Instant Action....and so it begins
by Derek Smart · in General Discussion · 10/11/2007 (5:00 pm) · 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!
#2
10/11/2007 (5:24 pm)
Well, I for one am excited. I used to be a web developer, and was very much into pushing the browser to its limits for gaming. I mostly put emphasis on CCS/JavaScript instead of Flash. In the end, I wasn't getting enough performance and went with TGB instead. Though to this day I'm intrigued about implementing my different game ideas inside a browser. I think the intersection between Web 2.0 and games is a fascinating one yet to really be explored.
#3
erm, right. sure.
@Chris
Yes, true its fascinating indeed. Just like a new brightly shining light bulb is to an insect. In other words, we as devs are always drawn to new things.
Anyway, I think most are - clearly - missing the point.
No matter how awesome the tech is, a rubbish or also ran game running on an awesome browser based tech is still a rubbish game.
Apart from that, even if you have good games to host, that alone is the uphill climb to differentiation and profitability.
There is a good reason why, despite how great some of their games are, that publishers post losses, go out of business, get bought out etc. Its called competition and competence. If you're going to compete in the same established space, you'd better be competent and have something different. IMO, have Torque 2 based games running inside a browser is not something different in terms of drawing in an anxious gaming crowd. Then you go an add casual games to the mix. Didn't GG already have casual games here? Yep, Sure did.
10/11/2007 (5:44 pm)
@Dunsanyerm, right. sure.
@Chris
Yes, true its fascinating indeed. Just like a new brightly shining light bulb is to an insect. In other words, we as devs are always drawn to new things.
Anyway, I think most are - clearly - missing the point.
No matter how awesome the tech is, a rubbish or also ran game running on an awesome browser based tech is still a rubbish game.
Apart from that, even if you have good games to host, that alone is the uphill climb to differentiation and profitability.
There is a good reason why, despite how great some of their games are, that publishers post losses, go out of business, get bought out etc. Its called competition and competence. If you're going to compete in the same established space, you'd better be competent and have something different. IMO, have Torque 2 based games running inside a browser is not something different in terms of drawing in an anxious gaming crowd. Then you go an add casual games to the mix. Didn't GG already have casual games here? Yep, Sure did.
#4
I just can't envisage a cross-platform/cross-browser way of doing it that isn't already being done by other companies
Gary (-;
10/11/2007 (6:07 pm)
And no details are still forthcoming about how the games are actually delivered and work in a browser, which is the only thing that might be worth getting stoked over. [Eg, Java? Installed locally using magical magic then just visible through the browser? Flash? ActiveX?]I just can't envisage a cross-platform/cross-browser way of doing it that isn't already being done by other companies
Gary (-;
#5
For example, the first external developer team to be announced as a 3rd party for InstantAction.com is Alex Seropian's Wideload, with their game Cyclomite.
And yes, as soon as you go look at that page and read the speculative preview, you can say "but see, I said that it was only for casual games--and Cyclomite is a casual game!"--or, you could consider that we're still very much in the announcement phase, not the post live phase, and reserve judgment about the ultimate final nature of the market InstantAction.com is looking to create until after you have more information and data points.
10/11/2007 (6:11 pm)
In my opinion, a smart person would take into account that one game does not a platform make, and that of course we are going to initially seed a brand new technology with a game that we are ultimately familiar with (pun intended!). Why would it be smart to build new technology and a new game at the same time, when we could use an existing game as a starter for the new technology instead?For example, the first external developer team to be announced as a 3rd party for InstantAction.com is Alex Seropian's Wideload, with their game Cyclomite.
And yes, as soon as you go look at that page and read the speculative preview, you can say "but see, I said that it was only for casual games--and Cyclomite is a casual game!"--or, you could consider that we're still very much in the announcement phase, not the post live phase, and reserve judgment about the ultimate final nature of the market InstantAction.com is looking to create until after you have more information and data points.
