At this point in time, counting three categories of:
phone/tablet gamers
console (Xbox/PS3/Nintendo) gamers
PC gamersI would actually suspect that the category of PC gamers is far and above the SMALLEST category.
The era of PC game dominance is behind us.
/agreed
The days actually of using PCs or (desktops specifically) at all are numbered I believe ,with people going to more mobile technology. I like the fact I can work my Alienware laptop in the office and when I get home just plug it up using HDMI to my 52" screen for gaming. It also does not take up space in my house like a desk/PC station would.
Yet,I still have not found my "Paizo" tablet that I can use at the table while playing pathfinder. One to store all my PDFs, create a dice roller like program, some GM tools or Pathfinder interactive sheet. My Alienware does not work as well for an interactive table(especially when some people spill their drinks) but I am hopeful there will be a good Microsoft based OS tablet within the year.
I have worked with Iphone apps and wrote programs in objective-C and Cocoa but I am not an "Apple" fan. I can not deny the IPad2 is thin and looks good. I just do not like the code side of it.
OT on some issues of PC versus console gaming:
PC games don't dominate for a large number of reasons--and likely will continue to reduce in sales because, amongst those many reasons, increasingly strict DRM schemes by many companies complicates the purchase and usage of PC games. People get nervous when they realize installing this game they just spent $50 for might break their machine, or broadcast their gaming habits to the game publisher if they play while connected to the Internet, or find they can't ever play their game when the game distributor's server is down (by far, not all PC games will have these issues, but it's becoming an increasing concern, and "will this thing break my machine" has become the first question I ask before I buy a game).
My concern about consoles is that next-gen consoles are becoming more and more like PC games--disappearing are the easy plug-n-play days; now you often download games--and lose them when servers go down. And you need to install patches, just like PC games. Hardware failures are becoming more common. And there is the whole Big Brother Is Watching issue while you play connected to the Net--and most next gen consoles make it so you really want to be connected to the Net. If consoles become as fiddly as PCs (they are, after all, essentially very specialized, dedicated gaming PCs), what's the difference in what you use? These days if I want an easy plug and play game, I need to go to my Nintendo DS or my old Playstation 2.
At the same time, PC games will never go away because it's always easy to get indie games and online games, and because HEY, all video games are in fact designed ON A PC. So "porting out" a PC version isn't exactly difficult. And if someone will buy it, why not put it out. Plus PC games will always have the draw of being able to mod games easily, and provide complex toolsets for building within strategy and RPG type games. Some of that may begin to be doable on console (although for mods, you still have to design on a PC and then find a way to transfer it over, as far as I know).
And of course many PC games still make tons of bucks--MMOs of course, and broad-appeal games like the Sims particularly (although EA keeps trying to screw up the Sims franchise every way they possibly can, like never patching major bugs, having an online store that doesn't work, etc.). Developing for PC is never a BAD idea---but it's a very complicated, to say the least. Multiplatform seems the way to go to get the broadest audience, but that also causes its own development issues.
On topic: I am one of those people who'd rather see the Pathfinder Rules in a game fairly faithfully recreated, than a game in Golarion that uses its own ruleset. Of course, I have no objection to a Golarion-set game either. :) But I am the kind of person who likes turn based and quasi-turn based games like Neverwinter Nights. I even liked Neverwinter Nights 2. :) I would have liked a fully faithful-to-the-tabletop rendition like Temple of Elemental Evil if the GUI hadn't frustrated me (I HATED those radial menus) and the story bored me to tears (also, I never got the usermade patch to TOEE, and I realize that probably makes a huge difference).
in my version of a perfect world, I think I would much rather a good action game set in the Golarion universe (perhaps a pathfinder society dungeon-archeology series) than a NWN clone.Agreed. I'd rather the focus be on a faithful Golarion rather than on replicating the rules.
The Golarion campaign setting CAN NOT be used due to legal issues, but a custom setting using the Pathfinder system is OK.
The Golarion campaign setting CAN NOT be used due to legal issues, but a custom setting using the Pathfinder system is OK.in my version of a perfect world, I think I would much rather a good action game set in the Golarion universe (perhaps a pathfinder society dungeon-archeology series) than a NWN clone.Agreed. I'd rather the focus be on a faithful Golarion rather than on replicating the rules.
Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.
The Golarion campaign setting CAN NOT be used due to legal issues, but a custom setting using the Pathfinder system is OK.in my version of a perfect world, I think I would much rather a good action game set in the Golarion universe (perhaps a pathfinder society dungeon-archeology series) than a NWN clone.Agreed. I'd rather the focus be on a faithful Golarion rather than on replicating the rules.
Note that they said "in my version of a perfect world". Doesn't mean they expect that necessarily, but it's their ideal game. Also note I'm not trying to be rude, just pointing it out.
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.
The Golarion campaign setting CAN NOT be used due to legal issues, but a custom setting using the Pathfinder system is OK.in my version of a perfect world, I think I would much rather a good action game set in the Golarion universe (perhaps a pathfinder society dungeon-archeology series) than a NWN clone.Agreed. I'd rather the focus be on a faithful Golarion rather than on replicating the rules.Note that they said "in my version of a perfect world". Doesn't mean they expect that necessarily, but it's their ideal game. Also note I'm not trying to be rude, just pointing it out.
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.
However, under copyright law, satire is protected. So, even if we can't actually make Golarion into a game without permission, we can make games that make fun of Golarion all we want. Just exactly what the discworldian version of Golarion would look like is anyone's guess, however.
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.
Paizo staff in other threads covering this issue have stated that; they (Paizo Publishing) "DO NOT see the licensing of Golarion in the near future," they MAY change this later when things are just right, but UNTIL then the answer is NO.
And Eric is correct on the satire/parody method you could use to make a Golarion-based game, but that is IT.
This has probably been asked umpteen times before, but ARE there any plans for a Pathfinder-based computer game?Yeah, I would like to know, too. I was playing Temple of Elemental Evil a couple months back (the fan-patched version that fixes most of the bugs). It was great to play a tactical turn-based RPG based on the 3.5 ruleset.
I wish the answer to your question were "Yes," but, given the state of the industry though, I imagine that a company would need a lot of confidence in a project before investing the kind of resources modern computer games demand nowadays. I think (1) not having the D&D name recognition (yet) and (2) not appealing to the average consumer who is looking for a more casual, less-challenging experience would be two strikes against it.
Temple of Elemental Evil is the greatest 3.5 rule set game ever made in my opinion, and any attempt to make one as good would be a futile knockoff. lol. Just wanted to share that. :)
And you are right about the industry, with so many companies tanking because of the economy and abysmal launch sales for new IPs, I doubt anyone wants to take the reigns on yet another d20 based RPG. They'd have to have balls of steel or just be unbelievably inexperienced.
I'd buy any Pathfinder video game! I was thinking about this lately as well, since I tried to play through Temple of Elemental Evil a few weeks ago (didn't go so well .. I'm too used to Pathfinder rules now). There are also a few 4e games in the works, with Daggerdale just out (not sure if it's any good), and Neverwinter on the horizon. I'd love to see some Pathfinder video game action.
Daggerdale is a piece of ... something you don't want to waste any time on. It feels like just another dungeon crawler with nothing to give it a D&D feel to keep you interested. Also, if Paizo does get someone to develop and publish a Pathfinder game, it won't be anytime soon. Especially since they shouldn't wish to compete with releases in close proximity of mainstay franchises like Neverwinter Nights and Dungeons & Dragons.
I would like to see Pathfinder take a more tactical nature if it became a video game. Personally I find the market has too many hack and slash games (As fun as Champions of Norrath was, even that kept my intrest for only half a play though or so. Bayonetta and Vanquish were fun, and God of War held my intrest for about 5 seconds). I miss the days of think first then act that games like Baulder's Gate and Front Mission (D&D Tactics is way to clunky for me to get into for any length of time), and even Neverwinter Nights 2 kept enough "Brain" action to keep me playing it even now.
I used to play alot of console games, but I think part of the reason the hobby has died for me is because of the lack of "Brainy" games.
