[Captain_Tuttle]

Just wondering if adventure gamers is planning on reviewing digital praise's games, Adventures in Odyssey and the Sword of the Spirt as well as Adventures in Odyssey treasure of the incas? Sure there edutainment, but you guys have done Pepper in Time and other eduatainment games. When games are based on a license as large as Odyssey (largest radio drama show currently in America) I don't see how Adventure gamers can pass it up

[fov]

I don't think there are any immediate plans to review these, but we always like to hear suggestions.

I'm not sure I've even heard of these games. Off to do a little search...

-em

[Captain_Tuttle]

Heres the link http://www.digitalpraise.com/dpi_products.html
Hope fully you guys look into in, I'm planning on contacting the company with regards to writing an article for my school's paper, more with regards to rasing capital / marketing, but if theres a demand i could post it up here when i'm done

[BillBean]

If you would like to review the games, let me know. I think you will be amazed at what we have released - with more to come this year.

Bill Bean
Digital Praise Inc

[Captain_Tuttle]

Originally Posted by BillBean

If you would like to review the games, let me know. I think you will be amazed at what we have released - with more to come this year.

Bill Bean
Digital Praise Inc

Is There going to be an follow up to this? I mean you guys have apparently heard from a guy with the company with america's largest radio franchise as game, yet only thing from up top is fov saying she's never heard of them? Are you guys following up?

[Jackal]

Yep, we've discussed these titles behind the scenes. The licence a game is based on is a meaningless point, but if these games are suitable for AG coverage, we'll certainly consider reviewing them. I wouldn't expect public progress reports, though.

[Captain_Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Yep, we've discussed these titles behind the scenes. The licence a game is based on is a meaningless point, but if these games are suitable for AG coverage, we'll certainly consider reviewing them. I wouldn't expect public progress reports, though.

Well they're are adventure games, the fact that they are licensed isn't meaningless, it means it's a very big name game from a north american studio, yet hasn't been covered at all, wheras obscure games , without a license from europe are covered. I just found that kind of strange, I didn't expect public progress reports, just whether or not anything was taking place. Like i mentioned before the only message from AG was fov saying she hadn't heard of them. But thanks for getting back.

[Martin Gantefoehr]

"Glorifying God Through Interactive Media"?!

My, that's a pretty unambiguous mission statement.

[Watcher of the skies]

Thanks, but no thanks.

Mike

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by CaptainTuttle

Well they're are adventure games, the fact that they are licensed isn't meaningless, it means it's a very big name game from a north american studio, yet hasn't been covered at all, wheras obscure games , without a license from europe are covered. I just found that kind of strange, I didn't expect public progress reports, just whether or not anything was taking place. Like i mentioned before the only message from AG was fov saying she hadn't heard of them. But thanks for getting back.

Right, there's no problem with asking, and I had forgotten about the thread itself, actually, and should have responded sooner.

As to why they haven't been given equal attention to other games (besides no one knowing about them until recently), it's a two-part answer. In addition to the one Martin has highlighted, the second part is that they're children's games, which AG hasn't traditionally given much focus to (though we are, in fact, beginning to do that very thing). The first matter is much more sensitive, and that's what prevents us from agreeing to anything sight unseen. But as I said, we're certainly open to the possibility, and will consider the games on their own merits.

[Captain_Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Jackal

As to why they haven't been given equal attention to other games (besides no one knowing about them until recently), it's a two-part answer. In addition to the one Martin has highlighted, the second part is that they're children's games, which AG hasn't traditionally given much focus to (though we are, in fact, beginning to do that very thing). The first matter is much more sensitive, and that's what prevents us from agreeing to anything sight unseen. But as I said, we're certainly open to the possibility, and will consider the games on their own merits.

Not sure what you mean the one highlited by martin " Glorifying God Through Interactive Media" as an unamibigous mission statement, interactive media while not explictly adevnture games (a crossword puzzle could be interactive media) shouldn't be a reason for not reviewing a game. Mission statements can't be to limiting to an organization and must be openend enough to deal with change. imagine a organization whos mission is to "produce buggy whips" it would have been antiquated long ago though an organization whos mission is to "produce transporation accessories" could produce buggy whips but also adapt and function in a modern setting. I don't think just because the company's mission explictly states that it should produce adventure games that you should ignore it. On a different note for readers interesting in reading a reivew, theres one posted at just adventure http://www.justadventure.com/reviews...yssey/AID.shtm in got a rating of A-

[Jackal]

Huh? You seem to be quoting me, but responding to absolutely nothing I actually said. I wasn't giving ANY reason not to review the game. I was answering the question of why it generally draws less attention than more mainstream, secular titles. It is also a concern, because religious motivations certainly CAN be the source of much dissension. It would be foolish not to take that into consideration before agreeing to anything.

