What do you think about a Housepets game for Nintendo Wii?

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:03 am

Um... RPG maker is a game maker, just wrongly named...
I dont wanna be part of this flamewar...

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:13 am

Jack Wrote
Long messages are not a flame war!

Flamed Jack.

Edit: Jack is my name.Don't get confused.

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:15 am

p33wii wrote:
Jack Wrote
Long messages are not a flame war!
Flamed Jack.
Edit: Jack is my name.Don't get confused.

Sure seems like one. But whatever, I might be adding gasoline to the flame, so I'm gonna shutup now.

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:17 am

YOU'D BETTER.

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:18 am

p33wii wrote:YOU'D BETTER.

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:21 am

We are de-railing the subject aren't we.

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:23 am

p33wii wrote:We are de-railing the subject aren't we.

If we don't want to get slapped, then we should shutup.

Ebly · Post by **Ebly** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:28 am

Private Elliot wrote:
p33wii wrote:We are de-railing the subject aren't we.
If we don't want to get slapped, then we should shutup.

Yes you should

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:29 am

Just wondering, would the game have fighting aspects?

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:31 am

p33wii wrote:Just wondering, would the game have fighting aspects?

IF the game ever comes out, most likely not.

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 2:46 am

Gotcha.

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:35 am

Yeah, you are right about my concept. I am actually waiting for the others to come up with ideas, and that is indeed not how game designing works. But most other people don't have anything to offer other than ideas. So I can either try to involve them or work alone. However, you are probably right, it is too vague and I probably should have written something more detailed.

And no, no one would try to make an inferior game... Free stuff doesn't mean bad quality. I mean, Housepets! is free, but we sure know it is good! However, if something can be sold, it must be good... At least to some people, right?

Please don't be fooled by the way I act though. I never sold any games or finished making any games... Your games did get featured in some game magazines, that is definitely quite a feat, and you have already beaten me.

As for the challenge, I know the risk of not having enough challenge. If I don't watch what I am doing, I could end up making a boring game. I would defend my concept, but again, my concept was simply too vague and I don't think it is fair to defend it anymore.

I will probably talk less and work more from now on...

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 3:57 am

Private Elliot wrote:Um... RPG maker is a game maker, just wrongly named...

What?

Oh no not again, why did I say that I'm sorry, I didn't want to please don't get mad at me I'm sorry

I didn't want to say things in a bad way, it's all my fault, I shouldn've said anything and kept quiet, but I thought that GameCobra was attacking me and I got weird again and and... Please don't hurt me, I'm sorry, I'll go away now if you want me to, I didn't want to hurt anyone

I thought actually the opposite, that I just talk useless gibberish and I'm useless to you. Aquablast already had this project, so I better won't get any hopes up, it's naive for me to think that I can help or get help with this

It's all my fault, I'm sorry for what I've done

Private Elliot · Post by **Private Elliot** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 4:47 pm

It's okay Tails. We forgive you.
Now for a mariomarc moment!
*hug*

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:02 pm

Well, we can have more than 1 projects at once. These projects aren't official in the first place. Besides I am working alone since the beginning, so I think people should just ignore me for the time being, until I have something to show. Not to mention I might give up half-way or before I even start anyway.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:11 pm

Aquablast: well I already showed something, but it's too stupid, that it didn't help anything, so I guess there's not really point for me to trying anything anyway... especially when you know much better, since you can obviously make it official and get help from other people... Who would ever trust me, or want to work with me on something?

Umm... If something can be sold, doesn't mean it's really good. You may be surprised, but there a lot of games that are sold and that are not really good. In fact, I sort of despise talking about game design in terms of business and customers and such... I think you didn't mean that in a bad way, but let me explain, why does it sound actually like a horrible thing to me...

Game design to me is rather form of art, where you put something into the game, you put yourself into the development, your heart (not literally), so you create something interesting, something new, something fun, something that you can be proud of... Just like a artist draws a picture or music composer creates a new track. You make a game just to make the game itself, so it's high quality, not just focusing about customers and the market.

