Adventure Forums

Adventure Forums (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/)
-   AG Underground - Freeware Adventures (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/ag-underground-freeware-adventures/)
-   -   So, are you prejudiced? (Free game engine popularity) (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/ag-underground-freeware-adventures/20329-so-you-prejudiced-free-game-engine-popularity.html)

Giligan 07-05-2007 06:16 PM

So, are you prejudiced? (Free game engine popularity)
 
In a hypothetical scenario, we have four alternate universes.

Each one deals with a single amateur adventure game.

The screenshots and story look good. They look great. But it's not in *your* engine, so you won't bother with it.

Or will you?

I pose this question, of whether or not amateur adventure game lose publicity, because the developer chose an unpopular engine. Suppose we have one adventure game. In one universe, it's in AGS. You'll download it, because you like to keep up on all cool games in that engine. In the second Universe, it's in Wintermute, and you'll play it, because that's almost as good as AGS. In the third Universe, it's in LASSIE, so you'll avoid it. In our final Universe, the game is in Game Maker, and you aren't familiar with Game Maker, so you pass it up, even though it looks cool. Yes?

Squinky 07-05-2007 10:02 PM

As a user of several unpopular game engines, I find that so long as you make an attempt to advertise it on a wide variety of forums, if your game is any good, then people will play it and help spread the word in the form of reviews, etc. So yeah, I picked column 5.

That said, those damn AGS people can get pretty cliquey at times...

Harald B 07-05-2007 11:40 PM

I mainly play SCUMM games.:P
But seriously, I almost never even stop to consider what engine a professional game is made in, so why should I care more about this with amateur adventures? And how can not knowing the engine be a turnoff when so many popular (professional) adventure games have an engine of their own?
Maybe it's just because I'm not a designer myself, but this question seems pretty absurd.

jacog 07-06-2007 03:03 AM

I agree with what King Bluetooth above me said, but I must admit, I do have some preconceived ideas about some engines... well, maybe one... While there are many good games created with AGS, I always assume that an AGS game will have really amateurish low res graphics... using a resolution that should have been retired more than 15 years ago. I do realise that this is not always true though.

Thaurin 07-06-2007 04:51 AM

AGS is mailnly aimed at retro-adventuring, I think. At least, that's what seems to be its reputation. Higher resolution is possible, but not above 640x480, I think. I'm not really sure. But that's fine. Lots of people prefer the low res out of nostalgia, and honestly some of those games have been awesome. Just look at some of the Sierra game remakes (KQ1, KQ3).

I'll bet that there are engines out there that are more suited and more capable of doing modern adventure games, so the choice of engine does mean something. The next question is: how much does the average player know about the different engines, really?

Giligan 07-06-2007 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squinky
That said, those damn AGS people can get pretty cliquey at times...

...Which is the main reason why I created this thread. :shifty:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacog
I agree with what King Bluetooth above me said, but I must admit, I do have some preconceived ideas about some engines... well, maybe one... While there are many good games created with AGS, I always assume that an AGS game will have really amateurish low res graphics... using a resolution that should have been retired more than 15 years ago. I do realise that this is not always true though.

This is true most of the time, which really squeezes out CMI-style games. Whether developers are trying to channel the spirit of gaming past, or hide the flaws with their crappy graphics, I don't know. :P

This is quite a problem, too, as AGS inarguably is huge, and has a monopoly on all amateur adventure game creation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thaurin
The next question is: how much does the average player know about the different engines, really?

I would certainly imagine so. Amateur adventure gaming is a very small and isolated community, and the majority of players are, in fact, game creationists themselves.

jacog 07-06-2007 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan
game creationists

As opposed to game evolutionists? :P

After a brisk nap 07-06-2007 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan (Post 423623)
The screenshots and story look good. They look great. But it's not in *your* engine, so you won't bother with it.

Or will you?

What kind of question is that? Do you really think anyone would choose not to play an adventure game because of the program it was made with? That makes about as much sense as only playing games where the graphics are made in Photoshop, refusing to play any that are drawn in Paint Shop Pro.