#7
I'm not going to throw my voice out on the matter because it's still very early to come to a decision about anything. Also, we've picked the tech we want to use to make our games with and nothing can really stop that except funding or a problem on our end.
So I just want to know, with no malice intended, what your point is Derek? We all know your stance by now.
So are you trying to sway the opinion of others?
Are you trying to open up a general discussion? You don't seem to be open to what others say. You refute nearly every counter-point made.
Do you want someone to just say "You're right?" Or do you just want to beat a dead horse?
You have industry experience, so I don't believe you to be an idiot. You've made your claim, which is welcome in this open community. So, is it necessary to constantly "shout from the rooftops?"
I see a road in front me. I know not where it goes. You warn me that there is a possibility I might walk into a tree that might be present in the middle of the road 2 miles away. I appreciate your advice and opinion, but you don't have to follow me and tell me the same thing every 10 steps.
10/11/2007 (7:16 pm)
The only people I've seriously talked about Instant Action with are my team mates and a few other game developers, so I've been silent here on GG. I'm not going to throw my voice out on the matter because it's still very early to come to a decision about anything. Also, we've picked the tech we want to use to make our games with and nothing can really stop that except funding or a problem on our end.
So I just want to know, with no malice intended, what your point is Derek? We all know your stance by now.
So are you trying to sway the opinion of others?
Are you trying to open up a general discussion? You don't seem to be open to what others say. You refute nearly every counter-point made.
Do you want someone to just say "You're right?" Or do you just want to beat a dead horse?
You have industry experience, so I don't believe you to be an idiot. You've made your claim, which is welcome in this open community. So, is it necessary to constantly "shout from the rooftops?"
I see a road in front me. I know not where it goes. You warn me that there is a possibility I might walk into a tree that might be present in the middle of the road 2 miles away. I appreciate your advice and opinion, but you don't have to follow me and tell me the same thing every 10 steps.
#8
10/11/2007 (7:44 pm)
I'm not drawn to IA because it's a "new thing." I'm drawn to it because I've talked with people for years about the Web 2.0 - Games intersection and this is the first tech that could support ideas that have come from those discussions. I've tried existing web tech for some rough concepts and I've come away dissatisfied. So for me this is tech catching up with my ideas, not ideas coming from new tech.
#9
You see, there you go making sense again Stephen. Seriously, you hit the nail right there, and on both counts.
THAT is the point (both actually) of what I've been saying since this whole IAC thing broke. I, btw, have known about Carbonite for sometime now. So, once I saw it on the IA dog & pony show, I wasn't entirely surprised. But the first thing that crossed my mind was "....aha!!! I f*cking knew it. Those ladies are so frigging dead! Seriously, thats what I thought.
The gist of my thought? Casual games.
With all the song and dance, this is the thing that was going to give us a collective orgasm? Sorry, I think I left my condoms at the checkout counter.
When you start making noises about raising the bar, you better raise it higher than anyone can jump, by actually announcing something worth getting excited about.
OK, in all fairness, so IA is new and all that. But if there were games in the pipeline, where is the noise about them? Where are the news bits, the hype, the shots (ME WANTS SHOTS!!!), the dev talk? So far, we've had nothing but lip service. The same lip service that GG is notorious for. Then when its time to put your money where your mouth is, we're stuck with a half-cocked attempt. To wit: almost FIVE years later, piss-poor docs, tech support, aging technology etc. And I could shove a set of Scrabble tiles into my dog's mouth and have him cough up proper docs.
So, with all noise about the kind of games that IA is going to attract, we get to hear about *gasp* a f*cking (no offense to the devs btw) casual game? Well slap me sideways and call me Sally.
I've posted this several times already: IA is going to be a casual games portal (Not unlike what GG tried to be) that is going to attract only devs who want to develop and sell such games. And THOSE GUYS already have many portals selling their games. Why would they switch? Or even make games for a new service?
If IA ever gets ANY game that does not fall under the casual games moniker, it probably won't be a game that will even attempt to compete in the same game space as those not developed for browsers.
