Hail the all knowing Sultans of AGDI

Message

Blackthorne519 · #26 Post by **Blackthorne519** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 3:51 pm

TribeHasSpoken wrote:Am I the only one in the adventure fangame community who's never wanted to write/design a game?

Ah, I think everyone wants to be involved in some capacity. To the "lay-person" or average fan, you're spurred on with bits of impassioned ideas. I think everyone reads a book, watchs a film, or plays a game and gets some kind of idea about how they would "do" it.

Others pick more specific areas to concentrate on - a person who reads a book might think to become an editor; a person who watchs a film might become interested in being the DP (Cinematographer), and a person who loves games might be interested in doing PR for the development team.

It all comes down to the level of depth at which you look at creative projects. The average person rarely considers the size of a creative team that produces the works they love; it's rare that, for instance, someone stays to watch the 500 person crew who worked on (and was integral) to the latest film they love.

Bt

rich_eter · #27 Post by **rich_eter** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:01 am

BT, do you ever miss the days when the credits to a film were only like 20 or 30 people long? Look at the credits of "Clash of the Titans" for example. I think I sometimes do.

AGP · #28 Post by **AGP** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:43 am

Is "Clash of the Titans" as far back as you go? Come on. It's not new to have hundreds of people working on film. Watch the 1938 color release of "The Adventures of Robin Hood" or even "Gone With the Wind." Just the people who worked on the color of both films were numerous.

rich_eter · #29 Post by **rich_eter** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:49 am

No, it's nothing new to have hundreds of people working on a film, especially when they built huge sets and had many extras and all kinds of crew. But, there was something special in the 70s and 80s when big blockbusters could get away with a very small crew. It was a sign of the independent films to come... exactly like the kind that both BT and I like to work on.

Blackthorne519 · #30 Post by **Blackthorne519** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:50 pm

Seriously.... a time where the special effects guy was the gaffer too!

Bt

Alistair · #31 Post by **Alistair** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 11:29 am

Really cool thread guys (the result, not the original post).

I've been part of quite a few failed SQ remakes/fangames, now (SQ prequels, Khaveen's SQ3VGA remake, and more).

The writing comment is spot on. I've seen more wannabe fangame creators than I care to remember, even in the SQ community, and it always ends the same way, with the folowing timeline (note, it's a tad sarcastic):
1. Someone announcing a fangame they've come up with in the bathtub/on the train/on their way to work/et al. and they need a crew to make their 'dream' a reality.
2. One or two people join the 'team' and one or two backgrounds get drawn, and a webpage (and forums!) get made.
3. There's no updates for a while.
4. A revival happens, where the 'team' makes a comeback, announcing they're back to work hard on their visionary Quest fangame.
5. The 'team' folds, citing a lack of artists and programmers (or sometimes, community support, or you name it) as the reason for disbanding.

Note that certain steps, such as 3 and 4, may not happen each time.

Lol, the above is a little mean. But I've been in the SQ community for 5 years plus, and I've seen more fangames come and go than you'd believe. It was bad enough in 2003, now that AGDI have done such a good job at remaking it's sort of even worse, because people actually have a little bit of talent and try and emulate them, but the end result is still the same.

My personal view has always been that you need an actual team or you need to ask for one, before you ask for more help from the public at large. I've never understood people who 'start a fangame' as a writer or artist or whatever, and then expect people to sign on.

As for AGDI/IA merge and other such things, I think it's fairly self-evident why it wouldn't (and shouldn't) happen, and the replies have been pretty good from everyone about that.

Incidentally, my first post in almost a year

- Alistair

Ibanezrg82 · #32 Post by **Ibanezrg82** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:36 am

party poopers,
Who out there actually ever heard of this?

If its not a commercial engine then, it's dying slowly of cancer.
The youngest people who know it are all turning 20.

#33 Post by **Erpy** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:50 am

I'm having difficulty getting your exact point. Could you perhaps elaborate on what you wish to say?