Look, I see a lot of anti-AGS prejudice in this thread, and I don't really get it. If you're a developer, use whatever engine is best for you. And if you're a player, the only thing that really matters is the quality of the game. Bias is only going to blind you to what's out there.

Of course, there are differences between the "typical" games made with each engine. AGS games are more likely to be in VGA resolution. SLUDGE games tend to have kooky hand-drawn graphics. Visionaire games are usually in German. Many Wintermute games have a polished, CGI look. Flash games often have poor user interfaces (probably because they can't use the right mouse button), and so on.

There are great games for all engines and there are crappy games for all of them. Even if your personal taste isn't for the typical example of a particular engine, there are still plenty of exceptions (particularly for AGS, just because of the sheer number of games). Just look at the Underground News item I posted yesterday. They were all made with the same engine, but are radically different both in graphics, gameplay and style.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squinky (Post 423637)
That said, those damn AGS people can get pretty cliquey at times...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan (Post 423671)
...Which is the main reason why I created this thread. :shifty:

I think Squinky was mostly joking. I have never heard AGSers dismiss games made with other engines, or show anything at all like the thought process you describe in the original post. In fact, many of the most well-known AGS designers have worked with other engines as well.

AGS is a community as well as a game engine, with annual week-long meetups and other social aspects. So yeah, it's cliquey, because among other things it's a group of friends. And the AGS Forums are of course mainly focused on AGS. But as indie adventure game fans, the AGS crowd is perfectly happy to play non-AGS games, and I think that most of them are genuinely happy that there are alternatives to AGS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan (Post 423671)
This is quite a problem, too, as AGS inarguably is huge, and has a monopoly on all amateur adventure game creation.

But it doesn't, though! If there weren't other engines, we wouldn't even be having this thread.

The only "problem" I see is that players may never hear about non-AGS games. That's really the fault of the creators, though, for not announcing their games in places where players will see it. Flash games, especially, rarely get announced on adventure community sites (probably because many Flash developers aren't themselves part of the community). But when Pinhead Games made the Nick Bounty titles, they did a great job spreading the word about them (including on the AGS Forums), and you can see that they've become really popular.

If your game is good and you make sure people know about it, it doesn't matter what software you used to create it.

Quote:

I would certainly imagine so. Amateur adventure gaming is a very small and isolated community, and the majority of players are, in fact, game creationists themselves.
I very much doubt that. It's almost always the case that a small group creates (game creators), a larger group participates (forum regulars), and a much larger group just silently consumes (lurkers).

After a brisk nap 07-06-2007 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacog (Post 423661)
While there are many good games created with AGS, I always assume that an AGS game will have really amateurish low res graphics... using a resolution that should have been retired more than 15 years ago. I do realise that this is not always true though.

There are many AGS games with crappy graphics, probably mainly because it's the most popular engine and many people find it the easiest to use. Some of the games that look bad are crappy, and others are actually really good despite the poor graphics.

You need to distinguish between amateurish art and low resolution, though. In fact, crappy art in high resolution is a typical newbie error.

What I think it more interesting is to look at the higher end of the curve. There are quite a few Underground and indie games in low-resolution 320x200 (or 320x240) whose graphics are essentially professional quality. That is to say, they look as good (or nearly as good) as commercial games of the same resolution. (Like The Infinity String, Knightsquire, the Apprentice series, Cedric and the Revolution, The Blackwell Legacy, No-Action Jackson, etc.) On the other hand, how many high resolution amateur adventures could be mistaken for a commercial, professional title? Not many. (Some that are under development, though, like Rise of the Hidden Sun and Kaptain Brawe. The higher resolution graphics are probably one of the reasons they're still under development.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thaurin (Post 423668)
AGS is mailnly aimed at retro-adventuring, I think. At least, that's what seems to be its reputation. Higher resolution is possible, but not above 640x480, I think. I'm not really sure. But that's fine. Lots of people prefer the low res out of nostalgia, and honestly some of those games have been awesome. Just look at some of the Sierra game remakes (KQ1, KQ3).