When I - like most people - think browser based games, sorry, but we think casual games. You put up a shooter (one that is even worthy of the load times, let alone the download) on IA and see how that baby performs.
This has all the makings of a disaster just waiting to happen. I have seen it.
Listen, let me make myself clear again before people start taking a nose dive off the deep end.....
1. As a developer, I always have - and always will - support other developers. There are several devs currently at other companies who started out working for me. And THEY - in case my track record doesn't speak volumes - can attest to this. So, this is not some GG bashing spree. Just because someone dares to be different - and have differing opinions - doesn't mean that they're trolls, bashers or whatnot.
2. Despite my run-ins with one particular member of the GG founding fathers over some stupid inconsequential crap (not unlike this one actually), I hold no grudge or ill will. Why else would I even be here*? Besides, as experienced as I am, I ought to - and do - know better.
* As an experienced and published mainstream developer, I'm the type of dev that GG should have been catering to since day one. If they had, well, things would have been different around here because others would be here. Go ahead, all you incubator loving people, flame me, I don't give a damn because this is my opinion. Obviously GG - like most who are out of business or bought out - bet on the wrong horse. Sometimes visions are - in their entirety - unattainable and patently misguiding.
@ Michael
Sorry Mike, I didn't realize that I wasn't being clear enough or that I needed to have a stance in order to be understood. Why don't you just get it over with and tell me to shut up and sit down, because I'm spreading dissent, rousing the populace and all the other bad stuff that gets attributed to me when people don't like what I have to say? Its not my fault that, more often than not, I'm right. My history speaks for itself. When it comes to this industry, I know more than most and I am USUALLY RIGHT.
Anyway, back to the GG/IA...
Looks like Torque 2 is a distant wet dream. When I read the original Gamasutra article, it looked like this is what they'd actually gone and done. From discussions in other venues, I went back and read it. And now its clear that all the five Torque incarnations are going to remain as-is for the foreseeable future.
Look, as a developer, I welcome new technology. But lets face, the GG track record is sub-par at best. Hence the reason that, IMO, the only space they're [IA] going to compete in, is the casual games arena. Which is what will be the final death knell until somebody at IAC wakes up from that drunken stupor induced buying spree.
I just don't see ANY feasible way in which the IA browser based game delivery process is going to go beyond casual games. Heck, GameTap et al are already choking under the weight of most games in excess of 100MB in size. There is a reason why MS has a size cap on XBLA games. There is a reason why games (fun, high-end, or otherwise) worth playing by the avid gamer, are larger, focused and leave no wiggle room for tomfoolery.
...then there's Virgin's recent entry into the foray: A World Of My Own (a few of my games are being prepped to be in the Beta)
Do these guys know something that we don't? Not bloody likely. If there was any feasibility to non-casual games delivery and profitability, we'd be having a different discussion. Fact is, browser based gaming - from a tech standpoint - will always and forever - be relegated to casual games.
In other news, Take 2 started shipping my ninth retail game to retailers earlier this week.
10/11/2007 (9:38 pm)
@ StephenQuote:And yes, as soon as you go look at that page and read the speculative preview, you can say "but see, I said that it was only for casual games--and Cyclomite is a casual game!"--or, you could consider that we're still very much in the announcement phase, not the post live phase, and reserve judgment about the ultimate final nature of the market InstantAction.com is looking to create until after you have more information and data points.
You see, there you go making sense again Stephen. Seriously, you hit the nail right there, and on both counts.
THAT is the point (both actually) of what I've been saying since this whole IAC thing broke. I, btw, have known about Carbonite for sometime now. So, once I saw it on the IA dog & pony show, I wasn't entirely surprised. But the first thing that crossed my mind was "....aha!!! I f*cking knew it. Those ladies are so frigging dead! Seriously, thats what I thought.
The gist of my thought? Casual games.
With all the song and dance, this is the thing that was going to give us a collective orgasm? Sorry, I think I left my condoms at the checkout counter.
