Gp2x First Game And Application Program Is Open!


I'm sorry, but those the second two sound well dodgy to me.

# In the case of prize winning work (1st and 2nd place), the applicants of the works hand over the exclusive license of sales to GPH and GPH should share royalties with the applicants
# sharing royalty rate will be decided by GPH according to the general policy of GPH. But if GPH invest funds on the games after this contest, the profit sharing rate may be alternated through the negotiation with the applicants


Should? don't you mean will? Hardly binding is it?

# sharing royalty rate will be decided by GPH according to the general policy of GPH

Which is what? Why not tell us? What is GPH's policy?

If a contest winner isn't happy with the royality rate, can they rufuse? that second term seems to suggest that handing over the licensing of sales isn't negotiable.

Personally, I'm very skeptical, but only because they're not telling us everything - either due to language barrier, or to gain some sort of upperhand, I don't know, but either way it's dodgy in my opinion.
 
jbrodack posted on Jul 6 2006 at 10:37 AM said:
with the wording and rules revised it seems pretty good for devs. it seems you pretty much keep all rights to games and can do whatever you want with them which was the main concern for a lot of people. you finally got the answers you wanted so how would you not want to enter unless you just have no interest in making a commercial game or releasing your source.
Would you trust someone who changes terms every month? What happens when they change it after someone has submitted an entry?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Vynx posted on Jul 6 2006 at 06:15 PM said:
I'm sorry, but those the second two sound well dodgy to me.

# In the case of prize winning work (1st and 2nd place), the applicants of the works hand over the exclusive license of sales to GPH and GPH should share royalties with the applicants
# sharing royalty rate will be decided by GPH according to the general policy of GPH. But if GPH invest funds on the games after this contest, the profit sharing rate may be alternated through the negotiation with the applicants


Should? don't you mean will? Hardly binding is it?


*Sigh* You're getting all worked up over a bit of Engrish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
id trust them because it just seems to be a language problem and their actual intent is not to steal anyones games. the wording may be a little messed up but their intentions are fairly clear and it seems things like royalties are all negotiable too.
 
You can't assume anything. They could use their poor wording to their advantage if they did decide to rip you off. All they would need to do is point at their list of rules and say "we warned you".
 
jmetal88 posted on Jul 6 2006 at 05:12 PM said:
*Sigh* You're getting all worked up over a bit of Engrish.
That is legally binding by sounds of things. Wouldn't you be worried if you wanted to enter?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to show GPH's commitment level. Matt Bakse won the GPX2 renaming contest with GP2x. They said they would send him a GP2x at release. They kept saying they were going to send it soon and I think he eventually got it several months late. He may have had to threaten legal action to get it, I think.
 
If I were going to enter, I would be reassured enough by these latest changes to do so with much less fear.

For me personally, I had decided just before the latest changes that it was "too late" and since my emotional state having made that decision was one of relief rather than disappointment (that I didn't have to abandon my current projects for three months and trade them for a development "death march"), I'm not going to change it.

I hope that some folks from our scene here can take home the big prizes, and I can't wait to see what goodies we get from it. I have been critical of the way GPH have organized this competition but it does seem that they are trying in their own cute way and let's not forget that they are pumping about $10,000 into gp2x game development which isn't much as a fraction of the global economy but it's a lot for our little corner of it.
 
yaustar posted on Jul 7 2006 at 12:30 PM said:
jmetal88 posted on Jul 6 2006 at 05:12 PM said:
*Sigh* You're getting all worked up over a bit of Engrish.
That is legally binding by sounds of things. Wouldn't you be worried if you wanted to enter?

That was my point - it sounds like badly worded english, but how do you know those arn't really the rules? You can't just assume they meant something else, because if you're wrong, you're screwed, really.

I would never enter a competition that wasn't fully clear on the rules, for whatever reasons. It's just common sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Such a shame, this whole business. If only GPH could employ someone with a fluent knowledge of both languages, we might have had some straight answers, or at least know for certain if they're messing with us with those terms.

Personally, I still think a Community-administered dev contest would be fun. Set up a paypal account, set up a web site with donation button, set up a secure voting system, set up some NON-impromptu rules. Hey Presto!

Impromptu Rules:
  1. 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.*
  2. The game can be in late beta stages when entered, but it must be finished within one month of the contest's end.
  3. The game must can have had public betas, but it cannot have been fully released prior to contest's end.
  4. The creators of the game will retain FULL rights to their entry, bar none.
  5. IF there is a corporate sponsor (like a retailer or some such) for the contest, this sponsor may approach entrants about publishing contracts, but these will be handled separately of the contest.

* if it uses, say, Squidge's MMU hack, and Squidge has allowed them to use it for whatever purposes they like, that is fine, but it must be documented in all cases. If there's a bit of code copy+pasted from someone's source without documented permission to use this, that's NOT fine. Just to avoid possible issues.
 
nickspoon posted on Jul 9 2006 at 04:11 PM said:
Well at here's my 'game' at I hope I win $5000: Word Simulator

Warning: Strong Language. (and yes, this has actually been entered)
HAHAHAHA. Thats great.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sam fisher posted on Jul 7 2006 at 05:16 AM said:
Just to show GPH's commitment level. Matt Bakse won the GPX2 renaming contest with GP2x. They said they would send him a GP2x at release. They kept saying they were going to send it soon and I think he eventually got it several months late. He may have had to threaten legal action to get it, I think.

umm no I didn't threaten anything, I got it a couple months late. They wanted to send me the best one (all the bugs and stuff fixed) but I said I didn't care so they sent it to me anyways. GPH is pretty reliable I think, cause I had to return my gp2x to them to fix the heaphones and they fixed it fine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mattbakse posted on Aug 18 2006 at 08:12 AM said:
sam fisher posted on Jul 7 2006 at 05:16 AM said:
Just to show GPH's commitment level. Matt Bakse won the GPX2 renaming contest with GP2x. They said they would send him a GP2x at release. They kept saying they were going to send it soon and I think he eventually got it several months late. He may have had to threaten legal action to get it, I think.

umm no I didn't threaten anything, I got it a couple months late. They wanted to send me the best one (all the bugs and stuff fixed) but I said I didn't care so they sent it to me anyways. GPH is pretty reliable I think, cause I had to return my gp2x to them to fix the heaphones and they fixed it fine.
Oh. My mistake. Next time don't complain about it so much :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
PSyMastR posted on Jul 1 2006 at 02:59 AM said:
It looks like crap in firefox. Nice site though (when viewed in... IE uuuuuuuggh). I like their little tidbit on what to include with a GPL license. They must have read up on it for 2.0 firmware lol.


Haha that's pretty good. I don't think it looks to bad in Firefox, only thing I have to do is scroll back and forth, to get from left to right, cause I think it's suppose to be a pop-up site ya know, but if that's what your talking about then yea it's stupid lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top