/guild game here).
However, I still want a game that takes skill to master (but the skill gain vs. time required ratio should be higher than your average FPS), and that facilitates sh*t-talking to friends while schooling them at it. :)
That's the kind of games we're looking to publish on InstantAction. That's not to say that we won't cross the line on either side of the fence and publish some "casual" and some "hardcore" games, but we're aiming for the gap. And above all else, we're looking to publish high-quality FUN games.
And you all are welcome to label those games however you like. "Casual", "hardcore", "gap", "core casual", "a new kind of casual game", whatever... they're all just words that aren't really going to mean much until you get a chance to play the games. But to dismiss them out of hand before you get that chance because of an arbitrary label, well... we think you'll be missing out. :)
#85
I don't believe in some assumptions made (I happen to really enjoy both Zuma and Bejeweled, not to mention my wife has stayed up past everyone's bedtime playing these games), but I get the idea behind what you are saying. And there will always be someone who doesn't fit.
I happen to be one of those older guys who stopped playing games about 2.5 years ago (into my mid/late 30's) but have slowly been picking up on the casual and Tycoon (Zoo and Roller Coaster) games. You are right. I can come in and out of a game when I want and don't necessarily feel obligated to keep forging on as I did with FPS or RPGs.
I was recently asked to review a space-sim game and though I really wanted to do it, I just don't have the time or energy to spend on such an in-depth game these days. Unfortunately, I had to decline.
I think it'd be sweet if IAC bought rights to Tribes and tied in a new Tribes game with the introduction to IA. That is a name people know and recognize and will certainly turn heads!
10/13/2007 (9:24 pm)
Thanks Eric. That actually explained A LOT. You said what market you are trying to tap into and why. That really helps in understanding some of the why's and what's of this all.I don't believe in some assumptions made (I happen to really enjoy both Zuma and Bejeweled, not to mention my wife has stayed up past everyone's bedtime playing these games), but I get the idea behind what you are saying. And there will always be someone who doesn't fit.
I happen to be one of those older guys who stopped playing games about 2.5 years ago (into my mid/late 30's) but have slowly been picking up on the casual and Tycoon (Zoo and Roller Coaster) games. You are right. I can come in and out of a game when I want and don't necessarily feel obligated to keep forging on as I did with FPS or RPGs.
I was recently asked to review a space-sim game and though I really wanted to do it, I just don't have the time or energy to spend on such an in-depth game these days. Unfortunately, I had to decline.
I think it'd be sweet if IAC bought rights to Tribes and tied in a new Tribes game with the introduction to IA. That is a name people know and recognize and will certainly turn heads!
#86
Man, you read my mind! My son and I, while returning from IGC, were discussing what incredible industry wide buzz it would produce if IAC funded the purchase of the rights to Tribes and Legions was actually made. What am I saying "buzz"? -- with a frothing fan base from years back and something of this magnitude, it would be a tidal wave of press.
But sad to say, Kyle and I don't have a lot of pull at the board meetings...=P
10/13/2007 (10:10 pm)
@Steven SQuote:I think it'd be sweet if IAC bought rights to Tribes and tied in a new Tribes game with the introduction to IA. That is a name people know and recognize and will certainly turn heads!
Man, you read my mind! My son and I, while returning from IGC, were discussing what incredible industry wide buzz it would produce if IAC funded the purchase of the rights to Tribes and Legions was actually made. What am I saying "buzz"? -- with a frothing fan base from years back and something of this magnitude, it would be a tidal wave of press.
But sad to say, Kyle and I don't have a lot of pull at the board meetings...=P
#87
Thanks for answering those questions. This is what I'm talking about. Nobody [here] wants to rattle the cage or rock the boat because they want to remain in the good graces of the pack. So they'd rather skirt the issue with nonsensical questions and responses, instead of asking pointed questions and sparking intense debate.
Having lofty goals is one thing. Having attainable lofty goals is clearly another. You guys can sing this song until the cows come home, but without the properties (which, any dev with half a brain has already signed to someone else, instead of sitting around waiting for an unproven platform) to back that up, its just a waste of time.
Really, considering that NONE of you at GG have published a compelling game, much less a successful one, where exactly are you getting this notion from that you [GG] - or anyone in Barry's stable - know what that middle ground is? Thus far, no such middle ground exists - and the rest of us with published games - have been doing this with 2000+ man years experience and we know that the line is very solid: You have casual games. Then you have non-casual (no, they're not necessarily hard-core games either) games. There is NO in-between nor middle ground. None. Nada. Zilch. Since there isn't a single game in the history of gaming that disproves my point, go ahead, prove me wrong and show me on - just one - game that fits this bill.
Even as successful as XB Live! - and thus XBLA - is, the reason that you don't see a vast array of games on XBLA is because even MS - with all their inherent incompetence in some areas (Windows Live! anyone?, Games For Windows anyone? DirectX 10 for Vista only, anyone?) - know clearly the difference between casual and non-casual games. In fact, when you submit a game for concept approval, if it is not clear which category it fits in, its either not getting approved or you're going to have to go back to the drawing board. Here, go take a look see.
Right. Then he says.....
No, its not reasonable to assume this. Thats like saying unless you folks are intending on tying the two together in such a way that it makes more sense to use Torgue 2 than anything else. Do this and you.will.fail.again e.g. TorqueScript. While you - and a handful of hobbyists - think its the next version of slice bread, it has - and will continue to be - the bane of any Torque engine because experienced developers like to do things their way; use their tools, bypass anything (with ease) that they don't want. In fact, my guess is that you guys already realize this Archilles Heel or Torque 2 wouldn't even be in development.
