Well said.

Heh, so does C++. :devil:

On a serious note, SLUDGE does have those advantages you listed, except...

From SLUDGE FAQ:

How much does it cost to register the development kit?

It's $50 US.

Why not 24-bit colour?

Simply because SLUDGE was developed in 16-bit colour mode, so it stuck. Maybe, if there's enough call for it, 24-bit colour will be available as an option later... but increasing the size of data files so much for the sake of smoother gradients seems like too high a price to pay for the moment.

Which makes AGS a little more attractive, IMO (but of course, with its share of disadvantages). I'm glad that there is more than one choice, however. :)

It's interesting that whatever you do, AGS users have a way of defending their engine. :shifty:

A rant will ensue.

I understand the 16-bit colour, but I don't see what a pricetag has to do with the capabilities of the engine. I thought we were comparing technical pros and cons of both engines.

--Erwin

Do you get personal Sludge support from the developer for 50 dollars? In the case of AGS getting support from the developer himself is extremely rare, I'd think. EDIT: As usual, I was wrong.

The main thing I don't like about SLUDGE is that it doesn't have anti-aliasing. The thing I like most is that it is fast, even at high resolutions. For me, I would recommend people to AGS for low-res games, and SLUDGE for people making a high-res one. Though AGS has scripting, I think it is easier to start out with basic scripting and work in to more advanced stuff in SLUDGE than to start out in windows and menu buttons trying to work in to scripting. I'd say both are stable and have plenty of features, if you've afraid of scripting altogether and don't plan on doing anything complicated, go with AGS, if you like scripting, and want to do a high-res game, go with SLUDGE.

I recommend WME for high-res games. It's free, has an excellent feature list (including audio and graphics features and great flexibility), awesome documentation, an IDE where it is really needed and scripting to ensure maximum flexibility and a friendly, knowlegable and accomplished user base.

AGS for low-res.

That's not true. CJ (Pumaman) reads the AGS technical forums, and replies to individual questions. For instance, he last posted on March 25, and three of four posts were responses to technical questions. Of course, the AGS community is so active and supportive that he usually doesn't have to; others will have addressed the problem already.

I just thought that AGS's immense popularity would prevent it...

I really have something against AGS, dont I...

It's starting to come across that way, and I think that's unfortunate. There is a sense among some people in the AGS community that the WME community is hostile to AGS. There's no sense confirming that suspicion.

Generally, AGSers concede that AGS isn't the perfect engine for every person and every purpose, and welcome alternatives and competition. I'm sure most WME people feel the same way.

What I like about AGS is that it's easy to play around with, to put together something that is starting to look like a real game. It gives novices confidence and ambition. Yes, that means that there's a lot of newbie games, but some of those newbies go on to make better games, which might not have existed if the only alternatives were clean, scripting based engines like SLUDGE, AGAST and WME.

No, I'm the only one who is hostile towards AGS. I do not represent the entire WME community. I'm not even that active WME community member. I used to be anti-WME, too! Mainly, I'm against the unbelievable AGS hyperbole and fallacies about other engines and the constant neglect of mentioning the positive aspects of other engines.

But something I've learned is that usually it really doesn't matter which engine you choose. You'll learn to love your engine, even with its flaws, no matter what it is like.

Anyhow: AGS gives you leprosy! http://forums.idlethumbs.net/images/smilies/oldman.gif

From my original thread starting post...

"Let's remove the issue of any registration fees."

Okay, I'll rise... Where? Maybe people do neglece to mention the positive aspects of other engines, but come on, who does that when they're trying to 'sell' their own engine? As for the other points, I'd like some proof...

Hmm, is there? I wonder where it came from. I think "some people" are looking for problems where there aren't any :crazy: I don't like it, but there's very little I can do about it, I'm afraid.

I think that registration fees are EXTREMELY irrelevant, unless (a) you live in a third world country, or (b) quality is not an issue, or (c) the engine of choice has no 'try before you buy' option.

Making a quality game takes time. That time could be spent flipping burgers at McDonald's. For example, I find that a typical scene takes AT LEAST 3 hours to draw, 1 hour to code (floor, Z buffer, hot spots), and another 3 hours to make something interesting happen in it (conversation trees, possibly new characters or animations). At minimum wage in Britain, that means an opportunity cost of 8 hours, or 40 quid, or 70 dollars. Multiply that by a thirty scenes for a small game, add the learning curve, failed experiments and of course creating sprites, etc., and the final cost for even a modest fan made game is around four thousand dollars. That is, you could have made four thousand dollars in McDonald's, but chose to make the game instead. If the game is large, the cost could be two or ten times that.