When you start making noises about raising the bar, you better raise it higher than anyone can jump, by actually announcing something worth getting excited about.
OK, in all fairness, so IA is new and all that. But if there were games in the pipeline, where is the noise about them? Where are the news bits, the hype, the shots (ME WANTS SHOTS!!!), the dev talk? So far, we've had nothing but lip service. The same lip service that GG is notorious for. Then when its time to put your money where your mouth is, we're stuck with a half-cocked attempt. To wit: almost FIVE years later, piss-poor docs, tech support, aging technology etc. And I could shove a set of Scrabble tiles into my dog's mouth and have him cough up proper docs.
So, with all noise about the kind of games that IA is going to attract, we get to hear about *gasp* a f*cking (no offense to the devs btw) casual game? Well slap me sideways and call me Sally.
I've posted this several times already: IA is going to be a casual games portal (Not unlike what GG tried to be) that is going to attract only devs who want to develop and sell such games. And THOSE GUYS already have many portals selling their games. Why would they switch? Or even make games for a new service?
If IA ever gets ANY game that does not fall under the casual games moniker, it probably won't be a game that will even attempt to compete in the same game space as those not developed for browsers.
When I - like most people - think browser based games, sorry, but we think casual games. You put up a shooter (one that is even worthy of the load times, let alone the download) on IA and see how that baby performs.
This has all the makings of a disaster just waiting to happen. I have seen it.
Listen, let me make myself clear again before people start taking a nose dive off the deep end.....
1. As a developer, I always have - and always will - support other developers. There are several devs currently at other companies who started out working for me. And THEY - in case my track record doesn't speak volumes - can attest to this. So, this is not some GG bashing spree. Just because someone dares to be different - and have differing opinions - doesn't mean that they're trolls, bashers or whatnot.
2. Despite my run-ins with one particular member of the GG founding fathers over some stupid inconsequential crap (not unlike this one actually), I hold no grudge or ill will. Why else would I even be here*? Besides, as experienced as I am, I ought to - and do - know better.
* As an experienced and published mainstream developer, I'm the type of dev that GG should have been catering to since day one. If they had, well, things would have been different around here because others would be here. Go ahead, all you incubator loving people, flame me, I don't give a damn because this is my opinion. Obviously GG - like most who are out of business or bought out - bet on the wrong horse. Sometimes visions are - in their entirety - unattainable and patently misguiding.
@ Michael
Quote:So I just want to know, with no malice intended, what your point is Derek? We all know your stance by now.
Sorry Mike, I didn't realize that I wasn't being clear enough or that I needed to have a stance in order to be understood. Why don't you just get it over with and tell me to shut up and sit down, because I'm spreading dissent, rousing the populace and all the other bad stuff that gets attributed to me when people don't like what I have to say? Its not my fault that, more often than not, I'm right. My history speaks for itself. When it comes to this industry, I know more than most and I am USUALLY RIGHT.
Anyway, back to the GG/IA...
Looks like Torque 2 is a distant wet dream. When I read the original Gamasutra article, it looked like this is what they'd actually gone and done. From discussions in other venues, I went back and read it. And now its clear that all the five Torque incarnations are going to remain as-is for the foreseeable future.
Look, as a developer, I welcome new technology. But lets face, the GG track record is sub-par at best. Hence the reason that, IMO, the only space they're [IA] going to compete in, is the casual games arena. Which is what will be the final death knell until somebody at IAC wakes up from that drunken stupor induced buying spree.
I just don't see ANY feasible way in which the IA browser based game delivery process is going to go beyond casual games. Heck, GameTap et al are already choking under the weight of most games in excess of 100MB in size. There is a reason why MS has a size cap on XBLA games. There is a reason why games (fun, high-end, or otherwise) worth playing by the avid gamer, are larger, focused and leave no wiggle room for tomfoolery.
...then there's Virgin's recent entry into the foray: A World Of My Own (a few of my games are being prepped to be in the Beta)
Do these guys know something that we don't? Not bloody likely. If there was any feasibility to non-casual games delivery and profitability, we'd be having a different discussion. Fact is, browser based gaming - from a tech standpoint - will always and forever - be relegated to casual games.