AGS supports resolutions up to 800x600. While there is certainly a major nostalgia component to many of the games, there are also a lot that are as modern as possible, or at least have moved away completely from the classic VGA look (for example, look at Earl Mansin: The Breakout, What Linus Bruckman Sees When His Eyes Are Closed and READY). And, as you say, many of the low-resolution games have been awesome, whether they are fan games (you missed KQ2, which I think is the best one) or completely original.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan (Post 423671)
This is true most of the time, which really squeezes out CMI-style games. Whether developers are trying to channel the spirit of gaming past, or hide the flaws with their crappy graphics, I don't know. :P

AGS does not squeeze out "CMI-style" game.s The engine can easily handle CMI's resolution (only 640x480), with a higher color-depth to boot, not to mention effects like alpha-blending and antialiasing, and there are loads of people who would love nothing more than to play a game that looked like CMI. The reason why you don't see many "CMI-style" games is simply that most people aren't as talented as Bill Tiller.

While it's nice for artists to stretch their abilities, the results are usually better when they realize their limitations, and work within those restrictions. If you can't pull of a CMI-style background, it's probably best to go with something simpler. There's nothing wrong with that.

Squinky 07-06-2007 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423698)
I think Squinky was mostly joking.

Darling, it's my duty to slam AGS at every possible opportunity, considering that I'm a newly-inducted member of the Wintermute army and all. *insert winking smiley here*

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423703)
What I think it more interesting is to look at the higher end of the curve. There are quite a few Underground and indie games in low-resolution 320x200 (or 320x240) whose graphics are essentially professional quality. That is to say, they look as good (or nearly as good) as commercial games of the same resolution. (Like The Infinity String, Knightsquire, the Apprentice series, Cedric and the Revolution, The Blackwell Legacy, No-Action Jackson, etc.) On the other hand, how many high resolution amateur adventures could be mistaken for a commercial, professional title? Not many. (Some that are under development, though, like Rise of the Hidden Sun and Kaptain Brawe. The higher resolution graphics are probably one of the reasons they're still under development.)

But why do people even care about their games looking like commercial, professional titles? Is there some sort of ontological ideal that all game graphics must strive toward? Find your own styles, damnit! Stop trying to copy what's already out there!

StarLite 07-06-2007 10:43 AM

Myself, I use Point and Click Development Kit. I like it because it is drop and drag, easy to use and the script is easy for me. I would sooner poke myself in the eye with a fork than script, I hate it with a passion. It's the part of game making that turns me off the most. I've had friends not talk to me anymore and treat me like I didn't even exist because I use P&C DK. I have people who won't even come on my site because I display their banner.

Does it really make that much of a difference what engine the game is made in. I love freeware indie games because I know all the hard work, frustration and effort that goes into making these games. I never trash anyone's work. I think freeware indie developers are the best, my hats off to every one of them. I would play any free game, I find the best in them because you can see that the work comes right from the heart. We should praise these people who take the time to give us something for nothing. All they ask in return is that we enjoy their work. Sorry for sounding too preachy, that's just how I feel.

Giligan 07-06-2007 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423698)
What kind of question is that? Do you really think anyone would choose not to play an adventure game because of the program it was made with? That makes about as much sense as only playing games where the graphics are made in Photoshop, refusing to play any that are drawn in Paint Shop Pro.

Look, I see a lot of anti-AGS prejudice in this thread, and I don't really get it. If you're a developer, use whatever engine is best for you. And if you're a player, the only thing that really matters is the quality of the game. Bias is only going to blind you to what's out there.

I do, yes. Perhaps "prejudiced" was the wrong word, inclined would be more fitting. I suspect that amateur adventure game players are more inclined to play a game in an engine they're familiar with, yes.

Why I came to this conclusion, is very simple. I have seen a lot of polished, great games in other engines that never achieved large popularity. It could be because the develper didn't adventise the game enough, yes. Still, for example, take a look at this site. There are by far, more adventure games in AGS written about than games of other engines. I realize that the writers will deny this. Call it anti-AGS prejudice if you wish, but as a whole, games have an increased chance of fame and popularity if they're made with AGS. On a site, like, say Adventure Developers, where a good deal of staff here hang out, you will see a good many non-AGS games being promoted, but they just don't seem to reach popularity levels of AGS games.

