Sir, you require spices. That or a high constitution rating.

EDIT: The correct amount of Garlic Salt gets me through anything. But I may in fact be Wario.

Was that the same image?

I seriously doubt that Tim would post those here, publicly, under his own name. He's definitely not THAT stupid. (Though he may or may not be that malevolent.) This is probably a random troll trying to make Tim look even worse than he does already.

Just out of curiosity, did everyone who posted in the Langdell thread get the PM?

No.

I've read some pretty condescending remarks from some of Tim's defenders, about the community, about how they are a bunch of amateurs and how the man made games when people were'nt even born.

To be fair, there's plenty of insults pointed the other way too. Deserved or not, they don't help.

The implication that E3 is a thing with winners and losers might bother some people here.

My personal opinion is: HOLY CRAP METROID WTF, must buy even if it sucks. So... Nintendo won.  But that's not really fair because I am a Nintendo fanboy and an even bigger Metroid fanboy.

it's amazing to me how so many of you seem to think that pushing buttons with your thumbs is the definitive way of interacting with a videogame. ultimate and eternal. nothing's ever gonna beat PUSHING A BUTTON.

Buttons are almost certainly the best device for a particular kind of interaction with a system: discrete, time sensitive choices.

There certainly are other kinds of interaction, otherwise we wouldn't have mice and dual analogs, but so far we've always had buttons to fall back on, as they are incredibly useful for the frequent need to make discrete choices.

I'd be very interested in hearing about this point... if and only if it can be articulated within a few paragraphs, with the assumption that I've already played the game and skimmed through the plot analysis on GameFAQs looking for answers in vain.

It was interesting, to be sure. I'm glad that I played it, so that I can point to it as an example of crazy ass game design (like Fathom, but more so!), but I don't think I could say I saw a specific point to it. Does it mean something specific to you?

I do not approve of these unclear topic titles.

But OMG, Toy Story is still my favorite Pixar movie. 

Tim Langdell had three GDC 09 talks. I didn't go to them, so I can't comment on their content aside from pointing out the titles:

Who Controls a Game's IP and Who Reaps the Financial Benefit?

How to Design Your Game So That its IP is More Valuable to Hollywood

How to Sell Your IP to Hollywood (Without Selling Your Soul)

It's a surprisingly complex topic with more viable options than you have listed, but a direct response to your question is: If you ever want to change the frame rate later, the first technique will be a mess. Also, the second technique lets you specify velocities as distance-per-second, which is generally easier for humans to imagine than distance-per-small-fraction-of-a-second.

EDIT: And if you ever decide to implement bullet time, a slight variation on the second technique would be very useful.

i'd estimate that the majority of the games in the feedback forum here took a few weeks to make, and that can really keep a game down.

I assume that games that were made in a few weeks aren't even *intended* to become popular. There's no reason why you can't finish an experimental game in a few weeks if that's the sort of thing you're into.

Are there people who publish games after a few weeks of work who then complain that they're not getting enough publicity?

...This is pretty much the opposite of what I was expecting, based on the title. 

The big endian color problem is fixed. 

Attempting to load other people's levels fails. Also, sometimes when I restart the thing, I get some error message about a java.lang.IllegalStateException involving threads. 

Favorite fight (off the top of my head):



...Yes, it's fictional.

EDIT: This version has english dubs:

This is what it looks like on a big endian architecture:



Otherwise, it runs just fine. 

So the randomness is intentional then?

If this was a game that encouraged replaying, (I feel it doesn't, despite the people who look for alternate endings) then having randomness would make sense to me. People would have the opportunity to see both outcomes and might learn that there is a random element.

But I feel this is more like a movie, where half the people see one movie and half the people see a different movie, and they don't realize that they are missing something and learn about it unless they happen to compare notes.

Alright, so the thing that bothers me the most, which I don't understand, is the pit right at the start of the platformer level. It's totally reasonable for someone to accidentally fall in this pit, in fact I think someone earlier in the thread said that they did. But someone who falls in that pit ends up having a different experience from someone who made it all the way to the boss before falling. And I think it's likely that people who don't get to see the boss won't try it again. They will come away with a totally different impression, simply because they randomly fell into a pit by chance.

Given that water and death are supposed to be vaguely the same thing here, instead of restarting the first level after falling into the pit, I think you should just get rid of the pit entirely and not let the player actually die before reaching the boss. That way the player's experience will depend less on randomness.

I don't like that I can't stay on the same page while voting on a bunch of tools.

More important than the size of the stage is the number of pixels that have to be redrawn constantly. Big stages are not a problem if the game doesn't scroll and any animation is localized. Or, alternatively, if all of the graphics consist of a few carefully managed bitmaps.

Yeah, but pretty much nobody is THAT determined to steal flash content.

I was probably overreacting, portals actually tend to just steal from each other rather than from random places on forums, but I think it's still a good idea to site-lock it.