a976@mindlink.UUCP (Ron Tarrant) (05/29/90)
If there isn't a message on the box saying that the game is
harddrive-installable and multi-tasking, I don't buy it. If those messages
aren't there, you can bet (most of the time) that it'll be one of those games
that causes so many headaches for those of us who don't like to re-boot "just
to play a game" or makes it impossible to "play just for a few minutes while my
brain settles down from all this programming/animating/word
processing/what-have-you".
Please, make your game multi-tasking and harddrive installable and SAY
SO ON THE BOX!
Please please please please please please... (ad infinitum)
-Ron Tarrantmt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) (05/29/90)
Hi,
A few days ago I asked about the low memory of Amiga. Well I later noticed
that i(pc) and i(a0) are as fast addressing modes as $short, so I think
a can use i(pc) and put the variables in the same hunk as code. i(a0) isn't
too good because it eats one address register and almost all working in my
program are in registers for speed.
Okay, that's about that, now I had few other questions (or more specific I
would like to hear your opinions on following subjects):
1. Should game be HD-installable?
- IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat chip-memory
and you will run out of it especially on 512k chip-ram machines. And you
can make Disk-based routines lot more faster and more data in one disk
which helps people without HD.
2. Should game multitask?
- IMHO I at least don't want to play those shit games with multitasking on.
But if we are talking about for example following "Multitasking": Game
disables interrupts while playing but for example if you pause it it will
turn interrupts back on. I would like to make my game work like this. But
there are few drawbacks: Copy-protection is alot harder to make and you
very easily run out of memory.
3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors?
- IMHO memory is must because it makes the game lot more playable and HD-people
don't argue about the loading speed. Extra drives eat memory which causes
serious trouble in 512k machines. Processors are useless in simple scroll
games because they at least should be using the blitter in nasty-mode so
processors don't speed it up too much. Nowadays the games also must run on
all motorola 680x0 family thanks to A3000. But by detecting I mean really
notice the speed increase and add new things to game (BTW my program notices
but noone of my friends has 68020/68030 so I dunno how much it helps:-).
4. Should game be exitable?
- IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy anything in memory
and you will end up again without enough memory:-(
And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while doing
something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then updating
games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage).
I provide some examples what I think of games just for fun:
- Datastorm -fast'craze action but too easy
- Xenon -too much button hitting and quite hard
(took almost week to complete)
- Xenon II -great but easy
- Blood Money -stupid hit wall and die game
- Interceptor -great but too easy to complete
- Falcon -too much buttons
- Dungeon Master -great puzzles and good graphics and nice gameplay
- Simcity -boring just let it run 20+ hours and buy everything
- Elite -great but how to get missions? Gets boring without 'em.
- Test Drive I&II -slow and unplayable
- Stunt Car Racer -good gameplay with two computers bit boring alone
- Populous -computer has too much advantage
- Hybris -good but easy
- Battle aquadron -good but easy
It's 0300 am I think I go now. Bye!
MITT
--
Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen
Internet mt87692@tut.fi : UUCP tut!mt87692 : Bitnet mt87692@fintutnsw@cbnewsm.att.com (Neil Weinstock) (05/29/90)
A couple of items here caught my eye. >Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen writes: [ ... ] >1. Should game be HD-installable? > - IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat chip-memory ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > and you will run out of it especially on 512k chip-ram machines. And you > can make Disk-based routines lot more faster and more data in one disk > which helps people without HD. Useless is a relative term. I can assure you that any hard disk owner wants to install everything on the hard disk. If those with 512K chip-ram can't do it cuz of memory constraints, that's probably reasonable, those folks can still run it off the floppy. But why should those with 1M chip-ram and HD be forced to use a floppy? I hardly *ever* use my floppy for other than installing software, and perfer to keep it that way. [ ... ] >4. Should game be exitable? > - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy anything > in memory and you will end up again without enough memory:-( Aarrrgh. I don't like to reboot, period. I don't see why I should have to just for a stupid game. Look at it this way. Nowadays, the degree of system friendliness of a game is my top consideration when deciding on a purchase. It didn't use to be that way. I bought several games of the boot-from-the-floppy-then-reboot variety, then found out that I never play any of them because I can't stand the routine. I've logged more hours playing the version of Tetrix posted to the binaries group than all my other games combined. Why? Because it's right there, nice and convenient (also addictive as hell, but that's another story ;-). On the one hand, we all talk about how the Amazing-Amiga-Is-The-Only- Computer-With-True-Multitasking, then go and write and buy these games that torpedo the whole concept. Blech. I wonder how many people would play rogue if you had to load it in from 9-track tape every time, then restart Unix afterwords? > And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while >doing something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then >updating games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). That is an unfair blanket statement, and you know it. Besides, I think that what most people really care about is the ability to exit cleanly. They may not be able to actually "do work" while playing the game, but at least they don't have to shut everything down. What's to stop you from providing a "friendly" and "nasty" mode, anyway? If I want to tolerate slower operation in order to be able to download while playing (for example), that's my business. As for memory, your argument falls apart once you consider the existence of machines with more than 512K chip RAM. You're going to tell me that on an A3000 with 2 Meg of chip and 16 Meg of fast RAM, your game is going to encounter *any* memory restrictions at all? Just one paying customer's opinion... - Neil --==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-- Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs // What was sliced bread att!edsel!nsw or nsw@edsel.att.com \X/ the greatest thing since?
jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com (Randell Jesup) (05/29/90)
In article <MT87692.90May29030535@uikku.tut.fi> mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes: > A few days ago I asked about the low memory of Amiga. Well I later noticed >that i(pc) and i(a0) are as fast addressing modes as $short, so I think >a can use i(pc) and put the variables in the same hunk as code. i(a0) isn't >too good because it eats one address register and almost all working in my >program are in registers for speed. You can't use d(pc) as a destination. Use d(An), the extra register doesn't hurt enough to be a problem if you know what you're doing. >1. Should game be HD-installable? > - IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat chip-memory > and you will run out of it especially on 512k chip-ram machines. And you > can make Disk-based routines lot more faster and more data in one disk > which helps people without HD. First: HD's put their buffers/etc in fast ram if it's available. Second: Many people (myself included) greatly dislike games that aren't HD-installable. I can never find disks, and I have many hundreds of Meg of HD storage. Plus floppies are SO slow once you're used to fast Quantums. :-) >2. Should game multitask? > - IMHO I at least don't want to play those shit games with multitasking on. > But if we are talking about for example following "Multitasking": Game > disables interrupts while playing but for example if you pause it it will > turn interrupts back on. I would like to make my game work like this. But > there are few drawbacks: Copy-protection is alot harder to make and you > very easily run out of memory. I can live with arcade-like games that disable multi-tasking (though if they can manage with tasking turned on then I'm more likely to use/like them, since I often have to switch what I'm doing, and never reboot unless I'm forced to. If you must disable it, I _FAR_ prefer games that manage to restore the system on exit, and/or during pause. I get very annoyed with disk-based copy protection - it tends to die, and I never bother annoying the publisher, so effectively the game is gone. Also, as I said, finding program disks is a losing proposition for me. >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? > - IMHO memory is must because it makes the game lot more playable and HD-people > don't argue about the loading speed. Extra drives eat memory which causes > serious trouble in 512k machines. Processors are useless in simple scroll > games because they at least should be using the blitter in nasty-mode so > processors don't speed it up too much. Nowadays the games also must run on > all motorola 680x0 family thanks to A3000. But by detecting I mean really > notice the speed increase and add new things to game (BTW my program notices > but noone of my friends has 68020/68030 so I dunno how much it helps:-). They had to before the A3000 too. I will not reboot my machine 2500 in 68000 mode merely to play a game, plus the game will be SOO much slower (since it also makes me lose all my fastram). The flight simulators (at least some of them) handle it pretty well, they increase the refresh speed (DON'T speed up gameplay!) BTW, the "standard" "scroll games" turn me off. pretty shoot-em-ups, who cares? Give me something with meat to it, that isn't all reactions. >4. Should game be exitable? > - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy anything in memory > and you will end up again without enough memory:-( See above. I've ported games to the amiga (before I joined Commodore), and I didn't have much trouble with that (1 meg+ of C source code). > And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while doing >something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then updating >games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). I have no memory shortage (most people in the US have at least 1 Meg of ram, many have 3 or more.) I sometimes play games when I bored late at night, as a break from coding/whatever, and then go back to whatever I was doing, often when someone comes in to ask me a question or tell me about a bug. > I provide some examples what I think of games just for fun: ... > - Falcon -too much buttons Nah, good game! I really like simulations, the more accurate the better (even at the expense of some gameplay). > - Simcity -boring just let it run 20+ hours and buy everything Great fun! More hours were lost here in engineering than I'd care to admit after that came out. The rest I haven't played (I stick to strategy games, simulations, and the like most of the time). -- Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering. {uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.cbm.commodore.com BIX: rjesup Common phrase heard at Amiga Devcon '89: "It's in there!"