If game engine 'A' allows you to speed up your work by just five percent, it will save you around two hundred dollars. So fifty dollars is nothing. And I speak as someone who was unemployed with no real income when he started his game.

Like I said before, I have nothing against AGS. It serves a vital role, and the number of users proves it. If you want an easy start with lots and lots of help there is really no other choice. It has to be AGS. But if you have long term plans for a serious game, then you need to look around, and a modest registration fee is simply not an issue.

Please don't infer from this that Sludge is slow! I just like to pack a lot into my scenes and get them how I want them. The time is taken in physically writing the responses, finding graphical source material for inspiration, etc. I find it hard to imagine any way that Sludge could be any faster, unless it incorporated a mind reading feature and did the work when I was asleep. :)

It's always an issue if you use either engine for making commercial games. Or did you just want to compare the two for strictly free games? The mention of a fee was an additional downside of SLUDGE rather than a deciding factor for me. That's why I also mentioned the 16-bit limitation, and that is why I said in my earlier reply that if it wasn't for its commercial license, I'd choose WME. Let's make it clear -- If SLUDGE didn't cost $50, I'd still choose AGS. Last but not least, I didn't want to make a separate topic called "AGS vs SLUDGE, fees included", and I did not want to be constrained by your "rule". I just cannot see anyone realistically not considering every factor, including the fees. Because if fees were removed, then a dedicated team of professional programmers from one of the top game development companies to write a custom engine for your game would be the best choice, IMO. But it definitely will cost. If you still insist on only AGS vs SLUDGE and nothing else, fees removed, then my choice is still AGS. The community is more active, the author is quite dedicated, and the site looks more professional (it used to look crap, yes). What does the site have to do with the engine? Shows a little more care and commitment to the engine and its community. I'm surprised that SLUDGE site still looks very umm, unappealing. (shrugs) :)

One more thing for clarification. I'm not an advocate of AGS at all, it has its share of problems, some people in the community aren't all that pleasant to talk to, there is still a group of them that I remember from way back in early AGS days that would say that you didn't need 3D backgrounds or characters, more than 320x200 res, or Windows editor. Luckily, they were finally "converted". :)

That would imply that AGS wouldn't make quality games or that SLUDGE was a much better engine but that is simply not true. They are two VERY comparable engines, which makes SLUDGE a lot less attractive with $50US fee. Where you live is irrelevant, the point is that anything free beats everything non-free of comparable quality. Example? I think WME is much more "with the times" type of engine but in its case there isn't even a set fee but something rather vague, which is scary for commercial projects. Besides, doesn't SLUDGE cost $50US even for free games? Last time I tried it, it had a free version, which had limitations and/or "made with SLUDGE" nag-screen (or something similar), unless you paid $50 for it.

That's true. Production time and quality are more important than investments into the tools. Which is why it is never an issue for companies to hire dedicated programmers to write custom engines and tools for the designers of a game. The only time the cost becomes an issue is for amateur developers, especially if they want to attempt a commercial project. And since I don't see SLUDGE "much much" better than AGS, the fee is an issue, IMO. :) AGS also speeds up your work if you're not a good scripter and/or programmer, which some people saw as a downside.

All it requires to clear that myth is send Mnemonic an email to talk about the price. There are currently a few commercial adventures (of very high quality) developed with wme which prooves that the licence shouldn't scare anyone.

I sent such an email to him long ago. His reply was that he couldn't estimate the price before the project was actually completed or nearing completion. Which means, one could spend years making a commercial game with WME, and if Mnemonic's decision on appropriate royaltees does not agree with a development team, the whole thing would have been a waste. The vague nature of such a license is what's uncomfortable to me. As for the commercial games that are in development (such as Project Joe), the teams' own description is that they have close ties with WME author, which I'm sure adds to their comfort level.

Yes, it must have been long time ago, in the early days of WME when I wasn't sure about licencing. It has been sorted out (also long time ago, now) and the current commercial licence is pretty much fixed and pretty developer-friendly, IMHO ;)

First, If I knew of other engines like WME at the time I first posted I would have included it in the title.