You know... high-quality game and game that can will be sold well... there's a huge difference and you CAN'T use it as measure of game quality. Many years ago, most game developers made it, because it was fun for them, they wanted to create something new original and fun, they put themselves into the creation process. But what happened then? Producers wanter to sell more. Get more money more customers. Yes, they wanted exactly what you want: to make a game that will sell and get as many customers as possible, but they don't care about the game being that good or interesting or original, what's important is, that it attracts masses and a lot of customers and thus generates a lot of money.

You can see results today. A lot of people do games just for the money, not for the game itself. You can find tons and tons of games on the market, but only a few actually reach quality of these games from years ago, when people who focused on games that will sell and get customers were still rather minority and developers, who really cared about the games themselves, who did it mainly for the game and not for the money, were majority. Today, it's quite the reverse. People who care about really good games are rather minority, while most of developers do it just for profit. That's why you can also hear, that today many games are not as good as they were before. Yes they sell, because they make them so masses buy them, but that doesn't really mean that it's a high quality game...

I happen to also work externally for a computer magazine and commercial webzine and in journalism, it's actually very similar. Do you think that article, that has many views and thus brings more money is higher-quality one, than some that has less readers? No. People are more interested rather in topics that are rather shocking, or even scandal. If you'll have article "Steve Ballmer: "Linux is for wimps"" just informing how he bashes Linux (this is made up) and "OS comparison on desktop computers and server" featuring elaborate facts, professional tests and everything... which one do you think that will attract more readers (customers)? Yes, the first one, despite it's lower quality than the second one. Do you still think that something that's made so it's very successful on the market is higher quality? In fact... many authors often feel oppressed, because publishers (who pay them) often force them to write lower quality, but more shocking and mass-reader attracting articles, instead of some more elaborate ones, with more technological topics, which would however get less readers.

Simply put, you CAN'T use this as measure of quality. If you want, continue talking about it in terms of business and customer, but please... PLEASE don't mix it with game design, because it's an insult to many people who actually care about game design, because it's what ruined it and made it just a tool to get money. It's simple. (real and and serious) Game design doesn't mix with customer/business/selling things. Game designers who want high quality game don't focus at all on what you said, they focus on the game itself and want it to be high quality and thoughts about making a game that can be sold are on somewhere on the bottom of their priority list.

Also you need to improve that attitude of yours. With "give up half-way or before I even start" you don't often get much far and much successful. When I seriously start working on something, I intend to finish it, because development of something serious can take months, even years, so giving up in half-way means throwing away a lot of work. You need confidence that you can finish the project, so it's often better to start with small things... Actually it's better to first actually learn about how to do it by experimenting and gaining some experience.

Private Elliot wrote:Um... RPG maker is a game maker, just wrongly named...

What does this mean?

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:59 am

I know many game designers hate the business side of gaming, but I personally blame the whole industry practice. I may be speaking from the business side, but that doesn't mean I approve of their industry practice, which includes making games into soulless product, taking advantage of the trust of its customer, using hype without trying to live up to it, trying to mimic the other industries blindly, treating everything as franchise, manipulating information, or treating the gamers as fools.

They may be making a lot of money right now, but they are going to burn everything down if they keep doing this. Destroying your market, therefor losing your customers, is not the way of business.

To me, gaming is about entertainment, the whole point is to entertain people. If a game isn't entertaining its customers, then they should stop buying it, instead of rewarding their practice. This will probably happen someday, once people realized what the industry is doing.

And that's why game designers need to get into the business side, so they won't have to follow the industry. There is seriously no reason for them to listen to people who don't care about entertainment (these "businessmen" ARE willing to lie to their customers...) I have the passion of a game designer too, and I would love to make a living by designing games. To make games popular to everyone, is so that people could live their dream. I actually hope the gaming industry crash right away, so we can start anew sooner. The very first game designers started from a garage, there is no reason why game designers can't do it again.

If game designers want to keep gaming pure, then they will have to know the art of business first. If not, they will either have to work for people who don't respect gaming, or to have game designing forever as a hobby.