Thats pretty much common place for development. So no argument there I don't think.
pssst!! 2008 is in two months and fourteen days. Given what you've already stated, my guess is you're looking at either late 2008 or sometime in 2009. Please be specific.
Which means that you guys are going to be burning money for another year (for a total of 2+) before even having anything (IA, or IA+Torque2) to show for it. I want to be a fly on the wall at the Q2/08 finance meeting with Barry.
Lets see. IA is not geared towards casual games, but thus far, every PR (even the excerpts you posted) have said exactly the opposite; in that the goal (at least in Barry's spreadsheet hugging dreams) is to get a piece of that burgeoning casual market revenue.
Now tell me this, what [IA] game is even going to be ready in such a short time to roll out on the forthcoming - and already in Beta - IA service, that is anything BUT a casual game? Heck, the fact that you folks are citing a $1m cap on budget, is a Red flag. Anyone developer - indie or not - who has a viable property - can get close to, if not more than, $1m at any mainstream publisher. Heck, e.g. Atari will publish anything if it means staying in business for just a while longer.
MBU and Carbonite are BOTH casual games.
OK, you guys STOP IT!! STOP IT!!! Arggggggggggggghhhhhhh. *cough* *choke* *splutter*
MBU is a casual game. GG - and those who have no clue - are just trying to make an exception because everyone's already screaming about how they think that IA is going to be rubbish (I think it is; and thus have no interest in it), with rubbish casual games. Just like the old - and current - GG. See, lookee here.
Once again, my guess is that like so many before it and which had the same or similar lofty goals, IA is destined to be DOA. Lets just hope that Torque2 fares any better.
@ Charlie
Charlie Malbaurn wrote:
Damn you Charlie!!! It tooks me tomes to point that out; though most here seem to have clearly missed it. Then there you go being all straight to the point, eloquent and stuff. :)
btw, a must read for everyone in this thread
The Basic Marketing Plan For Indie Games
I'm off to church. TTYL.
10/14/2007 (6:08 am)
@ StephenThanks for answering those questions. This is what I'm talking about. Nobody [here] wants to rattle the cage or rock the boat because they want to remain in the good graces of the pack. So they'd rather skirt the issue with nonsensical questions and responses, instead of asking pointed questions and sparking intense debate.
Quote:The focus of IA is on high production quality, visually appealing core games. Obviously everyone in this thread seems to have a different definition of "casual" and "hard core" games--
Having lofty goals is one thing. Having attainable lofty goals is clearly another. You guys can sing this song until the cows come home, but without the properties (which, any dev with half a brain has already signed to someone else, instead of sitting around waiting for an unproven platform) to back that up, its just a waste of time.
Quote:we see a growing middle ground that has some of both the appeal and characteristics of each. A quote from Josh Williams:
Really, considering that NONE of you at GG have published a compelling game, much less a successful one, where exactly are you getting this notion from that you [GG] - or anyone in Barry's stable - know what that middle ground is? Thus far, no such middle ground exists - and the rest of us with published games - have been doing this with 2000+ man years experience and we know that the line is very solid: You have casual games. Then you have non-casual (no, they're not necessarily hard-core games either) games. There is NO in-between nor middle ground. None. Nada. Zilch. Since there isn't a single game in the history of gaming that disproves my point, go ahead, prove me wrong and show me on - just one - game that fits this bill.
Even as successful as XB Live! - and thus XBLA - is, the reason that you don't see a vast array of games on XBLA is because even MS - with all their inherent incompetence in some areas (Windows Live! anyone?, Games For Windows anyone? DirectX 10 for Vista only, anyone?) - know clearly the difference between casual and non-casual games. In fact, when you submit a game for concept approval, if it is not clear which category it fits in, its either not getting approved or you're going to have to go back to the drawing board. Here, go take a look see.
Quote:5. IA and Torque 2 are pretty much completely unrelated. You do not need to use any Torque products to make games for IA,
Right. Then he says.....
Quote:but of course since one company is doing both Torque 2 and IA, it's reasonable to assume that Torque 2 would be even easier than other engines to work within IA. Technology wise however, they are unrelated in just about every way.
No, its not reasonable to assume this. Thats like saying unless you folks are intending on tying the two together in such a way that it makes more sense to use Torgue 2 than anything else. Do this and you.will.fail.again e.g. TorqueScript. While you - and a handful of hobbyists - think its the next version of slice bread, it has - and will continue to be - the bane of any Torque engine because experienced developers like to do things their way; use their tools, bypass anything (with ease) that they don't want. In fact, my guess is that you guys already realize this Archilles Heel or Torque 2 wouldn't even be in development.
Quote:A quick follow-up here on transparent development, since it is apropos to the above question (or more directly, to responses I expect to my response): Transparent development means to us that we tell you things as soon as it makes good sense, and most importantly as they happen.
Thats pretty much common place for development. So no argument there I don't think.
Quote:There should be no question or thought in anyone's mind that Torque 2 is even close to being ready to
make games with right now -- it's not, and won't be until release in 2008.
pssst!! 2008 is in two months and fourteen days. Given what you've already stated, my guess is you're looking at either late 2008 or sometime in 2009. Please be specific.
Which means that you guys are going to be burning money for another year (for a total of 2+) before even having anything (IA, or IA+Torque2) to show for it. I want to be a fly on the wall at the Q2/08 finance meeting with Barry.