The reason I wanted to rule out registration fees was not because SLUDGE had one for the full version but because I did not want someone to say the following. "I like SLUDGE but I chose to use AGS because it's free." That kind of statement would not help me draw out the information I was looking for. I have an extra $50 and so I could care less about a fee one way or the other. I'm a 29 year old with a full time job. If I can't afford to help out the guy who wrote the engine then I should be spending my time reevaluating my life plan and not creating adventure games. If I did chose a "free" engine I would probably send the creator $50 anyway. If it were not for them most of us would be making web based chose your own adventure novels with pictures. (gratuitous subject change) At least we'd have "brain hotel". That was a refreshingly fun game with a cool player character and a talkie to boot. Not to mention it's using none of the engines we've been talking about. :pan:

If this is the case, then why isn't a rough guideline price available on the Wintermute site?

I hasten to add that I'm not suggesting that you're lying - I'm merely curious! :)

Since I'm in a typing mood I'll continue adding statements to push alternate discussions.

We'll start with another post I read about the character actions moving the plot directly. It's better to have your actions push the plot forward vs having your actions trigger an unrelated event that moves the plot forward and then drags the player character with it.
Links
http://forums.adventuregamers.com/showthread.php?t=7457 by Wormsie "today I understood that puzzles matter" Though it's about puzzles he could have titled it "Today I understood that plot matters"
http://www.adventuregamers.com/newsitem.php?id=944 Also good

Second...
If you have a game that you are releasing in 2005 please take the extra time and make it a talkie. I just played Beneath a Steal Sky (1994 release) and the voice acting though decent for the most part fell apart with some of the choices for a few characters. I'm not going to say It's bad but if you can do 1/4 of the voice quality of BASS it would still be better then nothing. It's 2005, we can do this. I'll also add that the voice acting in BASS is better then The black Mirror.

Flash back...
I'm old enough to remember playing non talkie games when they were new. I don't think I even questioned the fact that games did not have speech until I played Sam and Max (1993) at a friends house. My 386 did not have a sound card or enough ram to even run it. I had Day of the Tentacle (1993), it was the first Lucas Arts talkie and the previous game but I had the floppy non talkie version.

Whenever I remember, I try to remind myself and others that AGS is good for a variety of reasons, and the best alternative for a lot of projects. Icluding anything low-res and projects where you want to emulate Sierra/LucasArts - that side of the code is already scripted, and you only need to download a few files to get it working. For many beginner-types, I recommend AGS, too. Instead of selling my engine, I try to help the person, see where he's coming from and what he might consider necessary when it comes to engine features. I assumed everybody else wanted to do the same, but you just want to spread the plague that is AGS! http://forums.idlethumbs.net/images/smilies/oldman.gif

"Try to do this with Agast!" - 2ma2, when talking about a platform game he made with AGS. The AGS Ezine had a whole article dedicated to just praising AGS, in fact, "proving" that it is the best. There was an old post somewhere in the boards where I criticised tat one, but it was along the lines: "Sludge is pretty good but it costs, Agast has folders as rooms so it sucks. AGS is the best!" The reason for AGS being the best was that "you can do anything with it". However, you can do anything with Agast and WME (and Sludge, too, I'd wager). Most people do not have any idea of engines other than AGS. Whenever there is talk about other engines, I try to tell what I know of them. I know of Agast and WME, mainly. I have also tried both AGS and Sludge. I try to tell people that those engines are perfectly usable, too, no matter what the discussion forum is - Adventure Developers, AGS forums, etc.

Conversely, AGS users educate me about AGS stuff. (Chris Joes does help people with the engine.)

And a lot of my anti-AGS attitude is about being a troll. A sincere troll, but still a troll. :shifty: See the :shifty: after "AGS users find a way of defending their engine"? It means I'm joking.

A rant will ensue. Hopefully a humorous, self-ironical one.

Hmm, the FAQ on WME site still shows the same as when I wrote my e-mail:

Q: Is it possible to use WME to make a commercial game?

A: Yes, it is possible, but you will have to obtain a separate commercial license. The licencing fees will be discussed on a case-by-case basis. Please enquire with the developer about what would be fair in your particular case.

So, I were to ask you how much it would roughly cost if I made "Syberia" with WME, what would you say? If you're uncomfortable stating estimates on public forums, could you say that I would actually be given such an estimate if I were to ask by e-mail now, even if a project hasn't been started yet?