(Of course, it's not all that simple to start anew. The big companies and evil lawyers ARE capable of attacking game designers, and stop them from starting their own companies. That's why I am trying to be a lawyer first, so I can defend both myself and the others.)

As for now, I am trying to master too much things at once, so I won't be able to do anything until my vacation. I do fully intend to finish my project, but I am also aware of the possibilities of failing. Besides, considering everything I said? I am probably overconfident (I mean, I even said that I could convince Rick!), I probably need to be taught a lesson instead.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:23 am

Oh... you totally missed my point

Sorry...

Okay again... it's not about all designers hating the business side. It's that today, most designers do the job just for the money, without not much caring about games themselves. They don't want to create games like an art, they want to sell it like goods, while the ones, who still do it for the game itself are rather minority today. That's why you still find really good games, but there's a sea of game created just to get as much profit as possible, because that's what's priority number one, of many people today. I think that many people, who would give their heart to the game, give even little bit more effort than they're actually paid for, who don't take it just as a job, but form to express themselves and create something they can be proud of, just so they create great game, are now rather minority.

And second point... the audience. Most people won't appreciate high quality of something, they just don't care, they go for anything that's "cool" and I've seen it myself several times, that they just don't care if the game is really elaborate and tuned to every detail and if it holds any message and it's rather like an art. It's similar for other areas, even like I already mentioned in my previous post, but you apparently just ignored it... journalism. You think that higher-quality means more customers/players/readers? No it doesn't. I see myself, how many people read my articles every day and some topics can have really huge difference in views... I can't unfortunately tell you exact numbers, but for example article with IE9p4 performance tests has less than half views than "Alarm! Google is collecting your personal data" has. Or "Seven wonders of Windows 7" has three times more than "Firefox 4.0b1 performance tests".

This is a simple fact. Higher quality doesn't mean more customers. You need to break that association. Of course, it can get more customers, than something lower quality, but that doesn't mean that you can use it as measure of quality, that's just insult to people who focus on the game itself and want it to be rather form of art, than something that will be sold widely and by using this as measure of quality, you basically lower their efforts on the level of ""efforts"" of developers, who do it mostly for money...

You probably don't have much experience yet, so you still see it quite optimistically, but unfortunately, that's often not how it works. When you put a lot of effort into something to make it really unique piece of work doesn't mean you get much customers, because they won't be simply that interested in it, even though it's higher quality game, than some more popular and more cool thing, that may not be anything really original, but catches attention of masses.

I don't think you mean it in a bad way, but when you design the game and really unique and good game, you should completely forget about all the business stuff and focus on the game and the game itself. I doubt that it's possible to throw down whole gaming business... not to mention there are even some good big companies (even I work in very good one, with really cool and friendly people and even people leading the company actually work(ed) as editors :3 ) and good games are made, but simply there's myriad of these, who develop games mostly for money.

In fact... when I think about it... Do you know how many technologically advanced devices appeared in the past? They were really high quality and very useful, but simply they didn't catch attention of people much and they were lost. For example ZIP discs, they never managed to overthrow classic floppies. Or magneto-optical drives? Just because something is higher quality, doesn't mean it will be sold much and vice versa: if something is sold widely, doesn't necessarily mean that it's higher quality than other things...

zeroslash · Post by **zeroslash** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:39 am

High quality can make the difference between more or less customers. What really matters is the marketing and how well it's done.

Nevertheless, you also need to think about the audience. Shooters are very popular right now, so they're going to sell better than any other game (though like with all trends, people will lose interests).

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 9:06 am

I never said it can't make a difference (actually, if you read it thoroughly, you would see that I actually said that there still are high quality games and big companied that do great games, that actually are elaborate and detailed and that developers put themselves into their creation, although there is now myriad of ones, that do it just for money), just that often products, that are lower quality from the game design side, but more popularized and eye-catchy get more customers, so you can't use the fact how well it's sold as measure of quality. You simply can't.
And exactly... trends. That's doing what other people want and that may not be what you really want and what can be better. Many people are simply interested in something that's cool at the given time, but that doesn't mean that something popular and well sold is higher quality than something, that gets less audience.
Not to mention, you can't always popularize everything... because if people are crazy for thing A, but you do thing B, that's higher quality, but not much popular, you simply can't make it seem like it's thing A (without lying), you can make it more eye catchy, but it still won't be as popular.