Lets see. IA is not geared towards casual games, but thus far, every PR (even the excerpts you posted) have said exactly the opposite; in that the goal (at least in Barry's spreadsheet hugging dreams) is to get a piece of that burgeoning casual market revenue.
Now tell me this, what [IA] game is even going to be ready in such a short time to roll out on the forthcoming - and already in Beta - IA service, that is anything BUT a casual game? Heck, the fact that you folks are citing a $1m cap on budget, is a Red flag. Anyone developer - indie or not - who has a viable property - can get close to, if not more than, $1m at any mainstream publisher. Heck, e.g. Atari will publish anything if it means staying in business for just a while longer.
MBU and Carbonite are BOTH casual games.
OK, you guys STOP IT!! STOP IT!!! Arggggggggggggghhhhhhh. *cough* *choke* *splutter*
MBU is a casual game. GG - and those who have no clue - are just trying to make an exception because everyone's already screaming about how they think that IA is going to be rubbish (I think it is; and thus have no interest in it), with rubbish casual games. Just like the old - and current - GG. See, lookee here.
Once again, my guess is that like so many before it and which had the same or similar lofty goals, IA is destined to be DOA. Lets just hope that Torque2 fares any better.
@ Charlie
Charlie Malbaurn wrote:
Quote:This is one of those things that could work. But the thing to keep in mind here is that just because you can do something really cool, it doesn't mean that people will care for it. Or for that matter are ready for it.
Damn you Charlie!!! It tooks me tomes to point that out; though most here seem to have clearly missed it. Then there you go being all straight to the point, eloquent and stuff. :)
btw, a must read for everyone in this thread
The Basic Marketing Plan For Indie Games
I'm off to church. TTYL.
#88
Marble Blast Ultra EXTREME!
Kidding.. (please don't kill me GG).
10/14/2007 (7:01 am)
Quote:Now tell me this, what [IA] game is even going to be ready in such a short time to roll out on the forthcoming - and already in Beta
Marble Blast Ultra EXTREME!
Kidding.. (please don't kill me GG).
#89
(mod snipped)
wouldn't that be awesome. I'd be just as satisfied if Legions appeared on IA - or anything really with Tribes-like gameplay :o
10/14/2007 (7:30 am)
There are times when playing MBU multiplayer where I get the same feeling of awesomeness that I got when I played Tribes for the first time. I really don't think you can say that MBU is casual game, hands down, end of story. Maybe for you it is, but for others it isn't. When MBU first came out, I played the multiplayer portion just about every single day for hours on end. To me, that isn't casual.(mod snipped)
Quote:
I think it'd be sweet if IAC bought rights to Tribes and tied in a new Tribes game with the introduction to IA. That is a name people know and recognize and will certainly turn heads!
wouldn't that be awesome. I'd be just as satisfied if Legions appeared on IA - or anything really with Tribes-like gameplay :o
#90
Can argue this until the cows come home, but while they may not be Halo 3 numbers MBU was quite successful thank you ;)
And to refute/correct your point more directly: Your statement is misleading. If you want to say "GG hasn't published a game compelling to me, much less one I consider successful" then that's fine. But the way you said it is flat out completely untrue--the collective gameology of GG employess (not to mention InstantAction partners) is orders of magnitude larger than what you've listed. I'll certainly stipulate this list of games wasn't made while they were at GarageGames, but if you want to continue to press that particular point then you will have to stipulate that your past gameology doesn't count either.
On Casual vs Core :
You linked to Wikipedia, so I'll include a relevant section directly:
Points 1, 3, and 4 have absolutely no correlation with MBU. You might argue 1 if you wish, but will receive strong counter-argument from many (hundreds of thousands) of people that have actually played MBU, including those above. In any rational argument, if a game doesn't fit the specific points of a definition, that implies directly that the game does not completely meet the definition--which further implies a categorization should exist that fits the game--and we are calling that "core games".
Thanks for proving my point :) Games that wouldn't be approved by the Microsoft Casual Games division are most probably exactly what we are looking for (if of course the reason the game wouldn't be accepted by them is that they don't fit the strict definition of Casual Games in MS's eyes, not production/quality/other unrelated reasons).
I'll personally not be responding directly to "casual, not casual, IA won't work because all your games are casual" style arguments--in some ways (this is an analogy, I'm certainly not trying to be dismissive of anyone's opinions or position) it's like arguing flat vs round earth--If I want to sail around the world, you must first accept that the earth is round before you will accept that I might succeed. If you will not accept that the earth is round, then there is no possible way I can convince you to accept that I even have a chance of success in my attempts to sail around the world, and beyond a certain point discussing it becomes worthless :)
To clarify expected release dates: InstantAction.com is currently expected to go live in Q1 2008. Torque 2 does not yet have a firmer release period than simply "sometime in 2008", but when it does we'll let folks know.
You are reading more into this than I stated, so I'd like to clear it up. The only point I'm making here is that if you use an engine/set of libraries/whatever that's not previously been used on InstantAction, you will be looking at figuring out the best way to use the InstantAction API and features within your framework.
I'm not in any way talking about huge design changes or dozens of months of implementation--I'm simply saying that just like any other external service a game might connect to, you'll need to implement the game engine's side of leveraging IA's feature set and capabilities. Since GG makes both IA and Torque 2, it's pretty highly likely that you could use existing game engine enhancements to more smoothly integrate with IA.