bjornk@bula.se (Bjorn Knutsson) (05/29/90)
In article <MT87692.90May29030535@uikku.tut.fi> mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes: [...] >Okay, that's about that, now I had few other questions (or more specific I >would like to hear your opinions on following subjects): > >1. Should game be HD-installable? > > - IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat chip-memory > and you will run out of it especially on 512k chip-ram machines. And you > can make Disk-based routines lot more faster and more data in one disk > which helps people without HD. Yes. If you have a harddisk, you don't want to fool around with floppies. I wouldn't buy a game that can't be installed on my harddisk. You may think this is useless, but a lot of people don't. And besides, the kind of people who buy harddisk are the same kind of people who are prepared to BUY your program. You don't want to piss them off since they're your (potential) customers. >2. Should game multitask? > - IMHO I at least don't want to play those shit games with multitasking on. > But if we are talking about for example following "Multitasking": Game > disables interrupts while playing but for example if you pause it it will > turn interrupts back on. I would like to make my game work like this. But > there are few drawbacks: Copy-protection is alot harder to make and you > very easily run out of memory. Again, I wouldn't buy a game that won't let me multitask. I don't even want programs that take over the display. Also, if your program is copy protected I will hesitate to buy it. Word-in-the-manual, if done right, is OK. Any disk based protection is out. >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? > - IMHO memory is must because it makes the game lot more playable and HD-people > don't argue about the loading speed. Extra drives eat memory which causes > serious trouble in 512k machines. Processors are useless in simple scroll > games because they at least should be using the blitter in nasty-mode so > processors don't speed it up too much. Nowadays the games also must run on > all motorola 680x0 family thanks to A3000. But by detecting I mean really > notice the speed increase and add new things to game (BTW my program notices > but noone of my friends has 68020/68030 so I dunno how much it helps:-). A program should, of course, use as little memory as possible if it's multitasking. Offer the user the ability to cache stuff that is needed often. Use as little CHIPMEM as possible. The program should, of course, not use CPU based timing. If you detect a faster processor give the user the OPTION of adding extras if you like. But don't use the CPU more than you need. Think about those other tasks. Also, you shouldn't adapt to faster processors because CBM has released the A3000. Even an A1000 can have a 68030. >4. Should game be exitable? > - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy anything in memory > and you will end up again without enough memory:-( Yes. Anything else is not acceptable. I want to be able to start a game, play it while downloading some files, and then quit the game and resume work. > And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while doing >something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then updating >games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). I do and I like them. The most important aspect of a game is NOT cute graphics. It's much more important that the game is fun to play. One of my favorite games is The Colony. It multitasks, I can install it on my harddisk and I can pull down it's window. Now, there are some other aspects of this game that I don't like, but those would be the same regardless if the game multitasked or not. The protection used is OK as protections go. Now, I don't like any form of copy protection, but I can see why it's needed. The solution used in The Colony is one of the better I've seen. Generally, The Colony, while not the best game I've ever played, does a VERY good job of adapting to your machine. It even adapted its screen to the size of my overscanned PAL (704*568) workbench screen. >-- >Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen >Internet mt87692@tut.fi : UUCP tut!mt87692 : Bitnet mt87692@fintut --- Bjorn Knutsson / USENET: bjornk@bula.se or sunic!sics!bula!bjornk Stangholmsbacken 44 / Phone : +46-8-710 7223 S-127 40 SKARHOLMEN / "Oh dear, I think you'll find reality's on the S W E D E N / blink again." -- Marvin The Paranoid Android
mk59200@korppi.tut.fi (Kolkka Markku Olavi) (05/29/90)
In article <MT87692.90May29030535@uikku.tut.fi> mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes: >Okay, that's about that, now I had few other questions (or more specific I >would like to hear your opinions on following subjects): > >1. Should game be HD-installable? YES! >2. Should game multitask? YES! > - IMHO I at least don't want to play those shit games with multitasking on. IMHO I don't want to play those shit games that disable multitasking and steal the display. I bought my Amiga because of its multitasking ability! Why should I pay money for a stupid program that disables the main feature of the computer? You could as well turn off the display and tell the user to connect a Decwriter to the serial port to play the game. >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? Yes, yes, yes. >4. Should game be exitable? Yes, of course! -- Markku Kolkka mk59200@tut.fi
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (05/29/90)
In <17866@ultima.cs.uts.oz>, vilkas@ultima.cs.uts.oz (Iron Wolf) writes: > >Good for you but when you are blasting a games designer with these statements >you have to examine the reality of the matter and his point of view as well. >Now...if you have a DMA SCSI HD you need a buffer in CHIP ram...am I corect? >(I am not real sure but I assume this is true). He is not 'blasting a games designer'. He is answering with an opinion in response to a direct question. You are incorrect, unless the machine happens to have ONLY CHIP ram. Examining the issues from the designers point of view only carries so much weight. If the designer is designing for himself, fine, but he is not; he is designing from the point of view of making the game appeal to as wide an audience as possible. He is being told what is important to those he has asked. >Also....a VERY large number of the type of people who BUY these games, the >MARKET, don't have a HD, and quite a few only have 512k. Now unless we want >to make the cost of development increase by having the programmers write >variations for hard drives, extra memory and so on, we should be content that >in general, the games that are written actually WORK on most Amiga >configurations. You can talk about what _you_ should be content with, but please do not presume to tell us that we should accept your standards. Many demand more, and if it is not forthcoming, will not be forthcoming with their money. The author ignores wishes and/or demands at his own peril. >>I wonder how many people would play rogue if you had to load it in from >>9-track tape every time, then restart Unix afterwords? > >Lets not bring up a stupid comparison, UNIX is a lot more cumbersome that >AmigaDos, and I wonder if you realise how much piracy costs the game industry? >If the programmers start saying: "Sure, run a cli - make an image of the memory" >we will find very few commercial quality programs coming out on the market as >they will be easily available in pirated form. > >Every effort should be made to insure the integrity of the software and the >security of it. As if it really mattered whether or not a CLI can be brought up... games get stolen; it's a fact of life. No matter what you do, this will be the case. You might delay the inevitable, but you will not stop it. Bottom line here, again, is that I vote with my wallet. Copy protection is high on the list of things that will make me vote no. >Now...if we want games to multitask...we dont want security...we dont want >fast flashy games....we