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:25 am

Okay, I guess I missed your point. But I still think the same, it is not their fault if they want to make profit from games. The problem is with their current method and mindset. They are either taking shortcuts or they are making game to only entertain themselves. In my mind, the proper way to gain profit is still making a game that would entertain people.

And quality is kind of subjective, everyone has different standard and different taste. Something one find to be quality may be trash to another. I will just throw some questions: Starcraft I and Starcraft II, which one is better quality? What about Metroid: Other M and Metroid Prime? What about Super Mario Bros, Super Mario Galaxy, and New Super Mario Bros Wii? LoZ: Spirit Tracks and LoZ: Phantom Hourglass? L4D and L4D2? Megaman 2 and Megaman 8? I am sure any of those questions can easily create conflict, because people simply have different view on quality of a game.

As for why I skipped journalism, it is because most information are free now. Beside "Seven wonders of Windows 7" could be indeed better quality than "Firefox 4.0b1 performance tests". How can I tell, anyway? Everyone measures quality differently.

Sales != Absolute measurement for quality. Sales can be affected by other factors, like marketing and manipulation (example: hype). But unless you have a more objective way to measure quality, I am not changing my mind. People buy stuff because there is something they want. If they didn't like it, they should stop buying it. They should stop rewarding something they don't like.

Besides Effort != Automatic success. It is sad, but that's just how it is, no matter where... I am trying find out what makes something successful, so the effort won't go waste. That doesn't mean I don't care about effort. If something with effort could fail, let alone something without effort!

We simply have a very different way of thinking. You view games as art, while I view games as entertainment. While I measure quality with sales, you measure quality with something else.

zeroslash wrote:Nevertheless, you also need to think about the audience. Shooters are very popular right now, so they're going to sell better than any other game (though like with all trends, people will lose interests).

You know, shooter didn't become popular by magic, and people won't lose interest without a reason. "Trend" is one of the industry practice that should be avoided. They are simply using "trend" as an almighty justification of anything's success and their own failure.

I am not saying trend won't sell stuff (trend can sell as much as hype does). But if people think their customers appeared from thin air, then believe me, they will vanish like thin air too. Good luck with your business, if you are relying on magically appeared and vanished customers, instead of making customers.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 12:23 pm

I never said that games are not for entertainment. Just that sales are very bad method of measuring quality of something, only quality from the business side. You keep talking how you don't like these businessmans, who ruined the game design itself, yet you keep thinking exactly like one. There are simply too many other variables, so it's not possible for sales to measure directly the quality of the game, or any product itself, only it's market success, so it says very little about the quality of the game itself.

For comparison, it's like measuring voltage, by applying to resistor of unknown resistance for arbitrary period of time, then letting it cool down for a short time (also arbitrary) and then by pressing your hand against it and subjectively measuring it's temperature. Well maybe that's exaggerated, but it should show you how distorted and imprecise will the value be.

There's more objective way

(professional) reviews. And lot of them (so you can create average). Including rating and comments by players themselves. But I'm rather talking about the quality of the work itself (you're now twisting it somewhere else, into subjective quality area), not subjective quality, but how well does the developer and game designer do his job.

But you still don't get the point. What people want and like, isn't necessarily high quality from the creator-side (it's from the market side, and you should learn to differ between these two). Not to mention... "Seven wonders of Windows 7" IS lower quality than "Firefox 4.0b1 performance tests". Seriously... how can you argue this? I wrote both, and I KNOW how much effort I put to each to them and how much qualitative they are. In fact, I've been writing articles (commercial, for money) for 3 years now and I know... I often wrote something, I thought I put more work into it than some other and I was sort of proud of it and expected it to be popular, yet it didn't get many views, while some article I considered rather inferior got much more views...