To try to give another analogy, look at Microsoft's XBLiveArcade interface. It has a set of features and capabilities (and requirements) that are exposed as an API, and any game must interface with this service to work on this service. No game engine or game development environment is necessarily going to be best or easiest to develop with against XBLiveArcade, but if you can leverage work that's already been performed within a particular engine, then you are farther along than other engines that don't have that work product.
To try to make this point even more clear--I'm not talking about the lower level implementation requirements of this analogy such as dealing with the resources available, the rendering system, or anything along those lines--none of that really applies to InstantAction.
Out of the current games in development for IA, less than 1/3 are Torque powered games. Those that are Torque powered games are further assisted by the interfacing work with IA that has already been done, but those that aren't will have to implement the engine specific portion of said interfacing work themselves.
The "advantage" if you will that Torque powered games may have regarding interfacing with IA is small, but present. It's not do to any design or technical issues, but simply because a larger chance exists that someone has done the work your game needs for interfacing, and in the case of GG will assist you in that portion of the process.
10/14/2007 (10:40 am)
Quote:
Really, considering that NONE of you at GG have published a compelling game, much less a successful one,
Can argue this until the cows come home, but while they may not be Halo 3 numbers MBU was quite successful thank you ;)
And to refute/correct your point more directly: Your statement is misleading. If you want to say "GG hasn't published a game compelling to me, much less one I consider successful" then that's fine. But the way you said it is flat out completely untrue--the collective gameology of GG employess (not to mention InstantAction partners) is orders of magnitude larger than what you've listed. I'll certainly stipulate this list of games wasn't made while they were at GarageGames, but if you want to continue to press that particular point then you will have to stipulate that your past gameology doesn't count either.
On Casual vs Core :
You linked to Wikipedia, so I'll include a relevant section directly:
Quote:
* Extremely simple gameplay, like a puzzle game that can be played entirely using a one-button mouse or cellphone keypad
* Allowing gameplay in short bursts, during work breaks or, in the case of portable and cell phone games, on public transportation
* The ability to quickly reach a final stage, or continuous play with no need to save the game
* 2D, abstract graphics
* Some variant on a "try before you buy" business model
Points 1, 3, and 4 have absolutely no correlation with MBU. You might argue 1 if you wish, but will receive strong counter-argument from many (hundreds of thousands) of people that have actually played MBU, including those above. In any rational argument, if a game doesn't fit the specific points of a definition, that implies directly that the game does not completely meet the definition--which further implies a categorization should exist that fits the game--and we are calling that "core games".
Quote:
In fact, when you submit a game for concept approval, if it is not clear which category it fits in, its either not getting approved or you're going to have to go back to the drawing board.
Thanks for proving my point :) Games that wouldn't be approved by the Microsoft Casual Games division are most probably exactly what we are looking for (if of course the reason the game wouldn't be accepted by them is that they don't fit the strict definition of Casual Games in MS's eyes, not production/quality/other unrelated reasons).
I'll personally not be responding directly to "casual, not casual, IA won't work because all your games are casual" style arguments--in some ways (this is an analogy, I'm certainly not trying to be dismissive of anyone's opinions or position) it's like arguing flat vs round earth--If I want to sail around the world, you must first accept that the earth is round before you will accept that I might succeed. If you will not accept that the earth is round, then there is no possible way I can convince you to accept that I even have a chance of success in my attempts to sail around the world, and beyond a certain point discussing it becomes worthless :)
To clarify expected release dates: InstantAction.com is currently expected to go live in Q1 2008. Torque 2 does not yet have a firmer release period than simply "sometime in 2008", but when it does we'll let folks know.
Quote:
it's reasonable to assume that Torque 2 would be even easier than other engines to work within IA.
Quote:
No, its not reasonable to assume this. Thats like saying unless you folks are intending on tying the two together in such a way that it makes more sense to use Torgue 2 than anything else.
You are reading more into this than I stated, so I'd like to clear it up. The only point I'm making here is that if you use an engine/set of libraries/whatever that's not previously been used on InstantAction, you will be looking at figuring out the best way to use the InstantAction API and features within your framework.
I'm not in any way talking about huge design changes or dozens of months of implementation--I'm simply saying that just like any other external service a game might connect to, you'll need to implement the game engine's side of leveraging IA's feature set and capabilities. Since GG makes both IA and Torque 2, it's pretty highly likely that you could use existing game engine enhancements to more smoothly integrate with IA.
To try to give another analogy, look at Microsoft's XBLiveArcade interface. It has a set of features and capabilities (and requirements) that are exposed as an API, and any game must interface with this service to work on this service. No game engine or game development environment is necessarily going to be best or easiest to develop with against XBLiveArcade, but if you can leverage work that's already been performed within a particular engine, then you are farther along than other engines that don't have that work product.
To try to make this point even more clear--I'm not talking about the lower level implementation requirements of this analogy such as dealing with the resources available, the rendering system, or anything along those lines--none of that really applies to InstantAction.
Out of the current games in development for IA, less than 1/3 are Torque powered games. Those that are Torque powered games are further assisted by the interfacing work with IA that has already been done, but those that aren't will have to implement the engine specific portion of said interfacing work themselves.
The "advantage" if you will that Torque powered games may have regarding interfacing with IA is small, but present. It's not do to any design or technical issues, but simply because a larger chance exists that someone has done the work your game needs for interfacing, and in the case of GG will assist you in that portion of the process.
#91
(mod snipped--and a quick apology, I should have modded before I responded. The comment this response was to has been modded as well).