Anyway, I wrote to Digital Praise a couple weeks ago, and heard nothing back.

[Captain_Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Huh? You seem to be quoting me, but responding to absolutely nothing I actually said. I wasn't giving ANY reason not to review the game. I was answering the question of why it generally draws less attention than more mainstream, secular titles. It is also a concern, because religious motivations certainly CAN be the source of much dissension. It would be foolish not to take that into consideration before agreeing to anything.

Anyway, I wrote to Digital Praise a couple weeks ago, and heard nothing back.

You said one of the reasons they hadn't been given equal attention was u the one Martin had highlighted. Is that not so ? Martin's reason was: " "Glorifying God Through Interactive Media"?!

My, that's a pretty unambiguous mission statement"

What I talked about was how I didn't undestand that reasoning, as using the phrase "interactive media" isn't unambigous, for the reasons i mentioned in my previous post. Thus i was refering to what you said, not " responding to absolutely nothing I actually said"

[Jackal]

Well, by completely altering the context of my answer (changing it to a rationale for not reviewing something), that effectively addressed a point I wasn't making at all.

And incidentally, the "interactive media" is not at all the part of the statement in question.

[Captain_Tuttle]

Originally Posted by Jackal

And incidentally, the "interactive media" is not at all the part of the statement in question.

Well your weren't very explict which part of the statement you had qualms about you just said martin's statment., given the site's dedication to review strictly adventure games, it was the one that made the most sense. Furthermore I don't really believe I changed your rationale, you make it sound as though i'm attacking you personally. You just stated that mission statement was a reason that you hadn't given equal attention. As you did not clearly identify what you meant by the mission statment, I took the logical course of infering the interactive media portion, as many times the sit goes to say that they review only adventure games, (given just adventures's predispositon to go outside the pure adventure genre, and the fact that they reviewed the game, it made sense that this was the portion of the mission statment that you found contentious) Thus you said the mission statment a reason for not giving full coverage, I simply said that it shouldn't impede as they really are adventure games and explained the use of what I inferred to be the problem portion of the mission statment. You really shouldn't view this as an attack on you or my chaning your words as they are not.

[Jackal]

I'm not viewing anything as an attack, personal or otherwise. I'm simply correcting obvious misinterpretations.

I'll admit to being more than a little surprised there's any doubt at all that "glorifying God" is the defining aspect of DP's mission statement, not the vague reference to the medium.

So let me reiterate clearly: for us to be interested, a game would need to be A) a legitimate adventure game, and B) tolerant and respectful of people who don't share the same religious foundation. Pretty basic stuff.

[BillBean]

My name is Bill Bean and I am vp of sales & marketing. I am also one of the founders. Please allow me to speak plainly:

Who we are: the founders are three guys who want really fun games for our kids to play without some of the darker elements. Tom is the CEO, Peter is the CTO and Creative director.

Peter is a 24 year game developer and at his last gig he was the director of engineering for The Learning Company (TLC) for 7 years. His teams managed the core games and licensed brands in Fremont, CA. When RiverDeep acquired TLC and moved operations to Dublin, Ireland everyone was out of work.

We worked very hard on securing an established brand that had a library of 600 plus episodes offering positive messages in each of the episodes while offering both "faith" and "faith free" storylines. And we hired the writers who write the weekly adventure shows to create two adventures stories that would naturally extend themselves to interactive adventures.

We suspect that any parent would like to offer their children an opportunity to play games that were really fun to play and that had a positive message woven into the fabric of the game.

These messages are basic, simple, "want to have in your kid" kind of stuff, regardless. The hope of every Mother and Father is their child will not lie, cheat, steal and ultimately learn to take responsibility for their actions.

The point here would be - there is no overt religious messaging within these games. The games are really fun to play and kids love to play them! No one is going to church, there is no verbal religious questions being asked - these are adventure games - not a Sunday school class.