You know, quality of work from the author's side and quality from the business side (that's what people want) are different things. Surely, they overlap, but they're still different and they simply DON'T mix. What many people want simply isn't always what's higher quality in the area you work in. Or when I did some games. I did a little game, which I didn't even put that much effort in and yet it received better response, than some game I worked longer on. Before, I was like

, but now... I learned it myself, that what customers want, isn't always the best you can do, from experience, I don't know about you...

Not to mention for free? No no no

, it's never really for free, you always have to do something... Not to mention how's that even relevant? Mostly you view adverts on the website. You know, if it was for free, there would be a lot less high quality webzines, because people who write... they have to live from something too. They're not charity and it costs them a lot of time and energy, which is why I seriously hate people who block ads everywhere just so they're not bothered with them (if you have very slow connection and netbook for example, where ads would cause serious problems, then it's okay, as long as you don't block it everywhere, even when you can view them just fine and if you think there's to much ads, then simply go somewhere else...), because that's just selfish to the authors who create the content.

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:28 pm

Some of my goals may overlap with those businessmen, but I still have a lot more goals than they do.

And I think it is clear that we are standing on two different sides. Since I can't prove what I am saying yet, I will just wait until I have something to show.

Information is still free, for the users, at least. They don't pay when they click on the ad.

zeroslash · Post by **zeroslash** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 3:18 pm

I'm not saying that any of my future customers appeared our of thin air; where did you get that superfluous assumption? Shooters are popular right now because the economy is down. Throughout human history, we've been known to often resort to violent entertainment when times are low; it gets us excited. And I'm not doing just shooters. In fact, I only have two planned, whereas my other games will likely be platformers and action-adventure games; even my two shooters will have puzzle-based parts to them.

And there's usually a reason as to why a trend is popular. For example, Halo gave us one of the first times a shooter could work on a console system. Sure, Halo brought nothing really new besides that, but people still loved it. Why? Who knows? I can't really justify why. Maybe it was the story or the environment, or maybe it was the characters? Maybe it was because Master Chief acted more of a lone wolf and that allowed the player to play the game without being dragged down by teammates (though, shooters prior to Halo had very little teammates anyway)?

(I also am aware of Goldeneye, Doom, and even Maze Wars, but Halo kinda set the standard, no matter how low it is.)

Some people like repetitive, button-mashing action, and others like puzzle solving and open-world environments. Like what Aquablast said, "Everyone measures quality differently." And for another quote, "It is not their fault if they want to make a profit from games." Sometimes, especially with smaller companies, you have to. But having passion is the key. Sales don't directly determine quality, but if people like it, and if you enjoyed making the game, is that so wrong?

EDIT: Also, I like how this topic escalated to an argument about quality. God, this forums rules.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 4:35 pm

Argument?

I never thought this is an argument.

zeroslash wrote:Sales don't directly determine quality, but if people like it, and if you enjoyed making the game, is that so wrong?

Who ever said that that's wrong? I think you're just twisting what others say...
In my case, that's actually what's good and I said it several times... developers, who don't just take it as a job to make money, but who want to create the game itself, put something more into it and then people liking it... I don't know where you got that that would be wrong, because as far as I'm aware, nobody here said such thing.

Aquablast: Different sides? What do you want to prove anyway?

zeroslash · Post by **zeroslash** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:21 pm

Tails++ wrote:Argument? I never thought this is an argument.

zeroslash wrote:Sales don't directly determine quality, but if people like it, and if you enjoyed making the game, is that so wrong?
Who ever said that that's wrong? I think you're just twisting what others say...
In my case, that's actually what's good and I said it several times... developers, who don't just take it as a job to make money, but who want to create the game itself, put something more into it and then people liking it... I don't know where you got that that would be wrong, because as far as I'm aware, nobody here said such thing.

Aquablast: Different sides? What do you want to prove anyway?

Fine, it's a debate. :p

And I'm not twisting words, just misinterpreting them. Sorry. :/

Aquablast · Post by **Aquablast** » Fri Oct 29, 2010 12:00 pm

The key questions about trend are "How did the trend start?" And "Why did it become a trend?" I get that superfluous assumption whenever someone says "Game/Genre A will sell well because that genre is popular/it is trendy." Instead of "Game/Genre A will sell well because *insert reason why it will become popular*."

