Guys are TOO ADORABLE when they miss each other. /cue awwwwww
Thanks for incriminating me in this Lostcast with the Fry’s incident. IN MY DEFENSE, recently, when we went to one of our favorite sushi places, we didn’t get charged for our sake. While I did not say anything to our lovely waitress at the time, I added the cost of the sake on to her tip. That’s how I defend being a “bad person.”
Did you guys see Desk’s comment about the year posted?
“Googled myself” tickles me to no end.
Yes, the banter at the beginning was amusing.
I have another disagreement with @geoffb. I think the external advertising model is fundamentally broken. HTTP is an open protocol, and the client can interpret the data any way it feels. If I open a socket to port 80, and as part of the data transfer, which the web server freely gives, it suggests I make another trip over the web and fetch data from DoubleClick, AdSense, etc. I can simply refuse to do so. This is trivial to do, and the web was designed to work that way.
As for his moral argument: It is my computer. My bandwidth. My browser. That trumps any external source that the web server suggests I fetch, especially with expensive mobile bandwidth. In fact, ad networks have been known to get hijacked and serve malware. Therefore, I consider it a good proactive security policy to block unwanted content (which may include ads) to protect themselves. Many corporate offices do something like this already by blocking “distracting” or “high-bandwidth” sites such as YouTube, Netflix, Facebook, Twitter, etc by using Websense or some other filtering service. If your web server suggests I load a Twitter widget, and the corporate web filter blocks it, would I be morally obligated to leave your site since I did not collect all the external sources you designed your site for me to see? Or am I just morally required to not block widgets that help you monetize?
I develop and maintain a few web sites. What I do for my monetization is use simple hard links that are loaded locally within the page. These simple links are served internally and thus impervious to ad-blockers. They are not distracting to the users. This is the compromise. This works. I think this is the future of ads on the internet, and I think it will be a better internet for it. Less power to major ad networks is better.
As far as piracy goes, I am on @geoffb’s side there. However, I consider the pirated download an extremely minor issue. Those people are a lost market and would have never bought one anyway. The uploaders are the real pirates.
Haha awwwww <3
Was just talking about this out loud and Geoff pretty much agrees haha (although we probably do a bad job of expressing our complex opinions). The web is hackable and should remain hackable and a side effect of that is it’s relatively trivial to get around the vast majority of monetization models. Moral issues aside all seems fine in the world!
As far as piracy goes, I am on @geoffb’s side there. However, I consider the pirated download an extremely minor issue. Those people are a lost market and would have never bought one anyway.
I hate comparisons between piracy and theft, because they’re completely different things!
If you go to a store and steal something, there’s a well defined finite cost for that. With a game, it’s different. A copy of your game has, effectively, no cost for you and you have a practically infinite stock of it, so, if someone steals a copy of your game, you’ve lost effectively nothing.
And, as you said, someone playing your game is always a positive thing, no matter how they got it. Someone stealing your game might not be as beneficial as someone buying your game, but it’s infinitely better than someone not playing your game at all.
Finally, in some cases, someone illegaly downloading your game is better than if they bought it.
The uploaders are the real pirates.
I kind of disagree.
I think that, if I bought a DRM free copy of a game, I have the right to do whatever I want with it, including distributing it on the interwebs.
But there’s the moral problem of influencing other people to not buy the game.
Now onto my notes:
I hate to be that guy, but… Arduino is not a chip.
Your talk about good failures reminded me of the Beautiful Fails thread. It’s so beautiful!
Matt: “I really wanna make a medieval fantasy side scrolling platformer, I really wanna make a modern day side scrolling platformer, I really wanna make a sci-fi one […]”
Time travel anyone?
That business model of using the same IP with a different genre didn’t work out that well with Castlevania… or Zelda… or Super Mario Bros.
Matt: “There’s this really great mechanic, it begin in Super Mario World […]”
Hmm… What about Kirby? It certainly came before SMW.
Speaking of efficient use of mechanics and high overlap between game systems, have you guys played 140? I can’t recommend it enough! It’s just genius!
It’s also a great example of how cohesiveness can make an otherwise too simplistic art style look great.
Screw you guys ok? Now I’m super hyped for Futurecast, but I’m gonna have to wait at least more 60 hours for it.
So, will there ever be an AWL postmortem?
Hmm… What about Kirby? It certainly came before SMW.
A similar concept, though it’s inhaling instead of tongue-based.
- Speaking of efficient use of mechanics and high overlap between game systems, have you guys played 140? I can’t recommend it enough! It’s just genius!
I saw the trailer, looks great. I see a recurring theme from gamedevs: how do I art?! This is a great game to point them to; minimal visuals done well.
- So, will there ever be an AWL postmortem?
I guess the time hasn’t felt right yet cuz we are still working on it. That might change soon though; if the upcoming update/sale doesn’t perform well, we won’t be able to afford working on it much more.