Take, for example, two adventure games that came out in 2003. Out of Order and The Apprentice. Both were supposed to be excellent games. One was SLUDGE, one was AGS. Whereas, say, Out of Order isn't heard of anymore, you can't throw a dead cat without hitting an article praising The Apprentice, if you'll excuse the expression. I realise I'll invoke a lot of comments about how The Apprentice was much better than Out of Order and whatnot, and therefor worthy of more mention, but my point stands.

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423703)
What I think it more interesting is to look at the higher end of the curve. There are quite a few Underground and indie games in low-resolution 320x200 (or 320x240) whose graphics are essentially professional quality. That is to say, they look as good (or nearly as good) as commercial games of the same resolution. (Like The Infinity String, Knightsquire, the Apprentice series, Cedric and the Revolution, The Blackwell Legacy, No-Action Jackson, etc.) On the other hand, how many high resolution amateur adventures could be mistaken for a commercial, professional title? Not many. (Some that are under development, though, like Rise of the Hidden Sun and Kaptain Brawe. The higher resolution graphics are probably one of the reasons they're still under development.)

I understand what you're saying, yes. Professional games from the 90s, with lo-res graphics, had a realistic touch to every detail, despite the low resolution. Sadly, it's not a trait that is seen very often anymore.

Hammerite 07-06-2007 11:55 AM

I mostly play AGS games, to be honest, but I don't really know why I haven't checked out more Wintermute stuff, etc.
Most other engines don't get the same exposure unfortunately, or you need to download a seperate program to play them (I'm too lazy).

After a brisk nap 07-06-2007 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squinky (Post 423710)
Darling, it's my duty to slam AGS at every possible opportunity, considering that I'm a newly-inducted member of the Wintermute army and all. *insert winking smiley here*

Oh, I thought you were a SLUDGE woman. (This is going to be another of those times when I'm expected to remember details of the Adventure Architect series, isn't it?)

Quote:

But why do people even care about their games looking like commercial, professional titles? Is there some sort of ontological ideal that all game graphics must strive toward? Find your own styles, damnit! Stop trying to copy what's already out there!
Well, I don't think "looking professional" necessarily means copying an existing style. It's more a level of artistic accomplishment. There's a term in film making about a technically perfect shot (i.e. in focus, framed, lighted, camera stable, no smudges on the lens). They say that it's "Hollywood". That's not because all films should look like Hollywood movies, just a recognition of the production quality and technical polish that millions of dollars can buy. By the same token, I think it's perfectly reasonable for amateur adventure artists to strive to create work that is so good that it could be mistaken for a professional game.

stepurhan 07-06-2007 12:23 PM

I think I can sum up why you see more of AGS games than games using any other system in three words.

Big Blue Cup.

AGS has a website dedicated to promoting games made by people using the engine. They have regular competitions and other ideas to promote game creators. To put it bluntly, more people play AGS games because they know they can go to one place and hear about a load of new ones regularly (regardless of the quality)

Correct me if I'm wrong here but I've had a look and I can't find equivalent sites for either Wintermute or SLUDGE. I've also visited the Adventure Maker website today (thanks to a thread in this very forum) None of them have the promotional power of the Big Blue Cup website.

I'm speaking as someone whose name appears in the credits of one of the Wintermute engine's success stories. and who is a big fan of another one. I think, for the most part the prejudice you perceive is no more than people not wanting to look too hard for new free games and knowing they can find at least mediocre new games in one place.

Oh, and Out of Order is waaaay better than The Apprentice. The uninitiated can get it here.(Side point. A lot of sites came up in a search for this link. Maybe it isn't as obscure as you think it is)

Squinky 07-06-2007 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423738)
Oh, I thought you were a SLUDGE woman. (This is going to be another of those times when I'm expected to remember details of the Adventure Architect series, isn't it?)