In other news, Take 2 started shipping my ninth retail game to retailers earlier this week.
#10
10/11/2007 (9:54 pm)
Mod edit.
#11
Anton, I wouldn't throw the term "success" about so rapidly, but behave please.
10/11/2007 (9:55 pm)
I'm still waiting for the conclusive proof that IA is such a terrible thing and destined for failure. For all we know, IA could follow a Guild Wars model of downloading the executable and such first, then content as it can. It's anachronistic to think that the entire game, including content, should be downloaded before a person can start playing.Anton, I wouldn't throw the term "success" about so rapidly, but behave please.
#12
I was under the assumption that GG wanted to provide low cost tools for the hobbiest and indie, or have I got it wrong... ;)
Either way Derek as much as your experiance and success give you credit, and you would undoubtably be a useful member of the community, you are acting a bit like an (mod rephrase) antagonistic member.
Note: edited to try to tone down the rhetoric while still getting the root point across to keep the emotional level down.
10/11/2007 (10:35 pm)
Quote:
* As an experienced and published mainstream developer, I'm the type of dev that GG should have been catering to since day one
I was under the assumption that GG wanted to provide low cost tools for the hobbiest and indie, or have I got it wrong... ;)
Either way Derek as much as your experiance and success give you credit, and you would undoubtably be a useful member of the community, you are acting a bit like an (mod rephrase) antagonistic member.
Note: edited to try to tone down the rhetoric while still getting the root point across to keep the emotional level down.
#13
Torque2 is based off torqueX which is windows only. If GG and IA make the browser based engine off TX, a lot of people will be cut out of the game.
As for the rest of the hype, I'll wait and see. I can't judge something that I've only slight information about.
10/11/2007 (10:35 pm)
What I want to know is "what happened to cross platform??" Torque2 is based off torqueX which is windows only. If GG and IA make the browser based engine off TX, a lot of people will be cut out of the game.
As for the rest of the hype, I'll wait and see. I can't judge something that I've only slight information about.
#14
I thought Torque 2 was just based off of TorqueX in idea only, being the component system for example.
If IA acts as an ActiveX control, then most browsers support ActiveX don't they? I don't use Firefox really or Safari for that matter.
10/11/2007 (10:41 pm)
@Mike:I thought Torque 2 was just based off of TorqueX in idea only, being the component system for example.
If IA acts as an ActiveX control, then most browsers support ActiveX don't they? I don't use Firefox really or Safari for that matter.
#15
Seriously dude, when was the last time you saw a 'hobbyist' create a commercial game? (most of them release freewares cause people won't pay for them). Also, comparing Indie developers with hobbyists is kinda insulting them. It's like calling big-screen movie producers small-screen TV producers (well, something like that..). The point is, hobbyists don't pay anything to make a game as an hobby (if they do then they must have loads of cash to spend like this). I don't categorize them under the same roof, even if others do.
Anyways, what's with the immature name calling in the thread people? Stick to opinions please, because I love reading cat-fights online :)
Continue..
10/11/2007 (10:46 pm)
Quote:I was under the assumption that GG wanted to provide low cost tools for the hobbiest and indie, or have I got it wrong... ;)
Seriously dude, when was the last time you saw a 'hobbyist' create a commercial game? (most of them release freewares cause people won't pay for them). Also, comparing Indie developers with hobbyists is kinda insulting them. It's like calling big-screen movie producers small-screen TV producers (well, something like that..). The point is, hobbyists don't pay anything to make a game as an hobby (if they do then they must have loads of cash to spend like this). I don't categorize them under the same roof, even if others do.
Anyways, what's with the immature name calling in the thread people? Stick to opinions please, because I love reading cat-fights online :)
Continue..
#16
From reading the blog post that Derek posted links too, It said they were building it off the torque X engine, but then, in another thread, Stephan stated something different. I could be very wrong.