But know that even when you do come to an answer to those question, it doesn't mean it is automatically right. My explanations can be very, very wrong too.

And those knowledge can be used in making a Housepets game. For now I am just too tired to do anything productive.

Tails++ wrote:Aquablast: Different sides? What do you want to prove anyway?

I want to prove that there is no need to separate the business side and the creator side, and what I said isn't just valueless theory crafting.

The only way for me to do that is to make a game myself, then everyone can tell me whether it is truly terrible or not. I am not comfortable in discussing about game designing too much, since I don't really have anything to back myself up right now.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:19 pm

I'm not saying you have to separate them totally (you have to earn money somehow), just that the creator side must be much more important, if you want to create very good game, not just what will catch attention of masses in advertisements the most. A lot of people don't really care about thorough quality and often when something is actually lower quality from the creator side is higher quality from the business side, so you can't really use sales and such as measure of quality of the game itself, you can't deny that.

Teh Brawler · Post by **Teh Brawler** » Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:23 pm

Tails++ wrote:I'm not saying you have to separate them totally (you have to earn money somehow), just that the creator side must be much more important, if you want to create very good game, not just what will catch attention of masses in advertisements the most. A lot of people don't really care about thorough quality and often when something is actually lower quality from the creator side is higher quality from the business side, so you can't really use sales and such as measure of quality of the game itself, you can't deny that.

Oh if Microsoft could only figure that out.

disk333 · Post by **disk333** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:10 am

I knew I would see one of these here!
I know this is a bit late, but I had an idea like this not long ago. I thought Housepets would work well as a game if it was like the Persona series. If it was, it d solve several problems like "who would you play as?", and "how would you interact with the other characters?" Unfortunately the darker setting wouldn't suit the Housepets theme at all.

... of course this is assuming one will ever be made.

zeroslash · Post by **zeroslash** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:20 am

disk333 wrote:I knew I would see one of these here!
I know this is a bit late, but I had an idea like this not long ago. I thought Housepets would work well as a game if it was like the Persona series. If it was, it d solve several problems like "who would you play as?", and "how would you interact with the other characters?" Unfortunately the darker setting wouldn't suit the Housepets theme at all.

... of course this is assuming one will ever be made. :|

So, pretty much like Animal Crossing? :p

Kyderra · Post by **Kyderra** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:10 pm

I could see HP be a fun mini game on the IPhone way faster then on the Wii

Andrea · Post by **Andrea** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 5:40 pm

Kyderra wrote:I could see HP be a fun mini game on the IPhone way faster then on the Wii

Or maybe a a point&click adventure on DS

p33wii · Post by **p33wii** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:47 pm

I have always disliked point/click things, for any console, but I do think for housepets it is a plausible concept but a game for ds is far harder to make than for iphone, and not everyone owns a ds. I'm not saying that an iphone game is easy, or that everyone owns one, but for an unofficial project like this I think it would be easier.

BunchaCrunch · Post by **BunchaCrunch** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 7:58 pm

2D sidescroller.

Russiarules1 · Post by **Russiarules1** » Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:52 pm

Housepets! on Wii? mmhh... and why not XBox and PC too?
It would be an interesting game in my opinion, a 2D graphic game perhaps?
It would be cool if they launch a Housepets! game...

Kyderra · Post by **Kyderra** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:28 am

Andrea wrote:
Kyderra wrote:I could see HP be a fun mini game on the IPhone way faster then on the Wii

Or maybe a a point&click adventure on DS

you guys are missing the point,
developing a game for Nintendo or any console for that mater will mean you have to ave some sort of company and background to convince them to actually put out your game , witch will never happen.
when I say " would see a Iphone app faster" I mean, there is actually a chance if a person would be able to put it on the app store.

Foxstar · Post by **Foxstar** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:05 am

Could also develop something for Xbox indie games, but yeah, Kyderra has a point.

