Gp2x Community Game Contest!

[Magnulus]

Precisely. Thanks for adding that example.

I hope you're actually intending to make a game with imploding mutants. That sounds ace.

 

[Epicenter]

Complete finished product in final beta stages if you wish, mainly a playable game that only needs some minor touch-ups, not a nice little demo of something that may never happen .

My definition of 'playable demo' for Stargazer would include at least one level, hopefully two, full controls, graphics, music, sound effects, enemies, and bosses. The scope of characters and playable areas would be the only limited factors as level design is the most time consuming element.

 

[X-Code]

That to me sounds good enough Epicenter . And yes, Magnulus, I intend to make the Imploding Mutant a reality soonish B) ( though it may not look like people imagine, it'll be worse, or better :unsure: )

 

[PSyMastR]

Well, Ive already setup the Email for the contest and am currently working on the site for it.

 

[Magnulus]

So in case that's how it was decided to be done, the rule would be as such:

Both commercial and freeware games can be entered into the contest, with the only obligation that all games have to be released as freeware in the state that they enter the contest, this being the state in which they are judged. They will also be judged on like ground, meaning that if there are many limitations to the "freeware" version of a commercial game that is entered, this could end up lowering its chances to win.

In other words, it's advisable to submit games that work on their own, even if you intend to release a commercial version later, because they WILL be judged as full games.

Does this seem unfair in any way, or just in need of some modification?
Naturally, this is just a hypothetical rule if that's the route we want to follow.

 

[X-Code]

Seems ok up to here , if someone wants a good score for a commercial game, they will make sure that it is suitable as a freeware game.

 

[Magnulus]

We've been quiet for a couple of days, but we're back now with some updates.

We've established a gmail account for questions, entries, complaints, suggestions, etc.
gp2xgamecon[at]gmail[dot]com
We've started work on a website (well, Psy has) and you'll get the URL to that when he's done updating.
We've registered with Paypal, and I'm not just waiting for my bank statement to give me the code I need to really activate us for real and proper. I expect we'll be ready to take donations by monday or tuesday.

Finally, we've come up with some suggestions for deadlines.

• Deadline for alterations to rules: 31st of July
• Deadline for Contest Entries: 11th of December
• Deadline for donations: 1st of January
• Contest Winners Announced: 12th of January

If they seem unreasonable, do tell. We think these dates allow the most freedom for the developers without making it so far into the future that people forget about it. You can discuss the changing of rules until a few hours within the end of the 31st of this month, at which point we will cease all discussions and cement the rules real proper-like. Not a SINGLE alteration will be made after this point unless some major discrepancy shows up that makes the whole contest illegal or useless or something similar.

The rules as currently stated on the first post of this thread (subject to change)

• The game cannot be a port or otherwise based on other people's programming, and the entrants must originally own the rights to use all media and code in the program.**
• This is a games contest, not an emulation, application or demo contest. While we respect all of these, the aim of this contest is to promote and encourage development of original game content.
• The game can be in any stage of development when entered (alpha, beta, "gold"), but will be judged as a "final" version, meaning that an alpha build will be judged on the same grounds as a "final" build.
• The game can have had closed betas, but it cannot have been released in neither open beta state nor as a full release prior to the contest's conclusion. This excludes (for now) ports of games you have made yourself for other systems (for example the GP32).
• The creators of the game will retain FULL rights to their entry.

**It does NOT have to be open source, but the contestants are held fully responsible for any "stolen" source code, and will have to provide a list of source code they have been ALLOWED to use that was made by people outside the contestant's team (like the MMU hack). This will NOT be used against the contestant, it will only be used to make sure no theft is going on. If, for example, Squidge comes in and says "Anyone can freely use my hack for all entries" then that code is free to use for all contestants, but documentation of said use will still have to be provided.

 

[Dzz]

Cool. Still to be clarified:

How the judging is done

Whether the entries will be made available for the entertainment of the entire gp2x community

Rights. What if I license something? For example, for my super 3d swordfighting game I license an armor model from turbosquid.com, giving me the right to include it in my game. Am I disqualified because I do not "originally own" the rights? I don't really care, it's just not clear to me what the intent of the rule is.

 

[Magnulus]

yeah, the judging bit. I think we'll be going for the model discussed here in the thread with a few reviewers (fewer, though. Five, maybe. Ten, tops.), a "controller" and public release of the reviews with a "report suspicious review" button. I forgot to add it, 's all. Does that sound like a good idea?

And yeah. I also forgot to add the bit about the freeware.

[...]the contestants are held fully responsible for any "stolen" source code, and will have to provide a list of source code they have been ALLOWED to use that was made by people outside the contestant's team (like the MMU hack).