Even if someone did say, "I like SLUDGE but I chose to use AGS because it's free", it does not automatically mean that it's solely because they do not want to spend any money or cannot afford it. Let me give you an example and then hopefully you will see my point. If SLUDGE developer is asking for $50 to support his development of the engine, that implies that if the engine sale isn't successful, the development may very well stop or slow to a crawl because there's no motivation. One person may think they're making a difference by paying for it but look at some of the underrated adventure games that the fans absolutely loved but yet the publilshers and/or developers weren't happy with because of the low sales. I may try to "guess" SLUDGE developer's mentality that he's "not like those other guys" but I do not know him personally, so that won't work. Now, take a look at AGS -- Chris never asked for any fees, and yet he's so dedicated to updating it. There's always a new beta out, always something added. He will even make custom adjustments to the engine if a developer team so requires. If a person who doesn't want any fees for his engine is still so highly motivated and dedicated to updating it, that's even more motivation for me. So, the fee for me has absolutely nothing to do with having a job or life in order. It's called smart investment and/or spending. ;)

Yes, I know people with mentality "hey, who cares, it's just $50, I make more in a week". But once you start donating money to charities or various organizations that help sick people, ever penny counts, no matter how rich you are. Besides, $50 can buy you an additional (hopefully adventure) game or two. Also, as I said in one of my earlier replies, I'd be much more inclined to donate something to Chris because he's not asking for money in the first place and yet finds motivation to constantly update AGS than if he asked for something upfront. Because I know that AGS "life" does not depend on the fees at all.

Now that it's out of the way, let me at least point out that I actually agree with many things that have been mentioned:

1) AGS is perfect for classic style adventure games, best for lower resolutions like 320x200 but still doable for 640x480. And supports 32-bit. And it's free for commercial games. It IS slower at higher resolutions than some alternatives. Will it ever change in the future? Who knows.

2) SLUDGE is still cheap enough, even if it does require a fee, so if you're absolutely sure you want to use it, it won't make you poor. But no 32-bit support, which is an issue to some people, including myself. And $50 is still not free when it's not obviously ahead in features than something else.

3) WME, probably best technically from dedicated adventure engines but somewhat unclear commercial license. Great for free high res 32-bit games though. But I will mention that in a game like "Five Magical Amulets" the saving time took suspiciously long further in the game. Saving in commercial games is practically instant for me. I don't know if it was game-specific or an engine itself.

Personally, I've been using CrystalSpace engine, especially after finding out about its use in the upcoming commercial adventure game called "Keepsake". Plenty of coding and scripting in it for those who love it, and good enough high res, 32-bit and 3D support, if needed.

That's it. In the end we just want to make games because we love to play them. Hopefully, this will clear some air. :)

Lot of posts since this one now but I'd like to add, just for the record, that while Tim is busy with his work and stuff he has been helpful and I don't feel the support lacking.

And regarding AGS-fanatics, I admit that I get a bit annoyed when some AGS users pretend that there is no world outside AGS. It's not uncommon to see people talking about commercial games and AGS-games, rather than independent, amateur or underground. Sure, the correct terms are slightly more clunky and most of these games are made with AGS, but that attitude still rubs me the wrong way.

Well, I'll consider it, because I didn't realize it discouraged people THAT much. But let's just say I like to hear from the people seriously considering licencing the engine for commercial purposes. And when they contact me, we can also discuss some further details, support etc.
Oh, and I'm not lying, I have several witnesses ;)


Yes.

I'm glad somebody else feels like me. I feel less alone now. :)

I'd say the impression that WME fans are anti-AGS comes from people like Wormsie.

I think it's more about being genuinely unaware, more than "pretending". Some may never have heard of WME, SLUDGE, AGAST, CrystalSpace or games made with Flash, others are only dimly aware of these alternatives. It's easy to see why, just look at the nominations for the 2004 Underground Awards. One game made with WME (The Dead City), one with AGAST (Patrimonium), two with Flash (Brain Hotel and Peasant Quest) and one with AGI (Enclosure). All the rest are AGS games. AGS just has so much more visibility, it's easy to mistake the engine for the scene.

There are no "people like Wormsie". I repeat: I am the only anti-AGS person I know of, in the sense that I often want to use as strict hyperbole against AGS as many use for AGS.

If people are ready to think that all WME users are anti-AGS because I am anti-AGS, they are just stupid.