want lots of system overhead when writing simple >routines....we want somewhat inconsistent reaction times. Well >Well if this is what you want...take a look; you already have it PD & >shareware is what is viable for such demands. The quality is generally poorer >the cost is much less. You want multitasking, well you can get it. I'll stick >with quality and performance. And the only way to get consistent performance >is to shut off any interference. Again, speak for yourself. I will tell you that your priorities are not absolute immutable physical laws. You buy the ones that take over. I, and many others will choose to do without. >You're argument falls apart where you point out that there are machines such >as the A3000 and 1Mb & 2Mb Amiga's. The majority of Amiga's out there are >A500's with 512k or at most 1Mb, one..maybe two drives. Adn as such, there >is what the programmer's MUST cater for to achieve maxmimum market penetration >and sales. The games MUST have protection to discourage piracy and the games >must follow the dictates of what the majority of consumers want. Your argument was never together enough to fall apart. The point is not where the market is. The point is that the designer asked what was important in a few specific areas. He was told. Should he choose to ignore it, he will not make the sale to those who have expressed those opinions, and those who agree with it. Nobody is forcing him to comply; there are no midnight visits from the multitasking police. He will make his choices, we will make ours. Simple, neat, and self policing. >As the market changes, so will the games..already many games require 1Mb >and even the European games (which are the majority of good games) are beginning >to notice that second disk drive stuck onto the machines instead of saying >"please insert disk 2". I haven't found European games to be particularly good, but then we obviously have different ideas on what's good and what isn't; on what's acceptable behaviour and what isn't. >So the message gets through and the direction changes. > >So in a speculative future where the A750 with 68020 & 1Mb chip mem with two >drives is the basic model...we will see a lot of the things you are talking about >but we will also see a lot of games that are written in the same way as todays >games with more features better performance etc. > >The only way that your gripes will be picked up by the programmer's is if >the majority of the market started feeling the same way. > >The main point to remember is that the industry is geared towards the consumer >and will produce what he wants to see (or more correctly what he is willing >to pay for) That's right. You choose to ignore it in your main message, then reverse yourself here. -larry -- The raytracer of justice recurses slowly, but it renders exceedingly fine. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
djh@dragon.metaphor.com (Dallas J. Hodgson) (05/30/90)
Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen Internet mt87692@tut.fi : UUCP tut!mt87692 : Bitnet mt87692@fintut writes: >1. Should game be HD-installable? Hell yes. If you actually have to ask yourself this question, then you're still developing on floppies. If it's HD-installable, you're making it ultra-convenient for stores to demo your software, besides making life easier on the rest of us. Don't you just LOVE hearing the floppy head grind when you KNOW the game could sit on your HD? FORGET floppy-based copy protection. Use serial numbers or keyword entry systems and COOPERATE with the system! >2. Should game multitask? If at all possible. Again, stores will give your software a lot more demo time if they don't have to reboot to run it. Unprofessional! If you can't, be nice and RESTORE the environment when finished. >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? If you're using overlays, yes. Load as many overlays as will fit upon startup. Any file requesters must be able to references any valid AmigaDOS pathname. Making use of coprocessor features is not so important for a GAME, unless there's a real performance issue here. Just make sure the thing RUNS on a 68010 and better - and doesn't speed up because of this! >4. Should game be exitable? If at all possible. Cooperate with the system! The hooks are in place in the system to do so. Use them whenever possible. I recognize that most current Amiga games are not "well-behaved applications" - much less than the PC & Mac worlds, where all virtually all quality games are HD-installable and few crash on faster machines. +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Dallas J. Hodgson | "This here's the wattle, | | Metaphor Computer Systems | It's the emblem of our land. | | Mountain View, Ca. | You can put it in a bottle, | | USENET : djh@metaphor.com | You can hold it in your hand." | +============================================================================+ | "The views I express are my own, and not necessarily those of my employer" | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
deven@rpi.edu (Deven T. Corzine) (05/30/90)
On 29 May 90 00:05:35 GMT, mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) said: Mikko> 1. Should game be HD-installable? Mikko> 2. Should game multitask? Mikko> 3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? Mikko> 4. Should game be exitable? Mikko> And I would like also to know how many of you people really Mikko> play games while doing something else? If you do, do you really Mikko> like those every now and then updating games with poor graphics Mikko> (thanks to memory shortage). The answer to every one of these questions is a resounding YES. If you even need to ask, something's amiss. Of course, better you ask than do it wrong. Stop thinking like a C64 programmer. You DON'T have the entire machine at your disposal. Taking over the machine will keep MANY people from bothering with it. More importantly, you're clearly only thinking about your own system configuration. There are many variations in configurations and priorities, and you ignore them at your own risk. Any HD owner will NOT want to run your game off floppies, period. Many people want ANY game to multitask. People get very irritated by a game which keeps loading images off a floppy (slowly) when they have a hard drive and megabytes of memory and could go MUCH faster if the game were written correctly. And an ever-growing number of users are getting VERY tired of having to reboot the machine after playing a game. In short, every point you brought up is a major reason many people avoid poorly-written games. Don't second-guess the user. You might be concerned about ultimate speed and memory efficiency, but someone with an A3000 running under KickStart V2.0 with a 25MHz 68030/68882 and 2 Meg of chip RAM, 16 Meg of 32-bit fast RAM, and a 600 Meg 16 ms hard drive is likely to have far different priorities than the user with an A1000 running under KickStart V1.2 with an 8 MHz 68000, 512K chip RAM, no fast RAM and one floppy. Also, note that a user on a small system may well prefer to sacrifice some speed for the ability to continue something in the background... And don't use CPU timing loops! Do NOT assume everyone in the world has the same type of system as you have. It's NOT true. Even you will probably have a different system in the future. Avoid assumptions you don't need to make. Don't steal the system or go directly to the hardware. If you must, then at least cooperate with the operating system to gain ownership of the hardware before using it. You don't need to be unfriendly to the system in the name of efficiency. Just learn to do it right. Basically, follow the rules and guidelines long since established for developers... [don't you just hate lectures? *sigh* it's justified, anyhow.] Deven -- Deven T. Corzine Internet: deven@rpi.edu, shadow@pawl.rpi.edu Snail: 2214 12th St. Apt. 2, Troy, NY 12180 Phone: (518) 271-0750 Bitnet: deven@rpitsmts, userfxb6@rpitsmts UUCP: uunet!rpi!deven Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible.