I used to be at one time, yes. Now I'm a "whatever current engine can help me create my stories most effectively" woman.

After a brisk nap 07-06-2007 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Giligan (Post 423733)
I do, yes. Perhaps "prejudiced" was the wrong word, inclined would be more fitting. I suspect that amateur adventure game players are more inclined to play a game in an engine they're familiar with, yes.

Why I came to this conclusion, is very simple. I have seen a lot of polished, great games in other engines that never achieved large popularity. It could be because the develper didn't adventise the game enough, yes. Still, for example, take a look at this site. There are by far, more adventure games in AGS written about than games of other engines. I realize that the writers will deny this. Call it anti-AGS prejudice if you wish, but as a whole, games have an increased chance of fame and popularity if they're made with AGS. On a site, like, say Adventure Developers, where a good deal of staff here hang out, you will see a good many non-AGS games being promoted, but they just don't seem to reach popularity levels of AGS games.

I'll grant you straight away that we write more often about AGS games than games made with other engines. Why is that? Because there are many times more AGS games to write about. Let's see... I just did a feature on six recent Underground games. All were made in AGS, and all were released between May 31 and now (not by any means all the AGS games released during that time, I hasten to add). How many games made with any of the other engines were released in the same time period? As far as I can tell: none. In fact, the most recent non-AGS Underground game I can find is What Makes You Tick, released back around May 6. And before that you have to go back to February. Given that reality, how are we not supposed to write more about AGS games?

Quote:

Take, for example, two adventure games that came out in 2003. Out of Order and The Apprentice. Both were supposed to be excellent games. One was SLUDGE, one was AGS. Whereas, say, Out of Order isn't heard of anymore, you can't throw a dead cat without hitting an article praising The Apprentice, if you'll excuse the expression. I realise I'll invoke a lot of comments about how The Apprentice was much better than Out of Order and whatnot, and therefor worthy of more mention, but my point stands.
I wouldn't say Out of Order has been forgotten (it was featured on the Underground SOTD thread a while back, for example), and you hear less about Apprentice these days than you did a couple of years ago. But even if you're right, it's almost meaningless to compare two games (that aren't even particularly similar), because there are so many confounding factors. The Herculean guys made a sequel and a deluxe version of Apprentice, and a third game is in the works, while there has been nothing new to report about OOO since its release. In addition, Ian and Greg Schlaepfer have worked on a number of other games since then, while Tim Furnish has more or less vanished. Or you might compare the Herculean Effort Productions website with the Hungry Software one; I know which one I find more pleasant and easy to navigate (not to mention which one is more regularly updated).

Wormsie 07-07-2007 05:59 AM

AGS has been around for ages, it has a reputation of being easy to use, it has retro appeal and it has a huge active community. I think that's why it's so popular. Personally I'm quite suspicious of AGS and haven't used it much, and besides, I prefer to code things by hand anyway... On the other hand I haven't released any games either, although with The Curves of Danger we were kinda close. :D

I think games made in some other engine actually have slightly better chances at getting recognition, because the huge amount of AGS games released - if you release an AGS game it easily becomes just Yet Another AGS game.

Giligan 07-07-2007 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423757)
I'll grant you straight away that we write more often about AGS games than games made with other engines. Why is that? Because there are many times more AGS games to write about. Let's see... I just did a feature on six recent Underground games. All were made in AGS, and all were released between May 31 and now (not by any means all the AGS games released during that time, I hasten to add). How many games made with any of the other engines were released in the same time period? As far as I can tell: none. In fact, the most recent non-AGS Underground game I can find is What Makes You Tick, released back around May 6. And before that you have to go back to February. Given that reality, how are we not supposed to write more about AGS games?

I'm sure that's entirely correct.

Well, 19/22 votes for any game, any engine, is certainly good. Before we got into this lengthy exchange on the widespread use of AGS, we were discussing whether or not a player would be more inclined to play games on *his (or her) engine*. I'm glad to see overwhelming support for all games, despite being slightly disturbed at the monopoly of AGS as opposed to other adventure game making engines.