Anyway, I can see where this is going, so, I'm going to take a step back, now that I've pretty much said all that I wanted to say about the [IA + Torque future] subject. Let the record show that in a span of less than three weeks since this farce broke, I achieved a lot more in two threads, than ALL of you [haters] who have been hanging here since day one - combined.
My web dude has finished updating my blog, so, my IAC/GG article which I've been working on, will be published later this week.
@ Stephen
Thanks for all the information, informative or otherwise. All things said and done, ribbing, cajoling and prodding aside, you truly are a [good] trooper. You'll do great things.
10/14/2007 (11:16 am)
@ Geoff(mod snipped--and a quick apology, I should have modded before I responded. The comment this response was to has been modded as well).
Anyway, I can see where this is going, so, I'm going to take a step back, now that I've pretty much said all that I wanted to say about the [IA + Torque future] subject. Let the record show that in a span of less than three weeks since this farce broke, I achieved a lot more in two threads, than ALL of you [haters] who have been hanging here since day one - combined.
My web dude has finished updating my blog, so, my IAC/GG article which I've been working on, will be published later this week.
@ Stephen
Thanks for all the information, informative or otherwise. All things said and done, ribbing, cajoling and prodding aside, you truly are a [good] trooper. You'll do great things.
#92
Derek: sorry I didn't get it modded out before you were frustrated enough to respond. I would have preferred you let it go, but hey.
Heh..I guess you can take credit if you like, but the information flow was a business decision made by a team of 6 people over 4 months (of course, it wasn't the only decision :P)--not the result of one poster prodding ;) It would have happened regardless of who the questions/comments came from, although I will admit it was good to get some highly negative opinions as well as positive ones.
Thanks man...I honestly don't agree with your positions, and of course I hope in the mid and long run you are demonstrated to be incorrect (nothing personal, but I do work for GG ;) ), but it is nice to get a compliment from someone opposed to a lot of what I have said :) Wish you luck as well.
10/14/2007 (11:28 am)
Geoff: please don't try to play around the rules--saying you won't refer to something is just as insulting as making the statement itself.Derek: sorry I didn't get it modded out before you were frustrated enough to respond. I would have preferred you let it go, but hey.
Quote:
I achieved a lot more in two threads, than ALL of you who have been hanging here since day one - combined.
Heh..I guess you can take credit if you like, but the information flow was a business decision made by a team of 6 people over 4 months (of course, it wasn't the only decision :P)--not the result of one poster prodding ;) It would have happened regardless of who the questions/comments came from, although I will admit it was good to get some highly negative opinions as well as positive ones.
Quote:
Thanks for all the information, informative or otherwise. All things said and done, ribbing, cajoling and prodding aside, you truly are a [good] trooper. You'll do great things.
Thanks man...I honestly don't agree with your positions, and of course I hope in the mid and long run you are demonstrated to be incorrect (nothing personal, but I do work for GG ;) ), but it is nice to get a compliment from someone opposed to a lot of what I have said :) Wish you luck as well.
#93
Definitely a valid point, but a first run (or even established, but small) studio with a game isn't going to be in a particularly advantageous negotiation position for that money--most likely they will lose control of their IP, or be given advances that have to come out of royalties, or a smaller portion of the royalties than what we will offer.
I don't want to give the impression that any publishing relationship is going to be absolutely and incredibly perfect for the developer team and absolutely terrible, over-generous or completely restrictive for GG, but we do want to change the publisher/developer relationship as one of our core values, and our publishing agreements with existing and future developers is working strongly towards that goal.
Discussing specifics of any publishing relationship is a "business restricted" discussion that isn't appropriate for completely public exposure, but some key points that have been released publicly in other media include:
--developer maintains ownership of IP
--developer isn't given advances against royalties, but funding as part of the total deal (the more funding you need the less royalties you will receive, but there is no "dead zone" where you get zero royalties until all of your up front funding is paid off).
There isn't much more (if anything) that I can discuss regarding the specifics of our publishing agreement--if you have a game that you feel is appropriate for IA and want to discuss a relationship, contact us and if appropriate we'll get the process started.
10/14/2007 (11:37 am)
I missed a point I meant to follow up on, so here it is:Quote:
Heck, the fact that you folks are citing a $1m cap on budget, is a Red flag. Anyone developer - indie or not - who has a viable property - can get close to, if not more than, $1m at any mainstream publisher. Heck, e.g. Atari will publish anything if it means staying in business for just a while longer.
Definitely a valid point, but a first run (or even established, but small) studio with a game isn't going to be in a particularly advantageous negotiation position for that money--most likely they will lose control of their IP, or be given advances that have to come out of royalties, or a smaller portion of the royalties than what we will offer.
I don't want to give the impression that any publishing relationship is going to be absolutely and incredibly perfect for the developer team and absolutely terrible, over-generous or completely restrictive for GG, but we do want to change the publisher/developer relationship as one of our core values, and our publishing agreements with existing and future developers is working strongly towards that goal.
Discussing specifics of any publishing relationship is a "business restricted" discussion that isn't appropriate for completely public exposure, but some key points that have been released publicly in other media include:
--developer maintains ownership of IP
--developer isn't given advances against royalties, but funding as part of the total deal (the more funding you need the less royalties you will receive, but there is no "dead zone" where you get zero royalties until all of your up front funding is paid off).