I completely share your taste in games, however, i found no enjoyment in Champions of Norrath (I just don't like the Gauntlet type games at all... too button mash for me). Right now my PC is loaded with tactical rpgs like Ufo: Aftermath, Fallout Tactics, and Temple of Elemental Evil. I just wanted to suggest a great game that I recently bought that fits well into this category and I think you would enjoy: so don't pass up any chance you get to play DUNGEONS OF DREDMOR, it's awesome! Think "a modern Nethack with excellent graphics and a great sense of humor".
I too am a big fan of the Temple of Elemental Evil PC game (with the Co8 versions)
I really like the turn based combat, this game gives the best "feel" of paper and pencil Turn Based combat from "old school" D&D. I would LOVE to play a new and improved Pathfinder version, I think Turn Based Combat is a MUST!Lots of RPG games out there, but very very few have Turn based combat. That would be a BIG BIG plus for me (I would really ONLY be interested if it did have this turn based combat)
.... so... what you're trying to say is "screw turn-based combat"! ;)
And console users too...i hate consoles...I think that if they make a game, they should make it for PC exclusively, and exploit the awesome graphics possibilities.Yeah, screw those mac users and their crappy graphics.
Hama, I think he was being sarcastic... because MAC has excellent graphical capabilities that far exceed PC. I don't own a MAC only because PC games are abundant, and MAC supported titles are few and far between.
Personally, I think a Pathfinder game would be better as a console title... because it is way too easy to hex edit and cheat on a PC game. And there's a word for a player who cheats at an RPG... that word is "lazy".
The problem consoles have is that you can't throw out the old graphics card to get a new one, or top up the RAM because it has so little. So sooner or later they'll be way behind the PC again.On the other hand, you buy a new game for it, and it works without having to upgrade your drivers or add more RAM or upgrade your OS or get a new processor or install a liquid-cooling system for your video card. And it *still* works after a decade.
Game, Set & Match! :)
Strangest request made yet.Hey if I'd have to play it on a console it should at very least be on a console with other games I'd like to play. ;)
The Playstation 2 has probably the largest games library of any console ever! If you can't find a lot to love on that system, than quite frankly, you're just not looking. Even PS2 would have been less odd of a choice, and I'm a total dreamcast fan. But to be honest, I have maybe 10 games I absolutely loved for the SEGA DC, now compare that to the 40+ I love for the Playstation 2. And.... there are PLENTY of great games for the modern day consoles XBOX 360 and PS3. You would seriously go old school over next gen ??? *scratches head confusedly*
(NO MORE REPLIES)
Some original thoughts on this topic:
Recently, and then covered up like a politics adultery scandal, there was a great project known as the D&D Game Table. Nowadays it's talked about as much as Religion - avoided when possible. It was awesome what they were doing! I would be in 120% for Pathfinder to make it interactive gaming debut using a similar toolset. I have lots of out of state friends who I'd love to Game Master with - but distance is a killer of all things tabletop!
Also, another acceptable option would be similar to a project a group of college kids were experimenting on with the still-in-the-works Microsoft Surface. You can youtube it using the keywords "dungeons dragons Microsoft surface". The surface is a table that is essentially a touch-screen tablet, and what they did was incorporate the rules and characters and all the tools any group of players would need to play.
The surface itself kept track of who owned what miniature and what status effects if any a certain player was experiencing and how many more rounds the buff/debuff would last... a WHOLE MESS of things! But then after the semester, much like the D&D Game Table, it kind of just faded into the gray matter and hasn't been touched since.
THIS, TOO, would be an extremely acceptable way to play Pathfinder for me (downside being it doesn't exist yet (Ms Surface) and when it does the price tag is probably going to mean my kids will be eating the free lunch in high school and never going to college... and that's even if they make it available to the general public).
Also, another acceptable option would be similar to a project a group of college kids were experimenting on with the still-in-the-works Microsoft Surface. You can youtube it using the keywords "dungeons dragons Microsoft surface". The surface is a table that is essentially a touch-screen tablet, and what they did was incorporate the rules and characters and all the tools any group of players would need to play.