vilkas@ultima.cs.uts.oz (Iron Wolf) (05/30/90)
nsw@cbnewsm.att.com (Neil Weinstock) writes: >>Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen writes: >[ ... ] >>1. Should game be HD-installable? >> - IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat chip-memory > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> and you will run out of it especially on 512k chip-ram machines. And you >> can make Disk-based routines lot more faster and more data in one disk >> which helps people without HD. >Useless is a relative term. I can assure you that any hard disk owner wants >to install everything on the hard disk. If those with 512K chip-ram can't >do it cuz of memory constraints, that's probably reasonable, those folks can >still run it off the floppy. But why should those with 1M chip-ram and HD >be forced to use a floppy? >I hardly *ever* use my floppy for other than installing software, and perfer >to keep it that way. Good for you but when you are blasting a games designer with these statements you have to examine the reality of the matter and his point of view as well. Now...if you have a DMA SCSI HD you need a buffer in CHIP ram...am I corect? (I am not real sure but I assume this is true). Also....a VERY large number of the type of people who BUY these games, the MARKET, don't have a HD, and quite a few only have 512k. Now unless we want to make the cost of development increase by having the programmers write variations for hard drives, extra memory and so on, we should be content that in general, the games that are written actually WORK on most Amiga configurations. >[ ... ] >>4. Should game be exitable? >> - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy anything >> in memory and you will end up again without enough memory:-( >Aarrrgh. I don't like to reboot, period. I don't see why I should have to >just for a stupid game. >Look at it this way. Nowadays, the degree of system friendliness of a game >is my top consideration when deciding on a purchase. It didn't use to be >that way. I bought several games of the boot-from-the-floppy-then-reboot >variety, then found out that I never play any of them because I can't stand >the routine. I've logged more hours playing the version of Tetrix posted >to the binaries group than all my other games combined. Why? Because it's >right there, nice and convenient (also addictive as hell, but that's >another story ;-). >On the one hand, we all talk about how the Amazing-Amiga-Is-The-Only- >Computer-With-True-Multitasking, then go and write and buy these games that >torpedo the whole concept. Blech. >I wonder how many people would play rogue if you had to load it in from >9-track tape every time, then restart Unix afterwords? Lets not bring up a stupid comparison, UNIX is a lot more cumbersome that AmigaDos, and I wonder if you realise how much piracy costs the game industry? If the programmers start saying: "Sure, run a cli - make an image of the memory" we will find very few commercial quality programs coming out on the market as they will be easily available in pirated form. Every effort should be made to insure the integrity of the software and the security of it. Now...if we want games to multitask...we dont want security...we dont want fast flashy games....we want lots of system overhead when writing simple routines....we want somewhat inconsistent reaction times. Well Well if this is what you want...take a look; you already have it PD & shareware is what is viable for such demands. The quality is generally poorer the cost is much less. You want multitasking, well you can get it. I'll stick with quality and performance. And the only way to get consistent performance is to shut off any interference. You may find yourself a little different to the average consumer who freaks if his arcade qonversion doesn't have all the screens of the original...isn't as fast, or is too jerky, hasnt got the same quality graphics. To accomodate the people who buy their favourite conversions and variations and spinoffs the games programmers have to optimise their code and optimise the system performance. All this involves shortcuts and the like. The programmers have to cram their code and graphics in (just because some people have 3M doesnt mean the people with 512k will be happy...we have to cater to the market) they have to make their code FAST on a stock-standard amiga. Just because a 68030 wouldn't blink about running the same thing using the OS, the mjority of us only have 16bits and 7MHz..we are the main market. >> And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while >>doing something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then >>updating games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). >"friendly" and "nasty" mode, anyway? If I want to tolerate slower operation >in order to be able to download while playing (for example), that's my >business. As for memory, your argument falls apart once you consider the >existence of machines with more than 512K chip RAM. You're going to tell me >that on an A3000 with 2 Meg of chip and 16 Meg of fast RAM, your game is >going to encounter *any* memory restrictions at all? You are right , but if the majority of the market doesn't tolerate the slower games...that's the programmer's living! You're argument falls apart where you point out that there are machines such as the A3000 and 1Mb & 2Mb Amiga's. The majority of Amiga's out there are A500's with 512k or at most 1Mb, one..maybe two drives. Adn as such, there is what the programmer's MUST cater for to achieve maxmimum market penetration and sales. The games MUST have protection to discourage piracy and the games must follow the dictates of what the majority of consumers want. As the market changes, so will the games..already many games require 1Mb and even the European games (which are the majority of good games) are beginning to notice that second disk drive stuck onto the machines instead of saying "please insert disk 2". So the message gets through and the direction changes. So in a speculative future where the A750 with 68020 & 1Mb chip mem with two drives is the basic model...we will see a lot of the things you are talking about but we will also see a lot of games that are written in the same way as todays games with more features better performance etc. The only way that your gripes will be picked up by the programmer's is if the majority of the market started feeling the same way. The main point to remember is that the industry is geared towards the consumer and will produce what he wants to see (or more correctly what he is willing to pay for) So get some support and shake the foundations (I would support you if I could still get games with the same performance etc.) >Just one paying customer's opinion... > - Neil >--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-- >Neil Weinstock @ AT&T Bell Labs // What was sliced bread >att!edsel!nsw or nsw@edsel.att.com \X/ the greatest thing since? Not meaning to be personal but just trying to point out a view from a different angle....IMHO what you say has merit..but I am trying to stress arguments to the contrary...and what it all really comes down to is the cold hard green stuff - MONEY! c u Iron Wolf
cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (05/30/90)
In article <MT87692.90May29030535@uikku.tut.fi> (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes: >1. Should game be HD-installable? In my opinion games do not have to be HD installable, however and this is a big however, the game should be smart enough to detect autoconfiged RAM and use it as a "RAM" disk. There are a lot of systems with 512K extra and many with 2M or more extra RAM, if you can load all of the data off your floppy into RAM when it is available and then make changing levels and such extremely fast, then I will like your game. You should also make your floppy routines as fast as possible, but you would probably do that anyway. >2. Should game multitask? It is not necessary to be able to download files while your game is running, but I would like to be able to pause it and pop back to the the "real world" when I need to. Also, I would like to be able to start your game and then exit back to a system that is still usable (this means NO REBOOT is required after your game exits) >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? > - IMHO memory is must because it makes the game lot more playable and > HD-people don't argue about the loading speed. We are in definite agreement here. > Extra drives eat memory which causes serious trouble in 512k machines. This is a problem but you should strive to run with _two_ floppies attached. At least that way you won't get too many people mad at you. > Processors are useless in simple scroll games because they at least should > be using the blitter in nasty-mode so processors don't speed it up too much. Two things, your game _must_ work on a 68010 processor and should work on an 020 and 030 processor. Games that change speed when the processor is changed are probably broken. How difficult is it to let the CIA timer run and give you an accurate time reference ? > Nowadays the games also must run on all motorola 680x0 family thanks > to A3000. But by detecting I mean really notice the speed increase > and add new things to game (BTW my program notices but noone of my > friends has 68020/68030 so I dunno how much it helps:-). Take the time to find a system that is _different_ than you and your friends. I am sure that the an authorized Commodore representative, in the interest of helping a developer out, could find a machine for you to test on. >4. Should game be exitable? > - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't > destroy anything in memory and you will end up again without > enough memory:-( First, continually try to use the least amount of memory possible. Second, the game _Should_ be exitable. If you can detect that there is not enough memory to run you should put up a requester saying : "Not enough memory to run, continuing to run will require a reboot on exit. Continue ? (Yes) (No)" That way, if I knew I wasn't going to have a problem I could say yes, or I could cancel the game, go save my file changes and then restart the game and say "yes" the second time. Why are "exitable" games any harder to protect than non-exitable ones? > And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games > while doing something else? If you do, do you really like those every > now and then updating games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). You are confusing technical excellence in graphics with Game quality. I have played video games that had excellent graphics but the "quality" of the game sucked eggs! "Revenge of the Jedi" is a good example (it's an arcade game). Other arcade games such "Looping" and "Mr. Doo" had a good game play but very poor graphics. I would also challenge your two assertions that a) Multitasking games are "every now and then" updating and b) "thanks to memory shortage". I think both are "stupid programmer couldn't figure it out." Cheers, -- --Chuck McManis Sun Microsystems uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: <none> Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (05/30/90)