BTW, I would very much like to see - not proof, because I'm certain it exists - an example of someone presenting a view that WME users are anti-AGS. Anything interesting in the AGS discussion board, for example?

However, have you read my posts? I even recommend AGS! That's right! I have even used AGS for a brief while! And today I thought about learning AGS again. Until I remembered that it hadn't worked for me in the past. So I am not as anti-AGS as you apparently think I am. I am more likely pro-Other-Engines-Than-AGS, jus because I think it gets quite lonely in the WME boards from time to time...

Well, here in the Netherlands we have this saying: High trees catch most wind. Or something. Anyway, AGS is a high tree because of its huge community.

--Erwin

Then you should join the IRC channel from time to time, all the action happens there :-)

Oh, and we don't only hate AGS, we hate everyone. Including ourselves.

I see your point here, in that it's nice to know that people are serious about their intentions. And I'm not suggesting that you suddenly change your system to making an online purchase without talking with you guys first. Some idea of the price might be useful, however, as it prevents people like me from simply assuming that, if the developer won't state it on the site, it's bound to be more than the humble amateur can afford ;).

Yeah. We hate you, but we hate everyone so you're not special.

Just for the record, it did made me decide to check out the other engine first. The same applies to Agast. I got really comfortable with SLUDGE, so I never really bothered to try WME and AGAST. I probably would have tried it later, if I didn't like SLUDGE, and I probably would have tried it first if not for the shady license information. I don't know if many people were/are discouraged, though. After all, the license is only a small obstacle.

--Erwin

For the record, that was a big issue with me. I'm probably unusual, but I have invested a lot of time in my game and plan to invest a whole lot more. I then plan to sell it for real money (hey I can dream can't I?) I needed a license that was watertight.

Again for the record, this was an area where Tim (the Sludgemeister) passed the test with flying colors. The original Sludge license (circa 2003) was already perfect for free or shareware games, but the license was a little vague or worrying if a game was to be sold. (It wasn't Tim's fault, it was the third party sound software). I grumbled about it a few times, and Tim ended up paying an undisclosed but substantial sum to ensure that Sludge sound software is genuinely free for everyone. That kind of care and attention counts for a lot in my book.

He implemented an entirely different sound library, even. And then paid the fee, which was much cheaper than the previous one.

--Erwin

Don't forget the pointless deaths in Kings Quest 5. You walk to the edge of the stupid open area grid maze and a scorpion would run out and kill you. There was no way to avoid it.

I can see it know... Game starts...
Bob's Girlfriend: "Honey, you can't leave the apartment without brushing your teeth."
Bob: "OK!" Bob goes into the bathroom to brush his teeth and a bowling ball crashes through his ceiling killing him.:pan: Apparently his upstairs neighbor did not notice the line in his lease which reads, "Under no circumstances is bathtub bowling allowed" - The End

Please Restart or Load a saved game.

thanks for playing
Sierra

OK, how would you guys rank AGS, Agast, WME, and SLUDGE in some major categories such as stability, speed, ease of use, extra features/pointless extras, community, commercial licenses, etc.? For example, I'd say for price, it would obviously be 1. AGS (because it's free and can do commercial games) 2. WME and Agast and 3. SLUDGE because it's the only one that costs any money for registering. For the other categories I don't have enough experience with them to compare, except for AGS is dang slow at high-resolution. Where would you rank them? I think it would be fun just to see which ones rank the highest in the most categories.

I don't have enough experience with the other engines to really compare them, but this is what I can say about Sludge in those areas:

Stability: Never had any problems in that area, and it has a very solid "feel" to it.

Speed: Would need comparisions to really say anything. Seems good, though.

Ease of use: I find it very easy to use, but since it's scripting based it shouldn't be hard to find people who disagree.

Extra features: Don't know enough about the current state of the other engines to know what features are extra. Things like lightmaps and fading screens are pretty much standard now, aren't they? I like the ability to use MO3 music - that may be a Sludge-unique feature?

Community: Small but friendly. We're probably the least engine-centered community. Off topic talk practically doesn't exist at the Sludge forum. Typical Sludgers are Erwin who run Adventure Developers and me who run The Crow's Nest. I don't think anyone is ever left standing without technical help at the Sludge forum, but don't go there for artistic discussions. (AD and TCN, - maybe this forum, too - are better suited for that. I'd like to see more general discussion move off engine forums to the general sites.)