The surface itself kept track of who owned what miniature and what status effects if any a certain player was experiencing and how many more rounds the buff/debuff would last... a WHOLE MESS of things! But then after the semester, much like the D&D Game Table, it kind of just faded into the gray matter and hasn't been touched since.
THIS, TOO, would be an extremely acceptable way to play Pathfinder for me (downside being it doesn't exist yet (Ms Surface) and when it does the price tag is probably going to mean my kids will be eating the free lunch in high school and never going to college... and that's even if they make it available to the general public).
To touch on this (and speaking as someone who was fortunate enough to be able to actually play D&D on the SurfaceScapes program before the project ended): it is absolutely 100% as totally awesome as it sounds.
As for the question of whether or not it will see commercial availability, the Surface table is something you can really buy. It's crazy expensive, but it's out there. That's not important, though. Surface is the first generation of the technology. Of course it's tremendously expensive. Surface 2.0, the next generation of the tech, will be out soon. It features a smaller, slimmer table, beefed up hardware, a new object tracking system so advanced it effectively makes every pixel its own camera, and it will retail for a fraction of the cost of the original Surface. Is that viable for home consumers? No, probably not. It'll be one or two tech generations beyond that before we start to see home adoption. But when we do, we'll start to see some serious software development for the platform, and the table itself will probably fetch a price not wildly out of line for contemporary desktop computers. And that is something to look forward to.
I completely share your taste in games, however, i found no enjoyment in Champions of Norrath (I just don't like the Gauntlet type games at all... too button mash for me).
I didn't find Champions of Norrath, or its close cousin, Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, to be bad for button mashers. Dark Alliance 2, in particular, built upon the foundation the first game laid down very well. People wanting to hit buttons and smash things could do so as the human barbarian or drow monk, but players who liked the tactical element of building different skill synergies could also play those characters and enjoy themselves. Each class also had a really distinct feel - you would approach enemy groups and dungeon layouts completely differently playing as the dwarf thief than you would as the elf necromancer.
A third installment of that franchise with the degree of customization and depth of Champions of Norrath 2 would have been PHENOMENAL. I'll never get rid of my copy of BG:DA2.
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.
Yeah, saw that. He posted that while I was posting mine. Just didn't edit my post reflecting it.
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.
Sorry, but do you know any companies that would be interested in Pathfinder Golarion AND be a company that paizo would license to.
So until those conditions are met, the answer is NO,
A game can have the Pathfinder Rules and a custom setting, but not the Golarion campaign setting.
Hama, I think he was being sarcastic... because MAC has excellent graphical capabilities that far exceed PC. I don't own a MAC only because PC games are abundant, and MAC supported titles are few and far between.
When did a Mac start using different/better/unattainable-for-a-PC video cards?
Edit: Or, conversely, when did PCs use video cards that weren't available for Mac?
|
I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.Sorry, but do you know any companies that would be interested in Pathfinder Golarion AND be a company that paizo would license to.
So until those conditions are met, the answer is NO,
A game can have the Pathfinder Rules and a custom setting, but not the Golarion campaign setting.
There's a large difference between "There's not a company that's currently interested in doing X" and "X can NOT be done".
There's a large difference between "There's not a company that's currently interested in doing X" and "X can NOT be done".I agree with the action game in Golarion sentiment by the way. Too bad as AZ just pointed out it can't be done.Of course it can. It just can't be used by anyone like the rule set can - it has to be explicitly licensed/authorized by Paizo.Sorry, but do you know any companies that would be interested in Pathfinder Golarion AND be a company that paizo would license to.
So until those conditions are met, the answer is NO,
A game can have the Pathfinder Rules and a custom setting, but not the Golarion campaign setting.
IF a company is not interested in Pathfinder it will not be made by them.
IF the company seeking to use Golarion and Pathfinder for a game are deemed UNFIT for the job BY PAIZO, NO license will be issued and it WILL NOT be made.Thus BOTH conditions MUST BE MET
Paizo staff in other threads covering this issue have stated that; they (Paizo Publishing) "DO NOT see the licensing of Golarion in the near future," they MAY change this later when things are just right, but UNTIL then the answer is NO.
Can A Paizo Employee, please make this absolutely clear, if a Golarion based Pathfinder computer game is possible?