Hey! Someone voted for option 5! Wtf? :P

TheTwelve 07-07-2007 05:14 PM

Quote:

despite being slightly disturbed at the monopoly of AGS as opposed to other adventure game making engines.
I'm not sure you can complain about a monopoly on free games by a free game engine. Remember, when people make free games, everyone wins!

AGS isn't hurting the hobbyist adventure scene by being used by so many people. Rather, its ease of use is leading to it being used by so many people which leads to a stronger, more productive hobbyist adventure scene. And some of those users may decide to move on to another engine if they feel that the AGS engine's technical shortfalls are holding them back.

But the technical shortfalls like lower resolutions and lack of 3d support aren't an issue to most people who just want to make a game that entertains. Higher technical specs just mean a longer period of development and more work for someone who isn't getting any financial return for their time.

I've got to agree with pretty much everything Brisk Nap has said in this thread and thank him for mentioning my game, Linus, which is a good example of how AGS's robust scripting language can be used to create games that are far, far from the norm.

KamisoriX 07-07-2007 10:08 PM

i didn't even know that there are Game engine competition in the adventure game genre. usually it's the FPS games that fights for best engines and expands to other genres.
Well, for me it doesn't really matter what engine the adventure game uses as long the game is good and doesn't crash or loses game saves :D

Wormsie 07-09-2007 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTwelve (Post 423919)
I'm not sure you can complain about a monopoly on free games by a free game engine. Remember, when people make free games, everyone wins!

I think it would actually benefit AGS if people were turning away from it because of one reason or other. There'd be competition and for the game engine projects that would be a good thing - I also think that it's a shame other engines don't have so many games released even when they'd have great potential. But people seem to be content with AGS so there's probably nothing too much wrong with it, for them at least - I would never use AGS in its current stage.

Having tested many of the engines available, I'm also slightly baffled at those who proclaim AGS the greatest of them all (especially the one who proclaimed that all other engines should just stop development) without having tried the others, but well, maybe this is a subject I have to discuss with my therapist. :shifty:

jacog 07-09-2007 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 423698)
What kind of question is that? Do you really think anyone would choose not to play an adventure game because of the program it was made with? That makes about as much sense as only playing games where the graphics are made in Photoshop, refusing to play any that are drawn in Paint Shop Pro.

You silly person. It happens more often than you think... for example, on this very forum, in Chit Chat, Three Questions Thread... SnorkleCat asked "Have you played Trumgottist's game, Frasse and the Peas of Kejick" to which SSH replied "Nope. I adhere solely to the true path of AGSity..." ... and he meant it too, ask him.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormsie (Post 424159)
I think it would actually benefit AGS if people were turning away from it because of one reason or other. There'd be competition and for the game engine projects that would be a good thing - I also think that it's a shame other engines don't have so many games released even when they'd have great potential. But people seem to be content with AGS so there's probably nothing too much wrong with it, for them at least - I would never use AGS in its current stage.

Having tested many of the engines available, I'm also slightly baffled at those who proclaim AGS the greatest of them all (especially the one who proclaimed that all other engines should just stop development) without having tried the others, but well, maybe this is a subject I have to discuss with my therapist. :shifty:

Nooo, valid point, leave your therapist out of this.

Also... to TheTwelve :: ANY monopoly is bad, even of something that produces free games. It stifles innovation and progress. You always need competition to keep the standards high.

After a brisk nap 07-09-2007 05:05 AM

I have yet to understand how you can talk about a monopoly and lack of competition when there are multiple engines to choose from, and major games made in most of them. In fact, I would suggest that the adventure game engine market is overcrowded, with more alternatives than the user base can support (counting AGI and Game Maker there are some eight or nine more or less viable options).

Besides, at least two of the engines (AGS and WME, and possibly Lassie) are improving at a solid rate, so how is innovation being stifled again?

Wormsie, whatever your issue is with AGS, there's a reasonable chance that it's fixed in the latest release.

jacog 07-09-2007 05:43 AM

I never said AGS had a monopoly, I was just disagreeing with TheTwelve's statement that a monopoly is not bad if it's an engine that provides free games and that everybody wins.