[Poaching on Devon's article because he formatted the questions so nicely!] In article <DEVEN.90May29214958@netserv2.rpi.edu> deven@rpi.edu (Deven T. Corzine) writes: > >On 29 May 90 00:05:35 GMT, mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) said: > >Mikko> 1. Should game be HD-installable? >Mikko> 2. Should game multitask? >Mikko> 3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? >Mikko> 4. Should game be exitable? > >Mikko> And I would like also to know how many of you people really >Mikko> play games while doing something else? If you do, do you really >Mikko> like those every now and then updating games with poor graphics >Mikko> (thanks to memory shortage). > 1) Not only HD installable, but also Rad: installable for even faster performance. "It Came from the Desert" is a simply fabulous Amiga game, but even though it is HD mountable, it is not Rad: mountable. [Guess who spent his $.05 on memory instead of a HD? ;-) ] As mentioned by others, listening to the floppy drive grind its heads flat accessing the same data over and over, when my machine has plenty of resources to copy the game into memory and never see the floppy drive again, sets my teeth on edge. Ditto copy protection schemes that abuse my floppy drives. --- Copy Protection, a Digression --- I absolutely refuse to buy any more of the (very nice) Psygnosis games because of the damage their copy protection sounds like it is doing to my floppy drive on startup. In fact, since copy protection schemes just challenge my hacker friends (and me, too, pretty soon, I'm starting to see red on this subject) to see who can be the first to get a "broken" copy on the street, forget copy protection altogether. I promise, if your game is in anyway accessible (including reading it as raw MFM data off the floppy) somebody out there knows a way to beat your copy protection scheme, and will get a big ego boost out of putting it on the street with his/her "hacker ID" on it. If you feel you must copy protect, unlike the many game manufacturers who think thay can survive by treating their customers like possible repeat customers rather than known criminals, go with "word in the manual" schemes, or better, data from a large, hard to photocopy map like Starflight I uses. Do _not_ use a keyword sheet that is physically difficult for a large part of your potential customer base to read. Once I have isolated the group printing black ink on purple paper (you listening Electronic Slime?) that makes my 46 year old eyes hurt so much to read tears start flowing, they go on my list of companies never buy from again, too. Never, never, never make me turn off my machine to use your game. I keep lots of valuable stuff in Rad:, ready to use, and if you can keep from trashing it and don't make me power down, I can be up and running 30 seconds after I finish with your game, even if you make me warm boot. In general, if you cannot find a copy protection scheme that doesn't actively irritate your customers in normal operation, _don't_ use one. We _won't_ be back. We _will_ tell all our friends the game is a bummer, and with the net, we have a _lot_ of friends listening. 2) Yes! My favorite here is POCO, a really nice set of puzzles that takes very little CPU time while I'm staring at the screen, and so I can safely do a download while I'm working on one of the puzzles. I bought a multi-tasking machine, and loaded it down with memory, because I WANT TO MULTI-TASK -- ALL THE TIME. Don't think or plan that your game is the most important thing going on within my very large, very capable machine, even when I'm playing it! I might be raytracing a picture that takes several days, and want to play your game once in a while while this more important background task goes on. I might have left a job going, and told the kids they could use the computer for game playing while the job runs. Guess what? That means your game _has_to_ start from the Workbench without a reboot, it _has to_ mind its P's and Q's about resource acquisition and release, it _has to_ return to normal Workbench status when it is done, it _has to_ obey screen flipping so I can reach past the kids and check the status of my background job, it _has to_ leave some cpu cycles for the background job(s) [and if it runs on both an A1000 and an A3000, it is absolutely criminal to tie up all the resources of the latter machine when you need only the resources of the former machine. Don't busy wait, don't fidget. Do exactly what it takes to make your game run, and sleep the rest of the time]. Let _me_ decide if the game performance is too doggy to multi-task with the job I have running; let _me_ pause my background job if I want better performance from your game; do _not_ make that decision for me. Maybe I'm running the background job deliberately to slow your game down to the point where my older reflexes and more jangled nerves have a chance. Don't second guess me. 3) If there are extra resources available, _ask_ me if you should use them! If I'm running stand alone and I can get more screens in memory, I'll say yes. If I've got something else going on that is going to choke and die if you grab all the memory, I'll say no! This is an Amiga! Put the choice in a menu, _tell_ me how to get to it _and_ what it means, and let _me_ decide. The more controls you give me, the better use you make of my machine, the better you treat me and my machine, the faster my friends will hear about your great game (see Poco above, nearly the ideal multitasking game), and the more likely I'll be to buy your next one. 4) I've already said it, but of course you should exit! Give up the paranoia! Poco isn't copy protected, it multitasks, the game is completely described on the screen so you don't need a manual, and it is lots of fun and full of wonderful puzzles. I tell my friends to _buy_ a copy; I want the folks who made this game to be encouraged by lots of cash return to write another great game that is completely compatible with me and with my computer. --- Abusive Posting Material Follows --- Contrast that with Dragon's Lair, which wipes out the operating system, is impossible to back up, grinds the disk drives to death, isn't in standard format so I can't load it into Rad: (where it would fit easily except the idiots decompress their data during the hard disk install so it takes 10 meg instead of 5.28 meg if it were installed compressed and decompressed for each use like it is off floppies); if I had the skills to take that game apart and make it work like an Amiga game, it would be on the street in a flash, and I wouldn't have an iota of guilt about it. I hate spending $50 to be abused like that, and I get angry at the manufacturer. [Someone in my tenuous state of sanity can justify all sorts of nastiness when we feel put upon, and there are a lot of us out here lurking in wait for your abusive game, so don't abuse us.] [At the rate I'm going, I should have the skills to take this game (and its descendants) apart by this time next year, if somebody doesn't beat me to it. Watch for "DL.unprot.zoo" on a BBS near you! ;-) ] n) One last little note: don't lie to me! I just bought Aquanaut. They lied through their teeth! Guess what my response will be? From the manual: "A special data format was used on the disks in order to accomodate such a large program. This means that you cannot make backup copies of your master disks using standard disk copying procedures or utilities...Send $7.50...". We're talking ripoff here! This is total BS! I copied all but one crucial file onto a backup set of disks by saying "copy df0: to df1: all". There is _no_ special data format; the files compress about 40% apiece if you zoo them, which means if they have a compression scheme, it is a really lousy one. Since I just wrote a directory walker for a whole disk (just to get out a set of full path names so I could do a quick inventory of a couple of hundred disks with an output format much more useful than "dir all" provides), it shouldn't take too long to find out how they hid one 200 block file. If they couldn't figure out how to do file compression, they aren't to likely to have developed a really challenging copy protection scheme. Watch for "Aqua.unprot.zoo". ;-) [On the bright side, the game is pretty fun so far, and the "Operation Wet Feet" manual is a (perhaps unintentional) riot to read.] Since my main project right now is improving the existing Arithmetic Data Compression algorithm for speed and effectiveness, and it looks like it is especially good at compressing image files, maybe I'll send them back their game running from one disk, just to prove that they could have been telling the truth, if they had been willing to do the work, instead of just saying they had (and if they didn't think their customers were trash suitable for such abuse). ;-) Kent, the man from xanth. (xanthian@zorch.sf-bay.org)
ewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles) (05/30/90)
I don't care how good the game is. If it requires me to reboot after running the game, I won't buy it at all. If it doesn't allow me to multitask, then it has to be an outrageously good game. For example, Interstel's Empire does NOT require a reboot, and the other tasks appear to continue working. However, once you're in the game, you can't switch back to the other screens. Still, the game is quite good, and I enjoy it, so I bought it. I have never regretted the purchase, and am currently involved in a Tourney on CI$. As a counter-example, I also have Marble Madness. It requires a reboot, nothing else runs, and it still gets jerky. Even moreso since it requires floppy access. I regret ever buying the thing, because although I enjoy playing the game, I *HATE* the way it forces me to reboot. As a result, I rarely played the game, and haven't touched it in the last 2 years. Ever since, my first question is: Does it force me to reboot? If the answer is yes, then I don't waste any more of my time on it. Sorry! But that's the way it is. And I expect that the market is more my way, than the game addict's way. Who buy's Amiga? Someone who just want's to play games? No! THEY go buy something like Nintendo. People who are willing to plunk down the money to buy an Amiga want it to do more than just play games! Enjoy! Edwin.
