[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Anyone on this list?
Xarvh Admin wrote:
> Please take a look at the site.
Looks like it'll be fun. I'm glad you're not going
to give up.
> Of course, but only 'cause i'm not going to trust anyone....
> i must be able
> to complete the entire project by myself: code, port, GFX, SFX, Music, site,
> documentation, rules, testing.
That's good, so any help you get would just be a bonus? I really
don't suggest that anyone assume sole responsibility for testing a
program they've made themselves though!
> This won't fail.
> Shall I work on it for 20 years, *this* won't fail.
> > Games *are* personal visions. I can't tell you the number of times I've
> > seen wildly enthusiastic people with ideas for games who seem to think that
> > I'll just *obviously* want to jump in and help them. Well, I'm sorry but I
> > have some great ideas of my own.
> Yes, i know, i've lots of good ideas none likes... =)
It's generally not a problem of people not /liking/ another person's
game idea. It's just that game ideas are, as I think Steve said,
so much cheaper than the originator of such an idea would ever like
to think, compared with the rest of the work involved.
> > It follows that people will not join your project just because it's a good
> > idea. They *may* join if they see a great code-base emerging - but to
> > REALLY attract developers, they need to see the whole thing basically
> > working - playable, etc.
> So, they'll join when all work's over...
It's a symptom of everyone having their own great game idea,
I think, that people are so reluctant to work on other peoples'
games. It's like admitting failure in your own vision, never
mind that the other person has actually written a slew of code.
> > HOWEVER, there is a lot to be gained by writing SUPPORT TOOLS for games
> > writers in a community setting. I put as much of the code from my solo
> > game projects into my shared library code project (PLIB) - so that the
> > ratio of game-specific code to shared-library-code is as small as possible.
> I can't understand this.
> There is an *overwhelming* amount of libraries and tools for games, and no
Libraries, yes. I am very pleased with the state of Linux's free
development libraries, generally.
Tools -- no, there are sadly big gaps on the 'free' side of things.
Someone (I think Steve, again) mentioned that 3d modelling/animation
is not covered satisfactorily in the free software domain, and that's
a hell of a big missing piece in putting together a modern game (we'd
hear more vocal whinging about that if this list had a more fair
representation of the set of skills that are required to turn out a
game, not just the coders). Blender could have been a contender... it
may yet be so, if the new development efforts steer it back away from
'Blender As The Game Engine' to 'Blender As The Modeller'. And of
sanitize that user interface...
> Lots of words are spent about the `technologies` to use, but linux games have
> still the appeal of commodore64 games...
Cruel but often true. :D Still that's not necessarily bad. Lots of
casual Linux gamers (amongst whom I am not) are quite happy with the
sort of game that you can fire up for 15 minutes and enjoy the raw
fun gameplay mechanics of eighties-style games, rather than the depth,
length and variety that's promised (and sometimes even delivered ;))
by modern commercial games.
Adam D. Moss . ,,^^ email@example.com http://www.foxbox.org/ co:3
"You could make a mince pie mountain and
carve yourself a lair inside to live in."