TheTwelve 07-09-2007 09:19 PM

You're right, the semantics of that statement were grey. I didn't actually mean to say that a literal monopoly would be a good thing, and I'm definitely not someone to whom you need to extol the virtues of innovation. As Brisk Nap has said, there is no monopoly. I was simply trying to make light of his comment. I intended that statement to mean that you can't really complain about getting free games made by developers who are receiving no compensation, no matter what engine they use. If the developers are looking for something beyond what AGS can do, they'll go find it.

I guarantee that the majority of the AGS games that come out are more limited by the time and ability of the creator(s) than the strength of the engine. If those developers had gone with a different adventure game creation tool, they would have ended up with a fundamentally identical game with a few differences due to each engine's quirks. A crappy AGS game would have likely been just as crappy in another engine. A great AGS game would have likely been just as great in another engine. It's the artist, not the tool, that makes a game great.

Competition or no, (and even if there were competition, the maker of AGS isn't getting any sort of financial compensation for his efforts, not even donations, so would he care?) the AGS engine is constantly being worked on and has frequent version updates with new features. The next long-in-development update is a complete overhaul of the editor's interface.

The one thing that I really think AGS could use is hardware acceleration. My current project is 320x240 (again, for reasons of time and resources, not engine limitation) but if I make a higher-res game next, as my previous two games were, I'll probably move to another engine. My last game, Linus, tends to bog down on slower computers thanks to the multiple transparency effects on the screen at once -- something WME's hardware acceleration, in hindsight, would likely have taken care of. I've used WME and find it capable, but a little more complicated to use than AGS. I'm also considering Torque after I finish my current game.

I can't understand the anti-AGS feelings that I'm seeing in this thread. It's popular because it's simple to use and has an active community that's willing to help as long as you read the forum rules and are polite, and I'm not sure how that's bad.

I think that there are some AGS users or players who will play a new AGS game just because it's AGS, and fine, whatever. At worst, they're wasting their own time on some crappy games. But I don't think that there is anyone who will actually avoid playing a free game because it was made in another engine.

I, for example, didn't play The Five Magical Amulets, a very well reviewed. But the reason I didn't play it was not because it wasn't made in AGS. I didn't play it because I'm generally not attracted to fantasy tales or settings. I didn't play any of the Apprentice series either for the same reason, even though it's one of the most popular series ever made with AGS.

And let's not forget that beyond the handful of people who have their finger on the pulse of the underground scene, the average player most likely has no idea what engine the game he's playing was made in. He's just excited to get a new game for free. And so am I. And so should you be.

AGA 07-09-2007 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTwelve (Post 424339)
I can't understand the anti-AGS feelings that I'm seeing in this thread.

It's Wormsie. His opinions on all things AGS can safely be ignored.

UPtimist 07-10-2007 01:03 AM

I didn't read the first post when I voted (so I didn't see the part about not playing a good game if it's not made with a certain engine), so I just voted on "what games I usually play". And yes, that's AGS, for exactly the reasons that have been said in this thread: they're the only ones I really hear about. I'm not so much into the scene to know exactly where to look for games and I'm not on the cutting-edge of rumors and future releases, so I just see here and the AGS forums to see what's happening. And our underground section isn't exactly bursting with new games, so basically I tend to get my games from the AGS forums, which for some reason tend to be mainly AGS games.

SSH 07-10-2007 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jacog (Post 424163)
You silly person. It happens more often than you think... for example, on this very forum, in Chit Chat, Three Questions Thread... SnorkleCat asked "Have you played Trumgottist's game, Frasse and the Peas of Kejick" to which SSH replied "Nope. I adhere solely to the true path of AGSity..." ... and he meant it too, ask him.

I meant the "Nope". The rest was a joke. I play more AGS games than anything else, simply due to the demographics of the UG scene.