This states that as long as you have aquired the right to use it for your game, you can do so. I'll see about making it clearer and more official-sounding so no one gets confused.

(See? Good thing, this community deal. You get clear answers in fluent English in a matter of hours and even MINUTES! )

 

[digitaljez]

Thanks to all who are making this happen. Competitions are great. I have entered them before knowing I didn't have a chance of winning so, for me at least, the prize is not an issue. Its the taking part that is fun, and it is an exciting time for all as we await the releases.
I have a few questions.

[*]The game can have had closed betas, but it cannot have been released in neither open beta state nor as a full release prior to the contest's conclusion. This excludes (for now) ports of games you have made yourself for other systems (for example the GP32).

• What is the definition of a closed beta ?
• Is this saying I could port a game I wrote for the GP32 ?
• Why does it have the (for now) condition in there ?
• Does original game content mean Tetris, Pacman and Space Invader (etc) remakes are forbidden ?
• Would using sound samples from a commercial game disqualify me or need I just give credit to their source ?

 

[Magnulus]

• What is the definition of a closed beta ?
• Is this saying I could port a game I wrote for the GP32 ?
• Why does it have the (for now) condition in there ?
• Does original game content mean Tetris, Pacman and Space Invader (etc) remakes are forbidden ?
• Would using sound samples from a commercial game disqualify me or need I just give credit to their source ?

A closed beta is when a game is tested for bugs, etc by a limited amount of people. Depending on the size of the game in general, a closed beta could probably vary from ten people to a few hundred (maybe even thousands? Definitely so for MMOs) but since these are going to be relatively small games made for a system that's (mostly) the same for everyone, I shouldn't think you'd need to have that many people testing it.

No, it's saying you can't.

And it states (for now) because these are still not finalized rules, and everything is up for discussion until July 31st, so if you have an issue with that rule, say so and clearly give good arguments for why, and we'll see what we think, and what the rest of the community thinks.

Yes. A Tetris remake is not an original game unless you change the concept so radically that it can't be described as a Tetris game any longer, but rather Tetris-esque. A good example is Titan Attacks, a really cool Space Invaders-esque game with a retro feel but severely updated gameplay and graphics. It's very very different from SI, and if you go that far away from the game you set out to remake, then it's fine, but in that case, it's not a remake, but a complete re-imagining of the concept.

About sound samples, I'd have to say they disqualify you unless you get them from a royalty-free site. If you do, due credit will have to be given.

I'll come back with more later, but for now, there's some bread that needs bakin'.

 

[Dzz]

It's very very different from SI, and if you go that far away from the game you set out to remake, then it's fine, but in that case, it's not a remake, but a complete re-imagining of the concept.

Whenever a line is drawn in the rules, it has to be very clear exactly how to interpret the location of that line. For example, "you must have legal rights to distribute the materials included in the game." Very clear. This one though is pretty fuzzy and that makes me uncomfortable.

Is there to be a single "arbiter of the sufficiently different" who reviews entries before they are given to the judges?

Would Tilematch be a legal entry? (pretending the gp2x game did not exist)

What could make a horizontal jump and run platform game sufficiently different from the hundreds of existing games to allow one to be entered?

 

[dockthepod]

[*]The game can have had closed betas, but it cannot have been released in neither open beta state nor as a full release prior to the contest's conclusion. This excludes (for now) ports of games you have made yourself for other systems (for example the GP32).

I think this bit is too bad. I've got a game that I'm working on and should be done in the nearish future. I might want to enter in the compo, but I don't want to wait that long to release.

 

[Magnulus]

I'm going to assume you misquoted there and really meant to quote about the end of the contest. About that, it's difficult to set a date that would be good for everyone, but we're certainly willing to try to come to any kind of arrangement that would make as many people as possible happy.

You raise some very important points, Dzz, we'll have to do some fine-thinking about that. The single line you suggested makes it sound much more concise, and would actually give people more freedom.

I guess Tetris and pong and the likes must have turned to public domain, since you have places like Chronic Logic who sell Triptych, which is basically just exactly like Tetris but with a realistic physics engine.

We need to think this through, though. Remember that this is your contest, so if you have a specific idea as to how we could administer this part, out with 'em. Again, though, that single sentence should be enough for most people.

As with the issue of unfinished entries, though, the reviewing in itself will probably swiftly end up downgrading the games that are just direct remakes of old classics, regardless of their legality.

So do people think "You must have legal rights to distribute the materials included in the game." is sufficient for our needs?

Thanks for raising these questions, Dzz. Seems being clear and concise isn't always as easy as it sounds.

 

[Dzz]

if you have a specific idea as to how we could administer this part, out with 'em.