Edit:
I have not move the goal posts, but Highlighted them and made it more clear.
Hama, I think he was being sarcastic... because MAC has excellent graphical capabilities that far exceed PC. I don't own a MAC only because PC games are abundant, and MAC supported titles are few and far between.When did a Mac start using different/better/unattainable-for-a-PC video cards?
Edit: Or, conversely, when did PCs use video cards that weren't available for Mac?
This is news to me as well.
When did a Mac start using different/better/unattainable-for-a-PC video cards?Edit: Or, conversely, when did PCs use video cards that weren't available for Mac?
He's probably referring to the past, when Macs used RISC processors made by Motorola. That's no longer the case, however, and the gap (which was never as large as Mac proponents wanted you to believe) is gone.
He's probably referring to the past, when Macs used RISC processors made by Motorola. That's no longer the case, however, and the gap (which was never as large as Mac proponents wanted you to believe) is gone.
When did a Mac start using different/better/unattainable-for-a-PC video cards?Edit: Or, conversely, when did PCs use video cards that weren't available for Mac?
Can you CrossfireX/SLI a mac?
He's probably referring to the past, when Macs used RISC processors made by Motorola. That's no longer the case, however, and the gap (which was never as large as Mac proponents wanted you to believe) is gone.
Well, at this point, it's the far-distant past, since they started using ATI RAGE video chips in the G3 as early as 1997 (if not earlier).
Not platform bashing, not machine bashing, just was struck curious by the notion that there was some wondrous difference that hasn't been present since pretty much the advent of so-called "3D" video cards.
Well, at this point, it's the far-distant past, since they started using ATI RAGE video chips in the G3 as early as 1997 (if not earlier).
I think I remember them. I think a friend had one of those in his computer. When you turned on the 3D acceleration, performance dropped compared to pure software rendering. We called it "3D decelerator"
I think I remember them. I think a friend had one of those in his computer. When you turned on the 3D acceleration, performance dropped compared to pure software rendering. We called it "3D decelerator"
The worlds FIRST and supposedly only "3D decelerator" was the S3 Virge chip, after that S3 had a hard time removing that title from their reputation.
in my version of a perfect world, I think I would much rather a good action game set in the Golarion universe (perhaps a pathfinder society dungeon-archeology series) than a NWN clone.Agreed. I'd rather the focus be on a faithful Golarion rather than on replicating the rules.
Sorry, but do we really need another button smashing action game set in a generic fantasy world? While I understand the popularity of this kind of games, a Pathfinder game would distinguish itself from the masses more easily by offering a deep tactical RPG experience to the gamers.
Button smashing action games are legions already, while tactical RPG are few and far between. Some people say that true RPG is a dying genre, and that we are now left with only action-RPG and shooter-RPG to fill the gap. While this may be true, a solid, graphically pleasing, tactical RPG with an engrossing storyline would have no competitors in is own genre (if we ignores the few tactical-RPG indie titles on the market) and could be a huge success if all those old-school gamers out there that are always complaining about how today's video games are all dumped down to reach a broader customer base would actually buy the game instead of stealing it.
This is just my opinion, but everyone is entitled to my opinion. :P
The worlds FIRST and supposedly only "3D decelerator" was the S3 Virge chip, after that S3 had a hard time removing that title from their reputation.
I think I remember them. I think a friend had one of those in his computer. When you turned on the 3D acceleration, performance dropped compared to pure software rendering. We called it "3D decelerator"
It might have been that, too. S3 Virge does sound familiar.
Anyway, if that 1997 date above was right, they were no competition, at least not in the 3D department.
That was around the time the 3dfx Voodoo chip came out. There was no beating that accelerator. Until Voodoo2, of course. And when the GeForce 256 chip was released, 3dfx's days were numbered, but before that, I can't remember anything coming near the Voodoo and later Voodoo2 (especially if you used two Voodoo2 chips in SLI mode)
Sorry, but do we really need another button smashing action game set in a generic fantasy world?
I agree that the Pathfinder computer game should be neither a God of War clone nor a Diablo clone.
|
|
Sorry, but do we really need another button smashing action game set in a generic fantasy world? While I understand the popularity of this kind of games, a Pathfinder game would distinguish itself from the masses more easily by offering a deep tactical RPG experience to the gamers.