Frooxius · Post by **Frooxius** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:12 am

Point which I made about a few dozen posts ago, but everybody is ignoring me as usual

It's nice that everyone tries to name as many platforms as possible, but question is, who is going to actually develop something for them? Especially knowing, that by choosing a single platform, you limit your audience only to people who own specific console and you basically cut of others, who would like to play a Housepets game, but they don't have that console. Is that really what you want to do?

I know nobody's going to read this, but I think that for this game is PC platform the best: basically everyone here has a PC, I would even say that 99.99 % of people who have some console have also a PC, but you can't say otherwise. So if it was for PC, then most people would be able to play it, which is most important thing, because that way, it can promote the comic the most.

The same thing goes for iPhone, a lot of people buy it for some reason, but also a lot of people don't have it and by releasing game just for that, you basically discriminate people who don't have an iPhone, which is even worse than with consoles. Not to mention it's not really much powerful device, so it would be rather some simple casual game and the (horribly arrogant) politics of Apple regarding developers (and not only them) makes me want to puke sometimes...

There's of course Xbox Indie games, where even freelance developers can develop for that platform and publish it, not to mention that with an XNA, you don't need to write much extra code, so it's possible to release it both for PC and Xbox 360. But in my case, the problem is, that I live in Czech republic and Microsoft doesn't allow to people from here to publish any games

I'll try to research more, if I can circumvent that, because I want to release also for Xbox 360 with my other games, but I simply can't because of stupid politics.

Russiarules1: I think that game is interesting, because of the game itself, not because you stick a "Housepets" label on it and put Peanut and Grape faces on some of the characters.

In fact, it seems that a lot of people here just take their favorite game and stick Housepets on it and think that will do.

disk333: I'm actually making a simple Housepets game (just to test if fangame HP game concept would even work), which will be hopefully followed by bigger one, but that's not something I can do overnight.

zeroslash · Post by **zeroslash** » Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:17 pm

Frooxius wrote:Point which I made about a few dozen posts ago, but everybody is ignoring me as usual

It's nice that everyone tries to name as many platforms as possible, but question is, who is going to actually develop something for them? Especially knowing, that by choosing a single platform, you limit your audience only to people who own specific console and you basically cut of others, who would like to play a Housepets game, but they don't have that console. Is that really what you want to do?

I know nobody's going to read this, but I think that for this game is PC platform the best: basically everyone here has a PC, I would even say that 99.99 % of people who have some console have also a PC, but you can't say otherwise. So if it was for PC, then most people would be able to play it, which is most important thing, because that way, it can promote the comic the most.

The same thing goes for iPhone, a lot of people buy it for some reason, but also a lot of people don't have it and by releasing game just for that, you basically discriminate people who don't have an iPhone, which is even worse than with consoles. Not to mention it's not really much powerful device, so it would be rather some simple casual game and the (horribly arrogant) politics of Apple regarding developers (and not only them) makes me want to puke sometimes...

There's of course Xbox Indie games, where even freelance developers can develop for that platform and publish it, not to mention that with an XNA, you don't need to write much extra code, so it's possible to release it both for PC and Xbox 360. But in my case, the problem is, that I live in Czech republic and Microsoft doesn't allow to people from here to publish any games I'll try to research more, if I can circumvent that, because I want to release also for Xbox 360 with my other games, but I simply can't because of stupid politics.

Russiarules1: I think that game is interesting, because of the game itself, not because you stick a "Housepets" label on it and put Peanut and Grape faces on some of the characters.

In fact, it seems that a lot of people here just take their favorite game and stick Housepets on it and think that will do.

disk333: I'm actually making a simple Housepets game (just to test if fangame HP game concept would even work), which will be hopefully followed by bigger one, but that's not something I can do overnight.

What's ironic is that people are reading your posts, but ignoring them. ;p

Anyway, just because most everyone has a PC doesn't necessarily mean that the PC is a good choice for releasing a game (but certainly not a bad thing either). Not all PCs are good for playing games; take mine for example: it runs slow while playing Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, and it crashed one time while playing Rollercoaster Tycoon. Though simpler, imagine what a Housepets game could do. All right, that's biased, but not all PCs are good for playing games. That's why there are game consoles.