Well in the end, fact always wins over fiction. So really to be blunt again,
people need to stop burying their heads in the sand and face the music.
These simple games aren't going to cut it in the real world. They're good to
practice on I can see the logic in that in terms of how to get code working,
but equally that doesn't to my mind justify a release each time. how many
space invader clones do we have now? the only thing that hasn't really been
cloned to death is packman which is good because the job that Phil did with
packman talks is a masterpiece in it's own right.
The facts are these:
1. Developers are indeed starting from scratch and learning as they go. This
I accept and openly acknowledge. I can't programme for the life of me so I'm
not going to sit here and debate how easy or difficult x game is to create.
2. whether a person is self-taught or whether you go to school and learn, we
all have to start somewhere. Again I totally accept this. But with
experience comes improved quality of product. It's just the same as with any
business venture. The longer you are in a given business providing you
survive, the more you can refine and train yourself to do better, produce a
better product or service. So to put this into the gaming context, the more
you progress the better games you can produce and also there's plenty of
knowledge and resources here to draw upon.
In the mainstream gaming community, too much cloning will simply bore people
and you won't have the attention you once had. Which in the long run can and
will only serve to damage you.
If the Audyssey Magazine is constantly full of these clones and there isn't
an effective streamlining process, then it will kill the Magazine. pure and
simple. Thus why gaming Magazines have a rating system for games and not
everything gets in.
At the end of the day, it's the people that drive the types of games that
are produced and it's the Magazines that effectively report back to the
people. So my question is, in order to support the masses, are we going to
just accept that there can be a ton of low budget games out there to play
that aren't too different from each other? or is a little time and patients
worth the increase in the quality of game? That is the trade-off isn't it.
personally I'm content to sit back and see what happens. In other words, let
the developers do what they're best at. Let the newbies learn how to develop
to a set standard thus over time the wait will be less because the more
progressing developers there are out there, the increase in titles we'll see
If you yourself were working in the mainstream community and it was taking
as long as it's taking you now to develop your game, the simple fact is that
until your game is released, people will go and play other titles because
they are available and there. by adhering and accepting the lower quality
games we're doing ourselves much more harm than good in the long run in my
Gamers mailing list __ Gamers@audyssey.org
If you want to leave the list, send E-mail to gamers-unsubscr...@audyssey.org.
You can make changes or update your subscription via the web, at
All messages are archived and can be searched and read at
If you have any questions or concerns regarding the management of the list,
please send E-mail to gamers-ow...@audyssey.org.