next »

[Steve Swink]

I am drunk and alone right now. Celebrating submitting our demo to see if we can get greenlit. On my own.

*Manhugs for Bez*

Just chiming in, since I tend to over-lurk and under-post...needless to say we're over the moon about being involved in IGF.  Honestly, it's the only game competition I've ever considered meaningful.  Let me just say this: if you're on the fence about entering, please do! Don't assume your game has 'no chance'  because it's 'not finished' or is 'not as good as other games you know will be entered.'  If you put your heart into it, please enter it. It's probably better, more complete, and more awesome than you realize. Personal projects are like that.

you just want our 95 bucks!

Ha ha...well, Flashbang has submitted, what, 10 games over the years? 12? Something like that.  With two finalists and no winners, I can honestly say the potential benefits offset the cost.  We probably would not still be around making games if we hadn't entered IGF all those times.  The publicity from being associated with the festival and the nice, firm deadline are worth $95 in my opinion.  I think it was Alec who pointed out that that's like foregoing two game purchases.   

Really, though, I just want to see more rad games submitted.  I totally have an excuse to play all the games this year. It's going to be awesome.

[PoV]

Yeah, the IGF is seriously one of the best PR moves you can do in our "industry".  Even if your game isn't the most awesome of awesome, at least making it in to the finalist bracket will be huge for you.

And remember kids, sound is an avenue that few developers give the attention it deserves. 

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

Might enter, might not.

Tim seems to think that Immortal Defense has a chance of becoming a finalist, but I have my doubts -- it's good, but I don't think it's up to the level of last year's finalists. And my next game won't be done before the deadline.

Also, traditionally, story-centric games haven't done well in that contest (although Aquaria might be an exception, it seems fairly story-centric from the trailer).

Still, 95$ isn't that much to throw away in exchange for some feedback from the judges, although I hear that's a mixed bag, sometimes you get no feedback at all, sometimes detailed feedback, depending on the quality of the judge.

[PoV]

Yeah, I have to admit my feedback wasn't worth the $95.  Praise, while I love it, I can get that without spending money. 

I put my infamous game out as freeware back in 2003, and it got picked up everywhere but North America.  So at least in 2006, I got noticed in my own market.

But man, I'm looking forward to being finished with it, remake and all. 

[fish]

well, myself and my associate have decided to give this a shot as neither of us feels like waiting a year and a half for the next one.
we're putting all other projects (games or not) on hold to work on nothing but the game, as close to full time as out dayjobs and schools will allow.
that leaves us 90-something days to ship something shinny.

its gonna be brutal.

[ravuya]

I eagerly await your midnight rants driven by Pixie Stix, caffeine-fuelled paranoia and permanent stubble.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை (Paul Eres)]

My impression is that you don't actually have to ship a game to enter it (look at Braid or Aquaria). Though I always find it annoying when I see an interesting game in there that isn't out yet.

[fish]

well, yeah, thats the plan.
i just want to ship an "FPP", or "vertical slice" of the game.
the entire game is planned to have 4 worlds, whatever we send to IGF will only have 1. so only 1 art theme, and only a fraction of all the planned game mechanics.
but we want to make that slice as shinny as we can, and as close to final quality as we can.
itll be a small slice but we want it to be high quality.
once thats shipped, we'll just keep working on the rest.
my understanding is that you only need 1 working level.
we'll have a few.
or plan to anyway.

and yes, there will be half-insane 3am rants.
many.

[sega]

my understanding is that you only need 1 working level.

I could be wrong, but I think that USED to be the criteria.  I believe they ask for something near to fully finished now.  I have a feeling they'd bend the rules for something exceptional, but as far as I know, on paper, they require something near a full game.  Please, someone tell me I'm wrong if I am.

[fish]

from the restriction/eligibility of the IGF 08 site:

State of Development: All Entered Games must be in a "beta" state or better (i.e., Entered Games must be feature-complete). At least one (1) level of each Entered Game must be complete and fully playable.

so...yes?
a demo, basicly?

[sega]

Ah you're right.  I only remembered the "Entered Games must be feature-complete" part, and I guess my mind recorded it as "content-complete".  Sorry .

[fish]

you scared me, there.
i mean, braid won, and its still not done.
amirite?
amirite?

[sega]

Yep!  Someone told me a bit back that things had changed, and I took it at face value.  But I guess it hasn't!  Good luck.

[Steve Swink]

from the restriction/eligibility of the IGF 08 site:

State of Development: All Entered Games must be in a "beta" state or better (i.e., Entered Games must be feature-complete). At least one (1) level of each Entered Game must be complete and fully playable.

so...yes?
a demo, basicly?

The gist is that it's not a requirement that your game be done, only playable (by the IGF judges.)  "Feature complete" is meant to reinforce the fact that judges will be judging what's playable, not ideas and concepts.

[fish]

ah, those judges, so smart, so sexy.

[Musenik]

I've been curious about how the initial round of judging is organized. Are the submissions handed out randomly to judges? Do judges get to pick the game they judge? Are the judges categorized and then given games in those categories?

Inquiring minds...

[sega]

Well, not all judges get to see all games, but they do make sure multiple judges see a particular game (an even amount of judges per game).  For instance, games A, B, and C go to judge 1, games B, C, and D go to judge 2, and so on.  Then there are superjudges that see every single game.  This way, there are judges that get to spend more quality time with each title, and judges that get an overview of everything submitted.

[Matthew]

That's the general idea--there were 141 games entered last year, so the majority of judges will obviously not be playing every game.  There will be a few "super judges" that will play every game (and we will play all of the games ourselves).  We will be overlapping the games/judges as sega mentioned, so a game won't be judged in complete isolation from its peers.

Judges have been allowed to voluntarily score more games than their assigned batch, too.  We'll likely keep that policy as we go into the judging phase this year.