As for ActiveX, I don't know if mac supports it. I dont think so as it's directX. I'm going to wait a while more and see what all gets announced.
10/11/2007 (11:01 pm)
Quote:I thought Torque 2 was just based off of TorqueX in idea only, being the component system for example.
If IA acts as an ActiveX control, then most browsers support ActiveX don't they? I don't use Firefox really or Safari for that matter
From reading the blog post that Derek posted links too, It said they were building it off the torque X engine, but then, in another thread, Stephan stated something different. I could be very wrong.
As for ActiveX, I don't know if mac supports it. I dont think so as it's directX. I'm going to wait a while more and see what all gets announced.
#17
Because the publishing setup for InstantAction.com is so developer friendly that it would be stupid not to switch.
10/11/2007 (11:07 pm)
Quote:
Why would they switch? Or even make games for a new service?
Because the publishing setup for InstantAction.com is so developer friendly that it would be stupid not to switch.
#18
There is no way a company can support five engines! Can you imagine Epic or ID supporting five engines? It doesn't make any sense. That is why GG has always had multiple mediocre products.
Yes I am sure that everyone will attack Derek for what he says because he isn't a fanboy. It is much better to look at GG's track record. Every mentionable piece of technology that GG has put out has been produced by a community member.
(mod edit)
10/11/2007 (11:09 pm)
@Derek Smart - I agree with you completely. There is no way a company can support five engines! Can you imagine Epic or ID supporting five engines? It doesn't make any sense. That is why GG has always had multiple mediocre products.
Yes I am sure that everyone will attack Derek for what he says because he isn't a fanboy. It is much better to look at GG's track record. Every mentionable piece of technology that GG has put out has been produced by a community member.
(mod edit)
#19
The whole I am better because I have a wiki is also pointless since anyone can make a wiki. And doing your own wiki doesnt really amount to a whole lot. I could do one saying I invented the cure for cancer but lost the formula in a housfire and now spend countless night reconstructing my notes form memory. :)
Garagegames selling out? No, Garagegames bought in. The game engine market is getting more competetive and GG's is just trying to get a heads up. When I bought the engine in 2002 there was only a handful of viable engine but gg's was the one I found for a decent price.
Anyways say what you want about others but in the end it doesnt really count unless people care.. :)
TomFeni
10/11/2007 (11:30 pm)
I am a hobbyist and if my game sells then hey "bonus", I have spent so far around 300.00 plus a new laptop around 1500.00. It really doesnt matter as far as money goes when you have a hobby.. Have you seen the price of model airplanes, I mean the ones that really can fly and "crash". Most are around the 200-500 range not including the cost of parts and what not. and they do that for "fun".The whole I am better because I have a wiki is also pointless since anyone can make a wiki. And doing your own wiki doesnt really amount to a whole lot. I could do one saying I invented the cure for cancer but lost the formula in a housfire and now spend countless night reconstructing my notes form memory. :)
Garagegames selling out? No, Garagegames bought in. The game engine market is getting more competetive and GG's is just trying to get a heads up. When I bought the engine in 2002 there was only a handful of viable engine but gg's was the one I found for a decent price.
Anyways say what you want about others but in the end it doesnt really count unless people care.. :)
TomFeni
#20
Amen to that. I got it around the same time and there was no big competitors really to GG. Now you have several. I'm happy for the recent happenings, I feel it is going to benefit us in the community ten fold. Fanboism or not, thats how I feel.
10/11/2007 (11:34 pm)
Quote:
Garagegames selling out? No, Garagegames bought in. The game engine market is getting more competetive and GG's is just trying to get a heads up. When I bought the engine in 2002 there was only a handful of viable engine but gg's was the one I found for a decent price.
Amen to that. I got it around the same time and there was no big competitors really to GG. Now you have several. I'm happy for the recent happenings, I feel it is going to benefit us in the community ten fold. Fanboism or not, thats how I feel.
Torque 3D Owner Dunsany