There isn't much more (if anything) that I can discuss regarding the specifics of our publishing agreement--if you have a game that you feel is appropriate for IA and want to discuss a relationship, contact us and if appropriate we'll get the process started.
#94
I agree. But I figured you'd mod it anyway, so I figured I'd still vent. :)
LOL!!! Yeah, but one poster's prodding did a lot more than anyone could've imagine. hehe. Saying that it was going to happen anyway is not playing fair; because anyone could have very well said that. After the fact.
Actually, either you misunderstood me or I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. I was speaking in terms of the genre in question and a benchmark to go by. Any game that makes money for the developers/publishers, is a success. Variable numbers and comparisons are irrelevant if you have money in the bank. I've lived by that code since day one; hence the reason I still do my style of games regardless of what anyone says or thinks. If it works for me and there are people buying it, its all good.
Also, I want to be perfectly clear, I have nothing against Marble Blast - or any developer effort for that matter. I don't own it and I don't play it. And thats because the only casual games I own are predominantly puzzles, stuff like Bejeweled etc and which I can either play on my Axim X50v, Samsung Blackjack cell phone, PSP or my DS. Though now with all this talk, I may just check it out.
Excellent point. Assuming that is in fact the plan, I'll concede that. But in saying that however, that is exactly how GG started out almost eight years ago.
10/14/2007 (11:41 am)
@ StephenQuote:Derek: sorry I didn't get it modded out before you were frustrated enough to respond. I would have preferred you let it go, but hey.
I agree. But I figured you'd mod it anyway, so I figured I'd still vent. :)
Quote:Heh..I guess you can take credit if you like, but the information flow was a business decision made by a team of 6 people over 4 months (of course, it wasn't the only decision :P)--not the result of one poster prodding ;) It would have happened regardless of who the questions/comments came from, although I will admit it was good to get some highly negative opinions as well as positive ones.
LOL!!! Yeah, but one poster's prodding did a lot more than anyone could've imagine. hehe. Saying that it was going to happen anyway is not playing fair; because anyone could have very well said that. After the fact.
Quote:Can argue this until the cows come home, but while they may not be Halo 3 numbers MBU was quite successful thank you ;)
Actually, either you misunderstood me or I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. I was speaking in terms of the genre in question and a benchmark to go by. Any game that makes money for the developers/publishers, is a success. Variable numbers and comparisons are irrelevant if you have money in the bank. I've lived by that code since day one; hence the reason I still do my style of games regardless of what anyone says or thinks. If it works for me and there are people buying it, its all good.
Also, I want to be perfectly clear, I have nothing against Marble Blast - or any developer effort for that matter. I don't own it and I don't play it. And thats because the only casual games I own are predominantly puzzles, stuff like Bejeweled etc and which I can either play on my Axim X50v, Samsung Blackjack cell phone, PSP or my DS. Though now with all this talk, I may just check it out.
Quote:Thanks for proving my point :) Games that wouldn't be approved by the Microsoft Casual Games division are most probably exactly what we are looking for (if of course the reason the game wouldn't be accepted by them is that they don't fit the strict definition of Casual Games in MS's eyes, not production/quality/other unrelated reasons).
Excellent point. Assuming that is in fact the plan, I'll concede that. But in saying that however, that is exactly how GG started out almost eight years ago.
#95
Very true indeed. But it also depends on the developer though and how badly they (a) need the money (b) they need to get their product done and out. I know devs who have walked away from million dollar deals for various reasons - all of which are based on publisher shenanigans. In fact, come to think of it, I was one of them.
And thats the crux of the developer/publisher relationship. There are many good relationships out there and which suddenly fall apart. Thats what studio closures, people moving, company splits (e.g. Monolith from Vivendi, CryTek from UBI and a ton of others). Oh, then there's that whole G.O.D. stint which Mike Wilson started and later sold to Take 2. Only to show up later as Gamecock (no, you can't make this stuff up).
The road to good intentions is - more often than not - paved with broken promises.
Interesting.
I think everyone here understands that. Again, I never have asked about anything to do with business relationships. If I was interested in that, I'd pick up the phone or fire off an email.
My interest - as I've said over and over again - was in TGEA for our next adopted game engine because I've grown tired of re-inventing the wheel and don't want to write another graphics renderer if my life depended on it. I just happened to get caught up in this [IA] discussion because the IAC issue was going on when I came back to see where TGEA was from the last time I looked at it a few years back. I have since all but settled on Unigine. But thats not to say that I won't look at Torque 2 when it does come out.
10/14/2007 (11:52 am)
Quote:
Definitely a valid point, but a first run (or even established, but small) studio with a game isn't going to be in a particularly advantageous negotiation position for that money--most likely they will lose control of their IP, or be given advances that have to come out of royalties, or a smaller portion of the royalties than what we will offer.
Very true indeed. But it also depends on the developer though and how badly they (a) need the money (b) they need to get their product done and out. I know devs who have walked away from million dollar deals for various reasons - all of which are based on publisher shenanigans. In fact, come to think of it, I was one of them.
Quote:I don't want to give the impression that any publishing relationship is going to be absolutely and incredibly perfect for the developer team and absolutely terrible, over-generous or completely restrictive for GG, but we do want to change the publisher/developer relationship as one of our core values, and our publishing agreements with existing and future developers is working strongly towards that goal.
And thats the crux of the developer/publisher relationship. There are many good relationships out there and which suddenly fall apart. Thats what studio closures, people moving, company splits (e.g. Monolith from Vivendi, CryTek from UBI and a ton of others). Oh, then there's that whole G.O.D. stint which Mike Wilson started and later sold to Take 2. Only to show up later as Gamecock (no, you can't make this stuff up).