Button smashing action games are legions already, while tactical RPG are few and far between. Some people say that true RPG is a dying genre, and that we are now left with only action-RPG and shooter-RPG to fill the gap. While this may be true, a solid, graphically pleasing, tactical RPG with an engrossing storyline would have no competitors in is own genre (if we ignores the few tactical-RPG indie titles on the market) and could be a huge success if all those old-school gamers out there that are always complaining about how today's video games are all dumped down to reach a broader customer base would actually buy the game instead of stealing it.
This is just my opinion, but everyone is entitled to my opinion. :P
Do we really need another cRPG where you have to wade through masses of menus go get to the option you're trying to activate? Yes, you can use quickslots to make this easier, but with a true-to-Pathfinder game, by even just the mid-low levels, you will be running out of quickslot spaces for options.
Also, my original post said I'd either prefer an real-time action/adventure that was at best loosely based on the PFRPG ruleset, or a turn-based game. The only problem with the latter is that there's nowhere near the audience for it these days.
Also, just because I'm asking for a game that doesn't bury the player in menu options, that doesn't mean that I'm trying to fully reduce it to the simplicity of a "God of War". You don't have to strictly follow PFRPG rules in order to have an engrossing storyline.
Do we really need another cRPG where you have to wade through masses of menus go get to the option you're trying to activate? Yes, you can use quickslots to make this easier, but with a true-to-Pathfinder game, by even just the mid-low levels, you will be running out of quickslot spaces for options.
Temple of Elemental Evil was the closest thing to a D&D game that was ever released, and the radial menu worked just fine on PC, although I can see that this kind of menu wouldn't work very well on console. Sadly, the game was plagued with massive bugs because of poor scripting, as well as entirely devoid of a storyline.
What everyone seems to have forgotten is that Pathfinder is a ROLE-PLAYING game and computers aren't very good at role-playing.
If you want a small-unit tactical simulation, you'd be far better off using board-game rules like D&D 4e.
Son, don't even.
Also, just because I'm asking for a game that doesn't bury the player in menu options, that doesn't mean that I'm trying to fully reduce it to the simplicity of a "God of War". You don't have to strictly follow PFRPG rules in order to have an engrossing storyline.
Honestly, I could be happy with a real-time/turn-based hybrid Pathfinder game like Dragon Age: Origins or Knights of the Old Republic. However, I just don't want to see another Dark Alliance Diablo clone or something even remotely similar to this Daggerdale garbage. If you're gonna put the Pathfinder logo on a video game, I expect that the game will feature at least a simplified version of the Pathfinder's ruleset.
Personally, I would like to see something more akin to FF Tactics than Bauldur's Gate. The battles there were a little too scripted though, IMO. Fallout 1 and 2 handled it very well, and we haven't seen a game quite like them for a while.
I'd like to see a Might and Magic: Heroes like game. Some turn-based strategy with tons of RPG elements.
The fun part about this would be that it would show off all the nice factions Pathfinder has.
I agree that the Pathfinder computer game should be neither a God of War clone nor a Diablo clone.
Sorry, but do we really need another button smashing action game set in a generic fantasy world?
No, it should be a Zelda clone, or a Dark Cloud clone. :p
No, it should be a Zelda clone, or a Dark Cloud clone. :pI agree that the Pathfinder computer game should be neither a God of War clone nor a Diablo clone.
Sorry, but do we really need another button smashing action game set in a generic fantasy world?
Dark Cloud is already a clone, it's a Soul Blazer clone! (;
So let me ask this, oh representatives of Paizo...
If a fan or group of fans DID make a game, or even something 90% finished, and it looked halfway decent, what are the chances you would sell them the usage rights they would need to actually sell the thing, and market it? I'm not talking about, "Can we have the rights for 5 years and we'll try to make a game in that time," I'm talking, "We have a game, or will have one in a year, and all it needs is your stamp of approval to market and publish it."
And if the answer is yes, is there a minimum set of guidelines you have for what such a game would look like or contain?