Regarding whether a game is a remake or too similar to an existing game, I simply suggest that this be eliminated from the contest altogether.

Thanks for doing all the work of turning a vague concept for a contest into an actual event!

 

[digitaljez]

• The game can have had closed betas, but it cannot have been released in neither open beta state nor as a full release prior to the contest's conclusion. This excludes (for now) ports of games you have made yourself for other systems (for example the GP32).

I think this should be altered for clarity. It is ambiguous when it says "This excludes ..." as I initially took it to mean : "ports of games you have made yourself" were excluded from the rule in the first sentence. It would be clearer if you said "This also excludes ..." .
I initially agreed with the rule as you intended it, as it would give an advantage to those with work to port. Having said that, however, anyone who has a program they are already working on has the same advantage over anyone spurred into action by the contest. So on reflection I can not see why they should be disallowed.

 

[PSyMastR]

if you have a specific idea as to how we could administer this part, out with 'em.

Regarding whether a game is a remake or too similar to an existing game, I simply suggest that this be eliminated from the contest altogether.

Thanks for doing all the work of turning a vague concept for a contest into an actual event!

We are currently working on sorting out the wording on that.

• The game can have had closed betas, but it cannot have been released in neither open beta state nor as a full release prior to the contest's conclusion. This excludes (for now) ports of games you have made yourself for other systems (for example the GP32).

I think this should be altered for clarity. It is ambiguous when it says "This excludes ..." as I initially took it to mean : "ports of games you have made yourself" were excluded from the rule in the first sentence. It would be clearer if you said "This also excludes ..." .
I initially agreed with the rule as you intended it, as it would give an advantage to those with work to port. Having said that, however, anyone who has a program they are already working on has the same advantage over anyone spurred into action by the contest. So on reflection I can not see why they should be disallowed.

I see your point, but take for example a game like Vektar (forget the fact that its no longer being worked on, or that its going commerical). There has been much time to work on it, and its a very polished game. Now if it was to be expanded upon and released again with tons of more stuff, then there would be a much higher advantage towards a game like that. (Sorry Dzz, that I used Vektar as an example). But the thing about closed betas, I personally think they should be removed as well. I think the real reason for this was so when the contest is in Judging stages, and around that time, then a lot of suprises would be released and many fun games would come out. I will discuss this with Magnulus.

Thanks guys for all the patience, and I hope I didn't confuse any matters any more then they already were. We want this to be the best contest it can be and have everything sorted out to your liking. The website is up, its very basic right now, but will add more stuff (right now it outlines the details as they are), and is not complete (such as the submit and entry page). But for those of you who would like to check it out, it can be found here:

http://www.psymastr.com/gp2x

 

[Dzz]

Regarding whether a game is a remake or too similar to an existing game, I simply suggest that this be eliminated from the contest altogether.

Thanks for doing all the work of turning a vague concept for a contest into an actual event!

We are currently working on sorting out the wording on that.

Just to make sure my opinion was clear... I am suggestion that the rule be eliminated altogether. If somebody makes a 100% workalike of Mario Kart (but with a different name, original code, artwork and music of course so no copyright laws are being violated), I think that should be okay.

 

[PSyMastR]

Regarding whether a game is a remake or too similar to an existing game, I simply suggest that this be eliminated from the contest altogether.

Thanks for doing all the work of turning a vague concept for a contest into an actual event!

We are currently working on sorting out the wording on that.

Just to make sure my opinion was clear... I am suggestion that the rule be eliminated altogether. If somebody makes a 100% workalike of Mario Kart (but with a different name, original code, artwork and music of course so no copyright laws are being violated), I think that should be okay.

Ya, I completely understand. We decided to change the first rule. All can be seen on that site:
http://www.psymastr.com/gp2x
(Rules are here: http://www.psymastr.com/gp2x/rules.html)

EDIT: As for judging categories, we were thinking of the following:

Playability
Innovation/Originality
Use of Graphics (Not necessarily best graphics, because if they are simple, yet fit, then it should be graded accordingly)
Use of Sound

Other Awards (Not really judging categories) (Still Pending)
Most Original Game
Most Technically Impressive Game

 

[Magnulus]

These categories would make it more a bonus than a requirement that your game is completely original, which is a good thing, since - as you so aptly put it, Dzz, it's hard to determine what is really original ENOUGH.

Ignore the footnote for the first rule, since I have yet to fix that up. (if it needs to be there any longer at ALL, that is.)

As an addendum to the rules, there will be a list of the things that need to be included in a text file upon entry. So far, we've discussed only the obvious, like the name of the project, the name of the project's leader, the name of other members of the project and who did what. Also included should be a full list of any licensed code or media.