The road to good intentions is - more often than not - paved with broken promises.
Quote:
Discussing specifics of any publishing relationship is a "business restricted" discussion that isn't appropriate for completely public exposure, but some key points that have been released publicly in other media include:
--developer maintains ownership of IP
--developer isn't given advances against royalties, but funding as part of the total deal (the more funding you need the less royalties you will receive, but there is no "dead zone" where you get zero royalties until all of your up front funding is paid off).
Interesting.
Quote:
There isn't much more (if anything) that I can discuss regarding the specifics of our publishing agreement--if you have a game that you feel is appropriate for IA and want to discuss a relationship, contact us and if appropriate we'll get the process started.
I think everyone here understands that. Again, I never have asked about anything to do with business relationships. If I was interested in that, I'd pick up the phone or fire off an email.
My interest - as I've said over and over again - was in TGEA for our next adopted game engine because I've grown tired of re-inventing the wheel and don't want to write another graphics renderer if my life depended on it. I just happened to get caught up in this [IA] discussion because the IAC issue was going on when I came back to see where TGEA was from the last time I looked at it a few years back. I have since all but settled on Unigine. But thats not to say that I won't look at Torque 2 when it does come out.
#96
Fair enough--thanks for clearing that up.
And that, honestly, wraps it all up and (hopefully at least) makes it all make sense:
Publishing games made by indies that go beyond bubble poppers/match 3 level if development, and more importantly game play, has always been a core goal of GG. Bootstrapping, and simply having a Game Store hasn't cut the mustard--games weren't of the grade and style (core games) that we wanted for the most part, and the games didn't get much penetration into larger market places that would make both the developers, and of course us as the publishers, successful in the big picture.
And this is why both the IAC partnership and InstantAction.com itself came about: we still have that core goal, but we needed a different strategy for success. We needed additional resources, both for ourselves, and for the developers themselves (as part of a publishing agreement with us) to not only make the games themselves, but make the infrastructure and communicate the message in an organized way.
GG, IAC, and our development partners feel very strongly that this is a strategy with a much higher expectation of success than what we've done previously, and everyone in that troika is extremely excited to be a part--as always, the final proof is in the pudding and it will be quite honestly years before anything is 100% proven one way or the other, but even if it doesn't make a gazillion dollars, disruption of the industry in how games get made, and games get played is also a goal.
Of course, gazillions of dollars isn't a bad goal either ;)
10/14/2007 (11:59 am)
Quote:
Actually, either you misunderstood me or I wasn't as clear as I thought I was. I was speaking in terms of the genre in question and a benchmark to go by.
Fair enough--thanks for clearing that up.
Quote:
But in saying that however, that is exactly how GG started out almost eight years ago.
And that, honestly, wraps it all up and (hopefully at least) makes it all make sense:
Publishing games made by indies that go beyond bubble poppers/match 3 level if development, and more importantly game play, has always been a core goal of GG. Bootstrapping, and simply having a Game Store hasn't cut the mustard--games weren't of the grade and style (core games) that we wanted for the most part, and the games didn't get much penetration into larger market places that would make both the developers, and of course us as the publishers, successful in the big picture.
And this is why both the IAC partnership and InstantAction.com itself came about: we still have that core goal, but we needed a different strategy for success. We needed additional resources, both for ourselves, and for the developers themselves (as part of a publishing agreement with us) to not only make the games themselves, but make the infrastructure and communicate the message in an organized way.
GG, IAC, and our development partners feel very strongly that this is a strategy with a much higher expectation of success than what we've done previously, and everyone in that troika is extremely excited to be a part--as always, the final proof is in the pudding and it will be quite honestly years before anything is 100% proven one way or the other, but even if it doesn't make a gazillion dollars, disruption of the industry in how games get made, and games get played is also a goal.
Of course, gazillions of dollars isn't a bad goal either ;)
#97
10/14/2007 (12:03 pm)
Browser based games = *yawn*
#98
1.
Torque is a viable solution on many levels of development. Familiarity and skilled programmers are a must for games that are defined as non-standard.
2.
We are working on a project directly with GG. We were able to get our game running in a very alpha build of IA within 4 hours. Granted, it is using TGB, but the process was relatively painless and what was needed related to the specific engine was moot. An api is an api.
3.
"Casual" and "Hardcore" are industry buzzwords that in the long-run mean nothing to the consumer. The categories should be centered on more specific terms such as, time to play and attention required.
4.
On that note, money and development time has nothing to do with category. You'd be surprised what you can develop in under a year and under a million.
5.
We plan on releasing at IA launch time and the time frame is very reasonable. You'd be amazed at the progress they have made in a short period of time for IA.
6.
@Mike Stoddart
Personal opinion has nothing to do with this discussion. Services such as Yahoo games are for an entirely different market.
7.
I believe, the reason for the choice in browser play is convenience. Just because GameTap loads its own application does not make it better. Ease of use is key. I would rather load up a web page interface than GameTap's horrific interface and wait as they load their video ads. Steam is a headache and extremely slow. IA is fast and easy, but maintains the ability to build whatever you want for it. Options such as switching between games with the same group of players are a fresh way of looking at it.
8.
People say that the biggest hindrance of the industry is lack of creativity. Tapping into the indie market and mod community is where the creativity lies. IA gives smaller developers the ability to showcase their games without the hurdles of big publishers. Publishers look at the market from old business models such as the movie and music world. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. GG is offering a modern view. Toss it out there and give it a chance. More risk, but more reward.