Also, if the answer is yes... any fans want to start a gaming company? You get paid in shares of profit on the finished product... :D
So let me ask this, oh representatives of Paizo...
If a fan or group of fans DID make a game, or even something 90% finished, and it looked halfway decent, what are the chances you would sell them the usage rights they would need to actually sell the thing, and market it? I'm not talking about, "Can we have the rights for 5 years and we'll try to make a game in that time," I'm talking, "We have a game, or will have one in a year, and all it needs is your stamp of approval to market and publish it."
And if the answer is yes, is there a minimum set of guidelines you have for what such a game would look like or contain?
Also, if the answer is yes... any fans want to start a gaming company? You get paid in shares of profit on the finished product... :D
Read some of my previous posts (single digit pages), I cover the various things required to make a game. So far the answer to your question is NO, the best fans can do is make a game that uses the rules, but NOT the campaign setting(you might get away using it, with some severe name changes and a few other severe edits).
The things required for a game to be in production are:
Design document (what game play, features, characters, requirements, assets etc.. are needed) (this is an absolute requirement before you even touch a line of code or draw a piece of art)
Game designers (work on the rules and systems in the game)
Game play Programmers (code the game play)
Engine Programmers (code the game engine and its sub engines, (this is BIG and HARD for complex engines))
AI programmers (take a guess)
Concept Artists (make the concept art)
Game Artists (make the game art, models, textures, etc..)
and Milestones during development must be reached or no paycheck.
I am planning on revamping an old java-based RPG game engine I made into a better C# based RPG engine, but so far that is it. If the game I make is good and people want more I will work on the game and enhance it, and that is it.
If I could get more people to lend support, not just me, I would do a Source Engine Mod to do the game.
Right now, I am the only one who is willing to put forth the EFFORT on these forums to make a game, rather than wait for one that may NEVER come.
So let me ask this, oh representatives of Paizo...
If a fan or group of fans DID make a game, or even something 90% finished, and it looked halfway decent, what are the chances you would sell them the usage rights they would need to actually sell the thing, and market it?
Next to zero. An IP holder generally requires a certain level of creative input or control over the product during development. The chances of the IP holder approving the use of their IP after the game is already finished (or even mostly finished) is negligible.
And if the answer is yes, is there a minimum set of guidelines you have for what such a game would look like or contain?
If you get an IP holder to license you the use of their property for game development, part of the licensing process will involve negotiations over how creative direction will be handled. During these negotiations, standards and expectations will be set for what is expected in the final product so that the IP holder is assured that the game reflects well on the licensed property.
Chief Technical Officer
|
There are many things that we might consider "promoting" from community activities into licensed works—look at Pathfinder Paper Minis, for example. But there are other things that we're almost certainly going to license only to established leaders in their respective areas. Among these are foreign translations, movies, TV, comics, and computer games. All of these markets are complex beasts, and frankly not for the faint-of-heart or light-of-pocketbook.
There are many things that we might consider "promoting" from community activities into licensed works look at Pathfinder Paper Minis, for example. But there are other things that we're almost certainly going to license only to established leaders in their respective areas. Among these are foreign translations, movies, TV, comics, and computer games.
So a well made fan game, with the rules, game play and features in place, could get an official OK for use of the Golarion Campaign Setting in its next build or as an extra Campaign Setting?
Edit:
Highlighted critical part of quote.
There are many things that we might consider "promoting" from community activities into licensed works—look at Pathfinder Paper Minis, for example. But there are other things that we're almost certainly going to licensing only to established leaders in their respective areas. Among these are foreign translations, movies, TV, comics, and computer games.So a well made fan game, with the rules, game play and features in place, could get an official OK for use of the Golarion Campaign Setting in its next build or as an extra Campaign Setting?
I'm pretty sure that's nearly the opposite of what he just said.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
There are many things that we might consider "promoting" from community activities into licensed works—look at Pathfinder Paper Minis, for example. But there are other things that we're almost certainly going to license only to established leaders in their respective areas. Among these are foreign translations, movies, TV, comics, and computer games. All of these markets are complex beasts, and frankly not for the faint-of-heart or light-of-pocketbook.