After a brisk nap 07-10-2007 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheTwelve (Post 424339)
The one thing that I really think AGS could use is hardware acceleration. My current project is 320x240 (again, for reasons of time and resources, not engine limitation) but if I make a higher-res game next, as my previous two games were, I'll probably move to another engine. My last game, Linus, tends to bog down on slower computers thanks to the multiple transparency effects on the screen at once -- something WME's hardware acceleration, in hindsight, would likely have taken care of. I've used WME and find it capable, but a little more complicated to use than AGS. I'm also considering Torque after I finish my current game.

The other big thing missing from AGS (probably related to lack of hardware acceleration) that I think is having noticeable impact on some games is smooth scaling of alpha channel sprites. Having to choose between the two is a pretty tough dilemma. I was playing Nelly Cootalot the other day, and couldn't help but think how much prettier it would be if the character edges were anti-aliased.

Other than that, it has always seemed like support for multiple developers has been poor, but with the addition of modules and now the source control integration and text-based resource files, things are looking a lot better on that front. I think that will make a big difference to the viability of larger team projects and maybe even further commercial games.

Squinky 07-10-2007 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 424499)
The other big thing missing from AGS (probably related to lack of hardware acceleration) that I think is having noticeable impact on some games is smooth scaling of alpha channel sprites.

This is one of the reasons I switched from SLUDGE to WME (and Lassie too, in one case), and why I haven't been motivated to try using AGS in its current state. I like to think it's a valid enough reason. I, personally, am experienced enough in using game development tools that I don't need a huge community to learn how to use them, just good documentation.

Candle 07-10-2007 01:10 PM

you forgot Adventure maker.
For games like this.

Wormsie 07-11-2007 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGA (Post 424348)
It's Wormsie. His opinions on all things AGS can safely be ignored.

Aww, you're so cute. :D

Wormsie 07-11-2007 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 424177)
Wormsie, whatever your issue is with AGS, there's a reasonable chance that it's fixed in the latest release.

Do you mean that whatever I want to do, I, and everybody else, should use AGS?

Squinky 07-11-2007 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormsie (Post 424762)
Do you mean that whatever I want to do, I, and everybody else, should use AGS?

Actually, he never said that.

After a brisk nap 07-11-2007 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormsie (Post 424159)
But people seem to be content with AGS so there's probably nothing too much wrong with it, for them at least - I would never use AGS in its current stage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap (Post 424177)
Wormsie, whatever your issue is with AGS, there's a reasonable chance that it's fixed in the latest release.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormsie (Post 424762)
Do you mean that whatever I want to do, I, and everybody else, should use AGS?

Yes, that's clearly a sane and reasonable interpretation of what I wrote. :crazy:

How about something more along the lines of "If you would 'never use AGS in its current stage', you must have found some flaw with it when you tried it (assuming your antipathy has a rational basis). Given that many of the most often remarked-upon problems with AGS have been addressed in recent releases, there's a reasonable chance (though no certainty, of course) that whatever your issue was, it has been fixed."

SSH 07-12-2007 01:29 AM

Just out of interest, Wormsie, what version of AGS did you last try? Or if you don't know the version, when did you last try?

Wormsie 07-12-2007 02:34 AM

I think my reason for being a bit weird about any kind of glowing praise for AGS stems from this old thread. It's very probable that I've been traumatized by that article. Also notice how I spell crystal as chrystal.

Wormsie 07-12-2007 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSH (Post 424919)
Just out of interest, Wormsie, what version of AGS did you last try? Or if you don't know the version, when did you last try?

It was probably in 2004-2005. Something like AGS version 2.6.

Jatsie 07-12-2007 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wormsie (Post 424930)
I think my reason for being a bit weird about any kind of glowing praise for AGS stems from this old thread. It's very probable that I've been traumatized by that article. Also notice how I spell crystal as chrystal.

So, what you're saying is, you don't like AGS because you have a meth problem? ;)

I never pictured you as a Crystal Queen. :D


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Design & Logo Copyright ©1998 - 2017, Adventure Gamers®.
All posts by users and Adventure Gamers staff members are property of their original author and don't necessarily represent the opinion or editorial stance of Adventure Gamers.