Conclusion:
I am in no way a GG fanboy. I have had many "f#$king torque" moments. I do have to state that the atmosphere at the conference was extremely positive and exciting. Talking to Stephen at the conference, I got the impression that Torque 2 and IA are not the usual, "this would be cool" attitude of the past, but a "this is happening and soon" attitude. They have a new responsiveness that isn't limited by budget anymore. They have the backing and are taking full advantage of it.
Just riffing with many of the GG guys about ideas was truly awesome. The new GG is great. I hope everything comes to fruition and they really change the business by breaking the mold of having to fight for your ideas.
Greg Kellerman
Lead Designer - Planet 12
Frozen Codebase LLC.
10/14/2007 (12:53 pm)
Good conversation. While this is my first post, I'll state that I have worked with the torque suite for many years and have actively developed with versions of the engine at a professional level. Granted, certain versions of the engine have proved to be "bang head on wall" frustrating, we do have a game releasing on XBLA that is beyond what would be expected with a FPS core engine.1.
Torque is a viable solution on many levels of development. Familiarity and skilled programmers are a must for games that are defined as non-standard.
2.
We are working on a project directly with GG. We were able to get our game running in a very alpha build of IA within 4 hours. Granted, it is using TGB, but the process was relatively painless and what was needed related to the specific engine was moot. An api is an api.
3.
"Casual" and "Hardcore" are industry buzzwords that in the long-run mean nothing to the consumer. The categories should be centered on more specific terms such as, time to play and attention required.
4.
On that note, money and development time has nothing to do with category. You'd be surprised what you can develop in under a year and under a million.
5.
We plan on releasing at IA launch time and the time frame is very reasonable. You'd be amazed at the progress they have made in a short period of time for IA.
6.
@Mike Stoddart
Personal opinion has nothing to do with this discussion. Services such as Yahoo games are for an entirely different market.
7.
I believe, the reason for the choice in browser play is convenience. Just because GameTap loads its own application does not make it better. Ease of use is key. I would rather load up a web page interface than GameTap's horrific interface and wait as they load their video ads. Steam is a headache and extremely slow. IA is fast and easy, but maintains the ability to build whatever you want for it. Options such as switching between games with the same group of players are a fresh way of looking at it.
8.
People say that the biggest hindrance of the industry is lack of creativity. Tapping into the indie market and mod community is where the creativity lies. IA gives smaller developers the ability to showcase their games without the hurdles of big publishers. Publishers look at the market from old business models such as the movie and music world. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. GG is offering a modern view. Toss it out there and give it a chance. More risk, but more reward.
Conclusion:
I am in no way a GG fanboy. I have had many "f#$king torque" moments. I do have to state that the atmosphere at the conference was extremely positive and exciting. Talking to Stephen at the conference, I got the impression that Torque 2 and IA are not the usual, "this would be cool" attitude of the past, but a "this is happening and soon" attitude. They have a new responsiveness that isn't limited by budget anymore. They have the backing and are taking full advantage of it.
Just riffing with many of the GG guys about ideas was truly awesome. The new GG is great. I hope everything comes to fruition and they really change the business by breaking the mold of having to fight for your ideas.
Greg Kellerman
Lead Designer - Planet 12
Frozen Codebase LLC.
#99
Thanks for providing your perspective Greg--it's great to have additional information from a 3rd party that has direct experience with IA at this point, since it was still mostly just me from the "providing information" side :)
10/14/2007 (1:50 pm)
Took care of the double post (and resulting comments) since I had mod interface up :)Thanks for providing your perspective Greg--it's great to have additional information from a 3rd party that has direct experience with IA at this point, since it was still mostly just me from the "providing information" side :)
#100
Now, I've tried to read all the posts, even the ones i don't agree with, but I haven't spotted the one real question that should be the only one that matters:
What happens if IA fails?
I mean, sure there's a lot of people speculating that it will or will not fail, but I don't see anything being said stating what happens if it does.
Is there a back up plan? Will the doors shut down? Do you guys have the option to buy back the company if they choose to close it down?
I know there is an answer to this because nobody who says they care as much about the people as GG does, would ever sell out with everything banking on one idea without a back up. Right?
I would think that with GG's position in the indy world, if IA did fail, someone would come along and buy it out.
I hope I'm right about that. A word of assurance would be nice though
10/14/2007 (5:33 pm)
Oh boy is this getting to be a long one.Now, I've tried to read all the posts, even the ones i don't agree with, but I haven't spotted the one real question that should be the only one that matters:
What happens if IA fails?
I mean, sure there's a lot of people speculating that it will or will not fail, but I don't see anything being said stating what happens if it does.
Is there a back up plan? Will the doors shut down? Do you guys have the option to buy back the company if they choose to close it down?
I know there is an answer to this because nobody who says they care as much about the people as GG does, would ever sell out with everything banking on one idea without a back up. Right?
I would think that with GG's position in the indy world, if IA did fail, someone would come along and buy it out.
I hope I'm right about that. A word of assurance would be nice though
Torque Owner Mike Rowley
Mike Rowley
I know they had a hard time getting people to pay that for a while. I can only base my opinion on the 1 platform. I could easily be proven wrong tho. (it wouldn't be the first time. ;-)
Playing in a browser window is the same as playing in any other window. It's just a window. (with buttons at the top)