" Seaman) (05/31/90)
vilkas@ultima.cs.uts.oz (Iron Wolf) writes: < nsw@cbnewsm.att.com (Neil Weinstock) writes: < < >>Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen writes: < >>1. Should game be HD-installable? < >> - IMHO I think this is quite useless because many HD drivers eat < >> chip-memory... < < >I hardly *ever* use my floppy for other than installing software, and perfer < >to keep it that way. < < Good for you but when you are blasting a games designer with these statements < you have to examine the reality of the matter and his point of view as well. < Now...if you have a DMA SCSI HD you need a buffer in CHIP ram...am I corect? < (I am not real sure but I assume this is true). My 2091 (as well as the A2090a that preceded it) uses no CHIP RAM at all. My 2500 has the same amount of CHIP RAM available as my single floppy A1000, when using the same startup-sequence. < Also....a VERY large number of the type of people who BUY these games, the < MARKET, don't have a HD, and quite a few only have 512k. Now unless we want < to make the cost of development increase by having the programmers write < variations for hard drives, extra memory and so on, we should be content that < in general, the games that are written actually WORK on most Amiga < configurations. Yes, there are a large number of 512K, single (or dual) floppy A500 owners out there purchasing games. There are also many 1MB+, small- to medium-sized hard disk A500/A2000 owners who buy games. There is no reason that a developer cannot accomodate both users. The development costs required to provide the ability to run from a hard disk or support extra memory are minimal. It also should not impact the operation on your single floppy A500 in any way. < >>4. Should game be exitable? < >> - IMHO exitable games are harder to protect and you can't destroy < >> anything in memory and you will end up again without enough memory:-( < < >Look at it this way. Nowadays, the degree of system friendliness of a game < >is my top consideration when deciding on a purchase. It didn't use to be < >that way. I bought several games of the boot-from-the-floppy-then-reboot < >variety, then found out that I never play any of them because I can't stand < >the routine. < < I wonder if you realise how much piracy costs the game industry? < If the programmers start saying: "Sure, run a cli - make an image of the memory" < we will find very few commercial quality programs coming out on the market as < they will be easily available in pirated form. While this may work on an Atari ST, I have never seen a successful memory dump of an Amiga (with multitasking enabled) that could be used to boot a system. Besides, there are non-disk methods of copy protection that work quite well. They may be slightly inconvenient, but they work. < Every effort should be made to insure the integrity of the software and the < security of it. I agree completely, however... < Now...if we want games to multitask...we dont want security...we dont want < fast flashy games....we want lots of system overhead when writing simple < routines....we want somewhat inconsistent reaction times. Well < Well if this is what you want...take a look; you already have it PD & < shareware is what is viable for such demands. The quality is generally poorer < the cost is much less. You want multitasking, well you can get it. I'll stick < with quality and performance. And the only way to get consistent performance < is to shut off any interference. There are certain type of games that do not perform well while mutitasking, but there are also types that do perform quite well. For the average 'shoot-em-up', or games that play in 'real-time', this can be a problem. These games can, and should, give the user THE OPTION to run with or without multitasking. Let me decide what I can live with. There are also schools of thought that have been mentioned before, such as disabling mutitasking during game play, but re-enabling it while the game is paused. I realize this would not be too convenient on a 512K machine, but then, you are not required to use that option on a 512K machine. < You may find yourself a little different to the average consumer who freaks < if his arcade qonversion doesn't have all the screens of the original...isn't < as fast, or is too jerky, hasnt got the same quality graphics. I doubt that the 'average' Amiga consumer is going to 'freak' if the Amiga conversion of his/her favorite arcade game doesn't have 'all the screens of the original'. Most Amiga owners I know prefer original work over arcade translations. < To accomodate < the people who buy their favourite conversions and variations and spinoffs < the games programmers have to optimise their code and optimise the system < performance. All this involves shortcuts and the like. The programmers have < to cram their code and graphics in (just because some people have 3M doesnt < mean the people with 512k will be happy...we have to cater to the market) < they have to make their code FAST on a stock-standard amiga. Just because < a 68030 wouldn't blink about running the same thing using the OS, the < mjority of us only have 16bits and 7MHz..we are the main market. As I mentioned above, the fact that there are 512K A500 owners out there should not prevent me from having THE OPTION to install a game on my 105MB Quantum hard disk, or prevent me from having THE OPTION of running the game in multitasking mode on my 5MB A2500. < >>And I would like also to know how many of you people really play games while < >>doing something else? If you do, do you really like those every now and then < >>updating games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage). < < >If I want to tolerate slower operation < >in order to be able to download while playing (for example), that's my < >business. As for memory, your argument falls apart once you consider the < >existence of machines with more than 512K chip RAM. You're going to tell me < >that on an A3000 with 2 Meg of chip and 16 Meg of fast RAM, your game is < >going to encounter *any* memory restrictions at all? < < You are right , but if the majority of the market doesn't tolerate the slower < games...that's the programmer's living! How many market surveys have you conducted to determine what the majority of the market will or will not tolerate? The majority of Amiga owners I know prefer multitasking, feature-rich games that tailor themselves to an individual system, rather than the lowest common denominator. < You're argument falls apart where you point out that there are machines such < as the A3000 and 1Mb & 2Mb Amiga's. The majority of Amiga's out there are < A500's with 512k or at most 1Mb, one..maybe two drives. Adn as such, there < is what the programmer's MUST cater for to achieve maxmimum market penetration < and sales. The games MUST have protection to discourage piracy and the games < must follow the dictates of what the majority of consumers want. Not true. To achieve maximum market penetration, a developer must produce a product that can ADAPT to differing configurations. Do you have any idea how people would react in the MS-DOS world if developers only supported CGA or 512K system RAM? These are still far and away the lowest common denominator, but the VAST majority of software now supports VGA and several memory expansion standards. < As the market changes, so will the games..already many games require 1Mb < and even the European games (which are the majority of good games) are beginning < to notice that second disk drive stuck onto the machines instead of saying < "please insert disk 2". < < So the message gets through and the direction changes. Here you are contradicting yourself. If the majority of the market base is still 512K A500's, then there is no message to be heard. The fact that many games DO support hard disks, second drives, and extra memory (and have done so for more that two years), shows that smart developers write code that can exist in many environments. < The only way that your gripes will be picked up by the programmer's is if < the majority of the market started feeling the same way. Take a moment to count the number of articles posted here that voiced the same sentiments as Neil's article. If this doesn't speak for itself, I don't know what could. < >Just one paying customer's opinion... < < > - Neil < < Not meaning to be personal but just trying to point out a view from a < different angle....IMHO what you say has merit..but I am trying to stress < arguments to the contrary...and what it all really comes down to is the cold < hard green stuff - MONEY! < < Iron Wolf No flames intended here, either. I'm just trying to point out that there doesn't need to be an argument at all. Amiga games should be designed to work exactly as you described. These same games, however, should also be able to work exactly as I (and Neil, and _many_ others on the net) have described. -- Chris (Insert phrase here) Seaman | /o -- -- -- cseaman@sequent <or> ||| -- -- - I'm Outta Here, Man! ...!uunet!sequent!cseaman |vvvv/ -- -- - The Home of the Killer Smiley |___/ -- -- --
martens@dinghy.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (06/01/90)
In article <5610@netxcom.DHL.COM> ewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles) writes: >I don't care how good the game is. If it requires me to reboot after >running the game, I won't buy it at all. If it doesn't allow me to >multitask, then it has to be an outrageously good game. I used to feel this way, but now, even if the misbehaving game is outrageously good, I don't want it. Rebooting and reloading all my software takes too much time to go through it for a brief diversion (e.g. a game). Policy: 1) If a game forces a reboot, is copy protected, or interferes with standard multitasking (i.e., it was written by a programmer with a Commodore 64, IBM PC, or Macintosh mentality), don't buy it. 2) If you get a game home, and then find out it forces a reboot, is copy protected, or interferes with standard multitasking, take or send it back to where it came from, and get your money back. I haven't had any trouble getting my money back on the few behavioral problems I've purchased, and would strongly encourage anyone to do the same. Let's get rid of garbage masquerading as Amiga software. -=- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) Chemlawn, trademark, suburban distributor of toxic chemicals.
cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) (06/01/90)
Larry Phillips comments are on the mark here. To put it more succinctly :
When a professional developer (someone who will sell the results of
their work for money) decides to develop a product they will have to
make many design decisions that affect the final outcome. A good
sampling of the types of design decisions that have to be made when
developing a game were posted by Mikko. The ultimate answer is that
each decision will have one of three effects on the final product :
fewer will buy it, none, more will buy it. Determining which of these
effects it will have is a VERY difficult job. To make such decisions a
developer can do a market survey such as Mikko did and ask for open
ended feedback. This is really only effective when the developer has a
good idea of the background of the people who are responding to the
survey. The reason the background is needed is that the effect will
vary depending on the "type" of customer. Decision A may have the
effect that more "professional" users of Amigas will buy the product
but fewer "student" users will. The key is to figure out the aggregate
change of buyers, either positive or negative. This is what a good
marketing person can do. A good marketing person is as good as gold,
a bad one can bankrupt you in a hurry. If you are a one person shop
(does the back of your "President" business card read "Janitor" ? :-)
then you have to do both jobs. The danger is assuming that because you
are a damn good developer, you are also a damn good marketeer. There
are different skill sets involved. I spent a year here at Sun working
very closely with the Product Marketing group and learned a _lot_ .
