I don't like this side of you joseph.

It's not a good video but it's about a website I've heard of!

One thing I was wondering, and I may be paranoid here, is if this might result in a small influx of immature kids joining the forums.  OMG KEWL GAEMS!  THNX SKREWATAK 4 HTE LINK!  Like I said, I may be paranoid. 

It's old.

Dark hallway to be specific.

I'd really appreciate it.

I am confused as to why the most pressing issue you JUST HAD TO get out of the way first was DON'T TALK LIKE 4CHAN WAWAWAWA

are you fucking kidding

Every single one of you loved it back then you hip sters.

[raped]

Annabelle Kennedy was raped and murdered.

I know jonathon mak is at least still alive, because jason rohrer mentioned he has spoken to him recently (giving jason advice on his latest game)

never heard of the others.

[trigger warning]

It really sounds like European and Asian/Oceanic indies need to organize their own events.    Can you imagine what an Australian or Japanese indie game event would be like?

We have GDC China which is meant for all australasia. It was pretty disappointing.

Been a long road, fellas, but in the end it was worth it.

Cause I've got faith of the heaaaaart,
I'm going where my heart will take me
I've got faith, to belieieieieieieve,
I can do
anything

I'd argue that the fixtures of the Rogue genre are a shorthand that helps define a game and sets player expectations in a useful way. Kind of like how I've occasionally used Mario (SMB 1-1 in particular) for stupid little kotmk things where I want to present a setup that begins in a completely familiar way so that the deviations are more striking.

To put it another way, you're using common presentation to go along with a common basic ruleset and common control conventions to make a particular audience comfortable and building on those rather than reinventing any wheels, deliberately, conceding that the conventions may not be exactly optimal.

For that hard core of roguelike fans the conventions are in some way part of the appeal. Nethack has a graphical tile mode and things like Falcon's Eye, but I'd wager most players play in textmode regardless. I'm not going to talk about benefits although a case could be made for certain things, but there's a definite preference among that core.

Could more accessible games open the genre up to far more players than would be put off by any changes? Of course, and there are people doing that sort of thing, and some really interesting, valuable projects have come out of that approach. But for the most part roguelike development is a labour of love, just like the people who still work on classic adventure games or classic IF or other dead love-letter genres that are intended as much for their own communities as for players in general.

tropes

Just FYI, "trope" doesn't mean what tvtropes implies that it means and it's a little uncomfortable to watch somebody misuse the word when you know exactly where they got their false definition from.

I agree that the limited diagonal movement can be hard to get used to.

It's not hard, it's not the only game to have that, it's actually a feature I like. However it isn't suited to levels with complex cave-like shapes.

And yes, auto-explore is a cool feature. That wasn't what I was objecting to.

I just gave Brogue a shot myself until I got bored and coincidentally (or not!) that happened to also be level 8 in my case. It's pretty cool, I like that it's very Rogue-ish and pretty much just adds a lot of new elements to the basic game, but it is indeed way too easy on those early boards. I generally like the restricted diagonal movement but in this case with the more winding organic layouts it just makes the floors a pain to navigate and as a result they take two or three times as long to complete as they would in Rogue, compounding the issue.

Auto-explore... that's interesting. Technically cool but to me it seems like if the first seven floors of your roguelike are too simplistic for players to want to navigate themselves without it being a chore then you really ought to be starting the player on level eight.

I can see how it might be a good introductory game though.

Girl farts.

Pillow cases

Pillow case seams.

that's probably better than nothing, but i'm not sure that'd be enough -- like, let's say a programmer spent a few days reading art tutorials before they made the graphics to their game. it'd still suck when compared to art done by a real artist, although it'd suck much much less.

Yeah this is a bullshit analogy, Paul.

Well, finding a friend with a degree and then trying to determine whether they actually know anything about web advertising is one thing I guess, but there's a lot of information on the web and you could probably get a pretty decent education on the specific types of ads you want to run with a day or two of reading.
Only trouble is this info is gonna mainly be available on sites relating to SEO shit, that is, the slimiest and most wretched hive of scum and villainy on the tubes.

All the ads there are for games, so it's kind of common to see there ads with only the a picture and the title of the game, sometimes a picture only ad.

That just means that you aren't the only person throwing money away.

[There is no reason that any particular limitation of HTML5 would necessarily be a limitation of the Construct 2 editor with a different exporter.]

Goddamn it to reiterate what I said on the last page, this time without giving anybody's intelligence the benefit of the doubt:

When you start a project you can choose which exporter you intend to use.

• You can change this later. I mentioning this parenthetically in case somebody gets their shit in a bunch even though it's an unrelated point.

The reason for doing this is so that the editor hides inapplicable functionality. For example, if you are making a HTML5 game, joysticks aren't supported, so the editor will politely hide any joystick-related objects.
This means that the editor can support joysticks. There's no reason that it can't or that it wouldn't. It only means that a game exported to HTML5 won't support it, not that this would be a limitation of Construct 2.

There is no reason that any particular limitation of HTML5 would necessarily be a limitation of the Construct 2 editor with a different exporter.

ps I'm like 90% sure that there'll be an exe exporter from the get-go, third-party or otherwise, spawned directly from the raw combined energy of all this panty compression over the html5 announcement.

People do that ALL the time. Game Maker is a good quality game creation software at a fair price, yet certain individuals thought it would be worth spending so much time and effort to offer their own product and give it away for free. 

Well, in the case of Construct it was MMF (hur mmfreplacement.exe).

Which is why...

- If a plugin comes out that supports a particular filetype (say SWF) as a pay-for, and someone develops another plugin for free that does the same thing (independently), will you force them to take down their plugin?

...since they were on the receiving end of legal bullshit once I'd anticipate their cocks being kept well out of anything similar in the future.

Yeah I think you could make a definite case for this if you had the money to throw at it. Primarily because the character is practically a recolour.

Setting and gameplay are slippery, but characters are a lot easier to defend especially given the context of everything else being the same and a potential causal link with the pitch thing.

Not that court is the end-all of everything which is kinda the vibe I'm getting from this thread.
(Of course, Capcom would win regardless.)

[click here]

Yeah, you haven't got anything in your ad at all, it's just a graphic and a name. Any kind of tag line or text would be an improvement.
You can't expect people to just blindly click on your picture because its on their screen. A good chunk of that 85 you have were probably mis-clicks, cause a CTR of 0.1% is potentially just noise.

Secondly you lack a call to action. You need to say, click here! Why? I don't really know but it works and there's a reason everyone else has it. I guess you're either indicating that there's some kind of payoff, or simply planting the option of clicking.

Thirdly, $2 per mille kind of sucks when you're starting out. It's okay for a big graphic but as you've just learned, if you don't use your ads effectively that's two hundred blown bones.

General advice for people using web advertising: split test. Make at least two versions of your ad and run them for a decent chunk of impressions (the more you can get in a short time window for reasonable expense the better) and compare their performance. Discard the worst-performing ads and look at the successful one, think about what made it successful, and create at least two variants based on that. Rince and repeat until you've evolved your ad up to a conversion rate you're happy with. While you're doing this keep in mind that what makes an ad effective in one place might not work so well when it appears elsewhere, so split test separately for each service etc you're using.

As a benchmark, iirc a good CTR is something like 1%-2.5%, although it can be much higher if your ad rocks, and conversion rates (sales) tend to be 2.5%-5% of that, although again it can of course be much higher if you're effectively filtering people interested in your thing (in which case, that is if your conversion rate is awesome, consider cost-per-action ads instead of CPM if you can and then crank up the exposure). There are a lot of factors here and I'm only speaking from memory so these numbers are just for conservative estimates.