Highlighted critical part of quote.
But, hey, do whatever you can do under the Community Use Policy. If it's the most awesome thing ever, maybe you can persuade us to find a way to get the support of an established publisher.
Had to check.
The part I highlighted and the part Vic highlighted were in a way contradicting each other, so I was unclear and looked at the best (development-based) possible answer and asked if it was true.
So their it is folks, fan-made games are eternally bound to a NON-Golarion campaign setting.
I'll still work on my game, and use my home brew setting for the full version. I would like to go the Minecraft route and release an early playable version and just keep updating it with content people want, but I would like a spot on the Paizo site to allow for a FREE download, to keep some of the pathfinders happy and may actually help me work on it.
And Vic the best way to a convinced Developer or a Publisher (Publishers lend money to Developer to make the Developer's game Idea) is to have a near-complete working Proto-type of the game (they love it to pieces).
This could be causing a chicken and the Egg scenario, Pathfinders would like to have and or make a Golarion Game, but Paizo wants a Developer/Publisher to make the game, but the Developer/Publisher would very likely want to see a demo of the game which could be supplied and made by the some of the same Pathfinders.
But since The Community Use Policy is in force and paizo wants it done professionally, the game will take some time to find a good developer or Publisher.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Paizo wants a Developer/Publisher to make the game, but the Developer/Publisher would very likely want to see a demo of the game which could be supplied and made by the some of the same Pathfinders.
Most publisher like to do things themselves. And the best have tools to create concepts swiftly.
So their it is folks, fan-made games are eternally bound to a NON-Golarion campaign setting.No... they just have to use the Community Use Policy. Which means they have to be free.
So ANY fan-game can use Golarion campaign setting, provided that it is FREE of charge.
Most publisher like to do things themselves. And the best have tools to create concepts swiftly.
If that publisher has and internal development team then yes (an example is Electronic Arts),
but the general case in the Computer game industry is the developer selling/pitching the game/idea to the publisher, whom in turn funds the developer who HAS TO reach milestones (goals) in the development cycle or not get paid for their work. The Developer has the tools to make the proto-type demo to sell their ideas.*I'll use Duke Nukem forever as an example:
Publishers (Take Two Interactive) are the money bags paying the Developers and have some control over the game from said Developers, The Developers (3D Realms, then Gearbox software) are the true workers and makers of the computer game.
*Note: One of my professors does two jobs, working at Arctech Studios and teaching Computer Game project management at Algonquin College. And some of the professors have been in the computer game industry before becoming a prof (in the game development program) at the college, and have told us (the students) how the industry works.
To touch on this (and speaking as someone who was fortunate enough to be able to actually play D&D on the SurfaceScapes program before the project ended): it is absolutely 100% as totally awesome as it sounds.
As for the question of whether or not it will see commercial availability, the Surface table is something you can really buy. It's crazy expensive, but it's out there. That's not important, though. Surface is the first generation of the technology. Of course it's tremendously expensive. Surface 2.0, the next generation of the tech, will be out soon. It features a smaller, slimmer table, beefed up hardware, a new object tracking system so advanced it effectively makes every pixel its own camera, and it will retail for a fraction of the cost of the original Surface. Is that viable for home consumers? No, probably not. It'll be one or two tech generations beyond that before we start to see home adoption. But...
I will definitely be keeping my eye on this. Ever since I youtubed that video, it's been something I plan to own in the future.
He's probably referring to the past, when Macs used RISC processors made by Motorola. That's no longer the case, however, and the gap (which was never as large as Mac proponents wanted you to believe) is gone.
When did a Mac start using different/better/unattainable-for-a-PC video cards?Edit: Or, conversely, when did PCs use video cards that weren't available for Mac?
yes you are correct, Alientude. I was working o0ff of old news. Back in college we used Macs to run all of our graphics software because it could almost solely use the video card and not tax any of the processor power.
Recently, like yesterday, I did my research on the whole PC vs. MAC = Graphic debate... and quickly discovered the gap of visual performance between PC and MAC system is pretty much extinct.
Apologies, everyone, for I am "out of the loop". It's nice to be back in. lol