Prior to that I thought of Marketeers as glorified combination Public
Relations/Salesperson types.
--
--Chuck McManis Sun Microsystems
uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: <none> Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM
These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.
"I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"w-stephm@microsoft.UUCP (Stephan MUELLER) (06/01/90)
In article <MT87692.90May29030535@uikku.tut.fi> mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes:
%1. Should game be HD-installable?
Yes. My word processor is HD-installable. My compilers are
HD-installable. My terminal emulator is HD-installable. The games
I play are HD-installable. I see no fundamental difference between
them as far as hard disks go. All are applications. There is no
reason why I shouldn't want to simultaneously use any combination of
them.
%2. Should game multitask?
% - IMHO I at least don't want to play those shit games with multitasking on.
The quality of a game is independent of whether it multitasks or not.
There are good games that do multitask (Tetrix. MindWalker, for
example) There are bad games that do not multitask. Take up the
challenge: write a truly awe-inspiring game that *does* multitask.
Give us fabulous performance by using brilliant algorithms, not by
nuking the OS.
% But if we are talking about for example following "Multitasking": Game
% disables interrupts while playing but for example if you pause it it will
% turn interrupts back on. I would like to make my game work like this. But
% there are few drawbacks: Copy-protection is alot harder to make and you
% very easily run out of memory.
If you copy-protect it, I will not buy it. "You don't even know me, but
you don't trust me" is the message I get from copy-protection.
%3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors?
Yes. As I stated above, games are in my mind equivalent to other
applications. What good are extra memory/drives/processors if no
application uses them? If memory/drives/processors are useful to
some applications, why not all?
%4. Should game be exitable?
Yes.
% And I would like also to know how many of you people really play
% games while doing something else? If you do, do you really like
% those every now and then updating
% games with poor graphics (thanks to memory shortage).
All the time. Tetrix is a great way to kill time while downloading/
compiling/TeXing etc.
Simcity is great to run in the background while doing anything.
I even run games while running other games: while playing Tetrix
I get called to the phone. Someone else can start up another
copy of Tetrix and play, without affecting my game in progress.
In a nutshell: multitasking is a fabulous tool. Please don't assume
I don't need it/don't use it/don't want it.
% I provide some examples what I think of games just for fun:
<list of action games deleted>
There are many games, not action-oriented, which are equally fun.
Try Shanghai sometime. As for performance: there are games with
fabulous graphics and high performance running on the lowly C-64.
Surely, on the Amiga, running at 7x the speed, with our favourite
anthropomorphic chip set, we can do the same without trashing
the OS.
Please. Just say no to concurrency-hostile software. Leave the
games that take over the whole machine on the Nintendos.
%Mikko "Assembler rules OK!" Tsokkinen
stephan(Nothing personal against the Nintendos);buffa@sardaigne.inria.fr (Michel Buffa) (06/01/90)
In article <5610@netxcom.DHL.COM>, ewiles@netxdev.DHL.COM (Edwin Wiles) writes: |> |> For example, Interstel's Empire does NOT require a reboot, and the other |> tasks appear to continue working. However, once you're in the game, you |> can't switch back to the other screens. Still, the game is quite good, and |> I enjoy it, so I bought it. I have never regretted the purchase, and am |> currently involved in a Tourney on CI$. Empire is a simulation game, not a fast action game. I also think it's a real bad game now (it seems pretty old compared to the recent ones). Try a shoot'em'up in a multitasking environment. Would you like your sheep to move at different speeds depending on the loading of the cpu ? |> As a counter-example, I also have Marble Madness. It requires a reboot, |> nothing else runs, and it still gets jerky. Even moreso since it requires |> floppy access. I regret ever buying the thing, because although I enjoy |> playing the game, I *HATE* the way it forces me to reboot. As a result, |> I rarely played the game, and haven't touched it in the last 2 years. Marble Madness is a good game, even if it'a pretty old. But if you really loved it, you should play it for hours and hours. In this case, what's the problem ? Rebooting takes only a few seconds. If it's not the case, you don't really like the game, so you are right to regret having bought this game. |> |> Sorry! But that's the way it is. And I expect that the market is more |> my way, than the game addict's way. Who buy's Amiga? Someone who just |> want's to play games? No! THEY go buy something like Nintendo. People |> who are willing to plunk down the money to buy an Amiga want it to do |> more than just play games! WRONG ! Here in Europe, 90% who buy an Amiga 500 only use it for playing games. Many of my friends never used the workbench disk ! They are the market in Europe. They bought an Amiga because Nintendo and Sega doesn't really exist here, and because you can try many of the games in a pirated form before buying them. I'm not encouraging piracy, but this is the reality here. I also think that the best games on the Amiga are much better than the best games for the consoles. ------------------------------------------ Michel Buffa: Projet Robotvis, INRIA, France Internet: buffa@sardaigne.inria.fr Surface Mail: Michel BUFFA, INRIA - Sophia Antipolis, 2004, route des Lucioles, 06565 Valbonne Cedex -- FRANCE Voice phone: (33) 93.65.78.39, Fax: (33) 93 65 77 65 ------------------------------------------
jeh@elmgate.UUCP (Ed Hanway) (06/01/90)
mt87692@tut.fi (Mikko Tsokkinen) writes: [heavily edited for brevity -jeh] >1. Should game be HD-installable? NO >2. Should game multitask? NO >3. Should game detect extra memory/diskdrives/processors? memory YES, others NO >4. Should game be exitable? NO Please let me know what game you're working on so that I won't waste my money on it. Ed Hanway kodak!elmgate!jeh
xanthian@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) (06/02/90)
In article <7938@mirsa.inria.fr> buffa@mirsa.inria.fr writes: > >Marble Madness is a good game, even if it'a pretty old. But if you really >loved it, you should play it for hours and hours. In this case, what's the >problem ? Rebooting takes only a few seconds. And it is this misperception that is at the heart of half the trouble. I keep around five megabytes of software in RAD: as a constant working environment; if your game forces me to a cold reboot, rebuilding this takes, not a few seconds, but fifteen to twenty _minutes_. And in the meantime, you have deprived me of all the useful work (compiling, downloads, raytracing, spreadsheet recalculation, weave pattern calculation, hailstone series calculation) that could have been done with the machine cycles your game didn't need on my more than baseline configuration Amiga, but hogged anyway. The longer I play your game, the worse my loss. So, guess what? I choose to play it the shortest time I can, which is to say, not at all! And since I won't be using it on your game, I can spend my money on a game that respects my wishes as the buyer of a multiprocessing machine. No argument, there are tons of A500's out there in minimal configuration, lots of them Christmas presents that are just fancier Nintendo sets for their users. If that is the _only_ market you care about, your game can run cold boot to cold boot, with the worst copy protection scheme you can devise. BUT, at last count, some 10% of the _total_ U.S. population was capable of at least minimal computer programming. With a better set of educational systems, the number is probably higher in Europe. Nearly anyone who can, given one page of instructions, an Amiga, and AmigaBASIC, will be able to write a Mandelbrot program, badly. You are selling into a crowd that bought Amigas, so the programmers among them were either looking for graphics or sound. The graphicsoids will write the Mandelbrot. It will run slowly (my first one took up to 36 hours per calculation) but make great pictures. Take me for specificity. Guess what? I want to use the rest of my machine for something while that work's going on, so I buy an extra half meg of memory. I try your game, and it trashes my Mandelbrot. I tell ten of my friends with minimal configurations what a _rotten_ game yours is. It may actually be the best, most fun game going for the A500 minimalist configuration, but after hearing me badmouth it, they buy something else. You planned your sales campaign and game design around the minimalist configuration, forgetting that word of mouth is much more powerful than the best advertising campaign. You forgot to look out for the needs of _all_ your customers, and you lost out in the marketplace. You think it doesn't happen? Ask the folks who founded Technisoft how fast a company can die when the word spreads across the net that its product is a can of worms and it despises its customers. Took us about four months, maybe six tops. Far better you should take the professional approach, forget the piracy paranoia, and write the best Amiga specific game you can. Take for example Faery Tale Adventure. It was pirated and the pirated copies widely circulated within months of its release. I know, I have one. I also have _two_ store