Once we secured the exclusive license for the Adventures in Odyssey, Peter hired all of his teams that he had worked with: producers, artists, animators, game designers, project engineers, engineers, marketing, sales, audio and more. Folks that had been at TLC for 6, 8, 12 and 18 years - all working together to create award winning products like Oregon Trail, ClueFinders, Where in the World is Carmin Sandiego, Algebra, Scooby-Doo, Powder-Puff, et al. We had 64 folks working at some level on these last two titles.


The point is we have top teams working together on developing adventure games, and masterfully providing a natural interactive extension to an existing licensed brand working within all of their unique criteria’s.

The animation was done by Toonacious Family Entertainment where there in house talent drew and animated Pumba in the Lion King, Kronk in the Emperors new Groove, Cogsworth in Beauty and the Beast, TOY Story and was the co-director of Disney’s Mulan.

The Adventures in Odyssey and the Treasure of the Incas game, WIN/MAC, is a mystery adventure game similar to let's say a Nancy Drew game. Primaraly targeted to ages 8 to 12.

The Adventures in Odyssey and the Sword of the Spirit game, WIN/MAC, is an action adventure game with arcade style activities. Primaraly targeted to ages 8 to 12.

Player take on the roles of each of the three main characters: Connie, Whit and Eugene.

Enough of my rambling - These adventure games are for anyone and everyone. All groups are included, all groups are welcome - no one is excluded. Play the game.

I would be happy to submit several copies of the games for your review team to evaluate or our public relations firm S&S Public Relations could facilitate that.

Unfortunatly I missed the earlier mentioned email, however I can be reached at 510-770-0244 Ext. 115 or [email protected]

Thank you for the opportunity to present my thoughts to your group! If you every need a couple of giveaways, please let me know.

Sincerely,

Bill Bean
www.digitalpraise.com
510-770-0244 Ext. 115

[Jackal]

Hi, Bill.

Thanks for taking the time to share these details. The answers are much like I expected, but the questions still needed to be asked.

I'm sorry to hear my earlier mail was lost in the ether. That address listed here is the one I used, so we'll make sure any future emails don't go awry.

[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by Jackal

So let me reiterate clearly: for us to be interested, a game would need to be A) a legitimate adventure game, and B) tolerant and respectful of people who don't share the same religious foundation. Pretty basic stuff.

I was not aware that B is a requirement for Adventure Gamers coverage. Are there other restrictions we might not be aware of? For instance, would you cover an adventure game with a strongly partisan political message? Would you in general not cover games that express a world view you find offensive? How about games that are nihilistically violent, sadistic or just plain nasty?

I have a hard time figuring out why a game with a controversial religious message would be more problematic, less appropriate for the site, than games full of sex or gore (which you have covered). If a game is openly or subtly evangelizing, can't you simply point that out in your review? If it expresses a fundamentalistic or intolerant world view, can't you raise those concerns?

As an adventure gamer, I'm interested in reading about religious adventure games. If they are any good, I might even buy and play them, even though I don't share the beliefs of the developers. If they were outrageously sanctimonious, I might even get a special kick out of that. However, based on what I can find out about these games, they're nothing at all like that, but just wholesome, positive games. I'm not even sure that they explicitly touch on Christian faith.

Bill, I think it's great that you've created something based on your inner convictions, that still can touch a wide audience. I'm sure there's plenty of stuff I would disagree with you about, but I wish more people would say what they have to say with a top-notch adventure game!

[Jackal]

Snarky, there's a big difference between having controversial content and having content promote a particular agenda, particularly an agenda known to be offensive or hurtful to some. I have a hard time understanding why that's not an obvious distinction. Frankly, it's impossible to even approach such issues with complete neutrality, as much as we may try to. It only makes sense to show SOME degree of caution before stepping onto that road.

I could try to get into some kind of philosophical debate about this, but since it's purely hypothetical and serves nothing, I'll just offer the practical answer that we'd take everything on a case by case basis. I'm sure everyone would like us to cover everything that interests them personally, but not everything is worth the time and energy required by the trouble it causes. Yes, I'm sure there ARE other things we would potentially deem not worth the effort to cover.

Perhaps you're simply reading too much into my statement, since you have no idea where the "line" may be on what is or isn't acceptable (or worthwhile). There are no hard and fast rules, of course, but rest assured that it's a very liberal line, as it is in all facets of AG. That should be pretty obvious from any time spent here.

The only reason it came up at all was in attempting to explain why I wouldn't just agree to cover any game sight unseen. I hope there ARE no games we would ever consider too inappropriate to cover, but I won't assume so by not looking before I leap.