TribeHasSpoken · #34 Post by **TribeHasSpoken** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:04 am

Ibanezrg82 wrote:party poopers,
Who out there actually ever heard of this?

If its not a commercial engine then, it's dying slowly of cancer.
The youngest people who know it are all turning 20.

I think he's trying to argue that Sierra fangames don't get sufficient publicity to introduce them to those who didn't grow up with the original games, and that a commercial release would be taken more seriously. I'm too tired to respond, though. |I

Blackthorne519 · #35 Post by **Blackthorne519** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:40 pm

It's the youngster's loss. Let them play Halo until their heads explode.

Bt

Quest For Glory Fan · #36 Post by **Quest For Glory Fan** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:59 pm

Halo isn't even fun. If I wanted to see the same thing condensed into two hours and 100 times better I'd watch starship troopers.

Lambonius · #37 Post by **Lambonius** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 7:33 pm

Haha. Well, I think he may be referring to the AGS engine, rather than the games being commercial or not, but either way I'm not sure what to say to such a random post.

PS: I dig me some Halo, but I'll be the first to say that I've always found it to be vastly over-rated. I prefer Duke Nukem 3D or even Quake II, myself. But then I guess I'm showing signs of my age there as well.

Boogeyman · #38 Post by **Boogeyman** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:25 am

Quest For Glory Fan wrote:Halo isn't even fun. If I wanted to see the same thing condensed into two hours and 100 times better I'd watch starship troopers.

I totally agree! I didn't like Halo AT ALL.

Quest For Glory Fan · #39 Post by **Quest For Glory Fan** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 2:58 pm

I'm not sure if he referred to the AGS engine or Sierra games in general but I know of both well before 20

Aperama · #40 Post by **Aperama** » Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:17 pm

Ibanezrg82 wrote:party poopers,
Who out there actually ever heard of this?

If its not a commercial engine then, it's dying slowly of cancer.
The youngest people who know it are all turning 20.

I take offense to that, sir.

19 as of this coming Thursday. And I knew of both well before now (e.g. single digits).

Quest For Glory Fan · #41 Post by **Quest For Glory Fan** » Mon Apr 16, 2007 4:50 pm

17 and 2 thirds here! but ya I can see what he means, I never find anyone my age that knows of these gems. I hardly know anyone older than me actually.... how many copies of KQ were sold again?

DonQuixote · #42 Post by **DonQuixote** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:49 am

I couldn't ever get too much into the first person shooters. Playing them every so often was fun, but 50 levels? 50 sequels?

The only "shooter" game I liked was Alice. Although that game was an odd exception...

Ibanezrg82 · #43 Post by **Ibanezrg82** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:46 am

I can understand why some people don't understand or even, take offense to some of my posts.
My thought before, Erpy, was that a vast majority of the gaming community either doesn't know or care that games of this type ever existed.
Nine out of ten people I ask about anything KQ, QFG, SQ, and such have never heard of them. These are the same people who religously play games like Halo and Final Fantasy.
So if any of you think that I am trying to knock you, mock you,
or in any way be unpleasant, it is not true.

I am just sticking up for some pretty much dead games, which you guys are bringing back to life.

IBANEZ

Ibanezrg82 · #44 Post by **Ibanezrg82** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:51 am

PS Boogeyman,

what is that shot of yours, on the bottom?
It looks familiar but I can't put my finger on it!

adeyke · #45 Post by **adeyke** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:27 am

Laura Bow 1: The Colonel's Bequest

Ibanezrg82 · #46 Post by **Ibanezrg82** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:32 am

oh yeah, I have that one but never got through it.

Never really liked it.

TribeHasSpoken · #47 Post by **TribeHasSpoken** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:21 pm

I'm far worse. Despite having both Laura Bow games as part of the Roberta Williams Anthology, I've never played either of them.

*offers Probst his torch*