bought copies, one still in the shrink wrap. It is still on the shelves, what is this, three years later? Still selling well enough to justify its place on a busy, busy rack. Why? Because it is a _great_ Amiga game; all the pirated copies just acted as advertising for the honest folks who wanted the game, by folks far too cheap to buy one. Back then, in the days of A1000's and SOTS barely workable expansions, the multitasking while playing a game market was miniscule, so it doesn't do that; what it does do is really take advantage of all the then machines best features to give super bang for the game buying buck. Today that same description goes to games that do great stuff while still obeying all the Amiga rules for system friendly software. Programmers have gotten better, the marketplace has gotten more sophisticated, games that _do_ obey all the rules are in evidence and have raised expectations; this isn't the 1985 Amiga game market any more, and writing games as if it were isn't the way to get rich. Look back through the postings and count the proportion that state flat out "I won't buy copy protected software"; that's how much of your market you throw away. That has nothing to do with multitasking. It has to do with the inconvenience, and often added cost, of replacing worn out game disks, with the damaging sounding racket on-disk copy protection schemes cause, with the illegible and easy to lose keyword sheets, with the difficulty of making my count of lines in the manual the same as yours, and so on. Even the minimal system owners are losing their cool over being thought crooks and made to suffer through all this nonsense by some game developers, while others publish without any kind of copy protection and do just fine. Just a note in passing, buried deep in this diatribe where it will never be seen: when you are ready to make your final master for the disk reproduction company 1) run "copy ... all" onto a clean disk to make all files contiguous, so that you won't be beating my floppy drives to death seeking across a fragmented disk, and 2) _look_ at what goes onto the disk; I just bought a game that came with a free copy of the commercial assembler used to create it, still on the disk. Probably a $150 assembler product, on a $25 game product. Make sure that everything on the disk is needed for the game, and that you have a right to distribute it! These two steps can't take more than an hour tops, at the end of a long game development cycle, but the first makes the game much more pleasant to play, and the second keeps you out of hot water and me honest, or at least less dishonest. Thanks for listening, I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record here. One more insight: if you make the Amiga look like a Nintendo clone by the way your software operates, you modify the market's perception of the computer away from its unique favorable qualities. This hurts Amiga sales, and over the long term, that hurts your sales, too. There is some synergy in doing the job right, since the opposite model then holds. Kent, the man from xanth. <xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
cstxqbt@warwick.ac.uk (CrisP of Truth and Justice) (06/04/90)
This subjec seems to be currenttly descussed in both comp.sys.amiga and comp.sys.amiga.tech. This is the article I subbmitted to comp.sys.amiga.tech. > >Mutitasking is not a problem for the games writer. There is nothing wrong >with Exec. The problem is mulitittasking with intuition. Lets face it >intuition is a load of rubbish. I can't stand useing any proggrams that make >extensive use of it. I reffuse to use DMCS because of this. In DMCS it is >that it takes too long to go about refreshing all the distturbed windows. >It window handeling is far from perfect. Even if you don't use windows it >is still not ideal. Did you know that if you leave the screen in front pulled >down, ( And I don't just meen pulling a window down. ) the whole maching >slows down to a snails pace. You may not notice this if you are not useing >much of the cycles before hand. Finally it is too dificult to manipulate the >display if you are restricted to useing intuition screens. > >- CirsP. I was pushed for time. You all seem to complain that you have to reboot your machines. Some of you say that it takes too long. What do you have in your startups. Personaly I have as little as possible. I want to turn my machine on and go imidiatly. And about Hard Disks. Take a decent game. It comes on two disks. If the programmer was clever he could have put about 3 megs on that. It should be possible for a writer to supply a third disk to install this onto Hard Disk. as a coninous file. allong with the nessassery pattches to make it use DOS to read it. This copy, alough in DOS format, would not make the game pirated any more than if it did not come wih the third disk. As most pirates do not have Hard Drives. And will find it easier to hack the protected copy than raise the money tto buy a Hard Drive. This is just a sugesttion to the writters. I think the exra work will pay off. Especialy if they make it so that the patched version will exit back to he OS. This should be exeptable to all as the patched version only need to work wih exra memory. Its all very well saying I don't want to use proggies that don't multitask. When I get down to writing a proggie I don't want to have to use intuition. I could write an intuition replacement that will allow cli's and custom displays generatted buy custom copper lists. But who'd use it. There are thoes who like there workbench. How about a screen manipulator that would allow the intuition's display as one of its elemens. Would NEone use it. Would you games programmers allow for its use? If there is a demand for it I'll write it. - CrisP.
karl@sugar.hackercorp.com (Karl Lehenbauer) (06/06/90)
In <136453@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) writes: >I spent a year here at Sun working >very closely with the Product Marketing group and learned a _lot_ . >Prior to that I thought of Marketeers as glorified combination Public >Relations/Salesperson types. Who turned you, you swine, and how much are they paying you to write this? ;-) -- -- uunet!sugar!karl -- Usenet access: (713) 438-5018
peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) (06/06/90)
In article <568@lily.warwick.ac.uk> cstxqbt@warwick.ac.uk (CrisP of Truth and Justice) writes: > You all seem to complain that you have to reboot your machines. Some of you > say that it takes too long. What do you have in your startups. Personaly I > have as little as possible. I want to turn my machine on and go imidiatly. I don't want to reboot my machine because it's NOT a Commodore-64. If I wanted a game machine I could have got one a hell of a lot cheaper than the nearly 2 grand I paid for my original A1000 with options. I don't want to reboot because I may have work in progress at the time I start the game up. I am willing to deal with a game that kills multitasking while it's running, but it should leave allocated memory alone. If it can't run with what I give it, it should say so. Hackercorp's own game, Tracers, multitasks just fine. I really don't see why anyone else should find it impossible to at least return to multitasking when it's done. -- _--_|\ Peter da Silva <peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>. / \ \_.--._/ My other car is a hot-air balloon. v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'
martens@kayak.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) (06/07/90)
>In article <568@lily.warwick.ac.uk> cstxqbt@warwick.ac.uk (CrisP of Truth and Justice) writes: >> You all seem to complain that you have to reboot your machines. Some of you >> say that it takes too long. What do you have in your startups. Personaly I >> have as little as possible. I want to turn my machine on and go imidiatly. The problem with rebooting and the question of what's in a person's startup are completely orthogonal. I don't like to reload emacs, all the files I happen to have in emacs, Online, and whatever else I might have laying around in memory from my floppies just because a game programmer thought the game would necessarily be the most important thing in my system. If a game forces a reboot, take it back to your dealer for a refund. -=- -- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu) Chemlawn, trademark, suburban distributor of toxic chemicals.
FelineGrace@cup.portal.com (Dana B Bourgeois) (07/06/90)
If you want me to *buy* the game then I want it to use available resources, be friendly to the OS, not force a boot or a reboot, not have disk-based copy protection, well...you get the picture. Some of these are negotiable. Give me the option of speeding up play by turning off multi-tasking and as long as you turn it back on when you exit then I am happy. I also do several things at once when I use my machine and I don't want to be forced to reboot and wait those 5 minutes to load up. Of course if you are aiming at the kids and are creating another shoot'em up that I won't be interested in and only they will be and you have to protect your product from their swap'n copy rings then go ahead and make it fast, small, nasty, and full of copy protection. But I won't even consider buying it. And if you don't tell me it is fast, small, nasty, and full of copy protection then after I take it back I will make a note to myself (just click on a second window in multi-tasking) to not buy anything more from you! So please your put your energies into software that is aimed at someone like me. I have money and I spend it on games I like and I don't allow copies to be spread. Can't you make money in *my* market? Dana Bourgeois @ cup.portal.com