Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Saw this and had to laugh:

 

Posted Image

 

Ultimately, what I care about most is that this game gets made. I'm sure whatever hurdles have been come up against are not insurmountable. Failing this Kickstarter might not necessarily be the end of the project. But we should do all we can to ensure that it doesn't come to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That web comic was great today! It was a parody of XKCD as far as I could tell. Most people write off XKCD as a kids-only comic, but some of them are good! It's funny because just imagine how good it would be if they spent more time on their 'style'. XKCD could compete with Dilbert!

 

The prototype 2 was awesome! Exactly how I imagined it. There's no need to 'prototype' adventure games on anything but HTML5 now (Flash is a piece of cake in comparison) so it's fun to see how their HTML/Javascript is coming along. It's the most platform-independent platform right now, so it's exciting!

 

Also it's cool that you can view the Javascript source code... all the game dialog and code is right there, so it's neat to see!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno why, but on neither my desktop computer nor my netbook this second prototype works. The first one, however, worked on both. I am using Chromium.

 

I've seen other reports of this. Is it an option for you to try it in Chrome?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Few people have any objections against the prototype. I agree with PCJ. Those few (2?) vocal people, are a minority.

 

Being one of those two, allow me to explain: Scott said in the audio clip that they learned the hard way that people are opinionated about Chrome. On the survey, you could vote for non-Chrome prototypes.

 

All that - plus the considerable delay of the 2nd prototype - led me to believe that the prototype 2 just might be redesigned to work on other browsers. But it wasn't. Exactly what did they learn the hard way? Jackshit, it seems.

 

This pissed me off enough to make ME want to cancel my $250 pledge ($265 international, actually). Now, since I'm a major SQ fan, I didn't cancel my pledge. $265 is more than a third of my monthly income, mind you. People not as mindlessly loyal as I might have lowered/canceled their pledge (and most likely did, considering the $6000 loss). And I still stand firmly behind my statements that making the prototypes Chrome-exclusive will cost them pledges and all the incessant pointing out of the prototypes being "interactive concept art" won't do able anything about that.

 

Thankfully, they were able to turn this thing around by rethinking the reward tiers and by introducing the webcomic. Those past few days were a huge success.

 

 

Just to keep negativity off the KS-comments section, I'll post my thoughts on the Prototype itself on this board:

 

On Chrome: Performance is a fucking nightmare. Couldn't bear it for more than about half a minute

Tried the extracted version on Firefox. Worked, no sound, crashed on me whenever I tried to cross the water.

Disliked the right-click interface.

Some of the responses were actually quite funny.

 

Edit: One of the things that broke my heart that day was Mark Crowe's post on the comments, how he thought that releasing prototypes was probably a bad idea. NO, IT WASNT! It was a wonderful idea! Making these things Chrome-exclusive was a bad idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Fronzel,

 

I saw your comments on the KS and I'm glad you have decided to join our community.

 

I think everybody understands your frustration, but at the same it's also momentously difficult to please everybody. If they had made a binary instead, people would have complained it didn't work on their platform, if they had spend more time making sure it worked across multiple browsers they would have had to include less new features which would also have upset people. I have no insights into what the results of the survey was, but I'm guessing non-chrome prototypes wasn't as highly voted for as some of the other things.

 

Regardless, I really appreciate that you are able to see beyond the proto-type and appreciate what the Two Guys are trying to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Leo said. It wasn't a Chrome love affair. It was simply because focusing on one platform made it easier to complete Prototypes faster, and Chrome's Web Store was ideal for quick release in a user-friendly way. Also, making them compatible with other browsers would take about as long as making the Prototype itself, meaning 2x dev time.

 

This is what we need to reiterate over and over when the Chrome ghost rears its ugly head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the warm welcome! I really loved this site ever since I first visited it (the music-files have a permanent residence on my mp3-player). Now that this is the Two Guys' official forum, my only regret is that I didn't register sooner.

 

It wasn't a Chrome love affair.

Allow me to elaborate just once more, then I'll leave it at that. Wouldn't want to wear out my welcome after just two posts...

 

Though I never played "Monolith Burger Boy", the proto-prototype, SirPrimalform's comment on Martin Kool's blog immediately caught my attention:

 

From the pitch at the end of the demo: "so it can find its way to the desktop (through Steam)" Not everyone likes Steam, stop putting ideas in the Two Guys' heads!

Rahul tweeted the following on May 24th: "Dave Hyatt just pledged $5k if the game is made in HTML5". That and Martin Kool's lengthy comment (which can be read in full here) suggests that it is indeed - at least to some extend - a Chrome/html5 love affair. I'm not one who enjoys sowing the seeds of discord, but Q42 definitely seem to have their own agenda with this project. One that might not necessarily work in the best interest of the SpaceVenture, the fans or even the Two Guys. Which is basically why I lost my shit on the KS-comments.

 

Never mind, I'll just blissfully ignore future prototypes to avoid further frustration. The new webcomics make up for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q42 got reprimanded for that remark. They were speaking for themselves. The Dave Hyatt thing was also completely unsolicited, and 2GFA have not responded to him.

 

Fronzel, I'm glad you have (re)joined the community and share your concerns! It's actually very helpful. And I hope you feel welcome. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, Fronzel!

 

It's somewhat understandable that people will be getting frustrated over this, but if we could all just have a little patience and understanding, step back and realize that we're going to be getting a new adventure game from the Two Guys, does it really matter what the game ends up as? We already know it's not going to be HTML5 and it's not going to require Chrome. These are just prototypes anyway. There have been some unavoidable problems like Mark getting sick and the mysterious reason why a media blitz was postponed but these guys know what they're doing. Just some bad things popping up at the wrong times. If we could just refrain from drawing conclusions (because we really don't know the whole story behind the scenes ever), trust the Two Guys, and anticipate that sometimes things don't always go as planned, we can see a new game come to fruition, one that we've been waiting for for a very long time!

 

It's good to be a Two Guys fan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope what comes out of this discussion is a deeper understanding of the intent and circumstances under which this venture has unfolded.

 

They're trying to be transparent -- the only reason there has to be some mystery about the no-press deal is because of legal reasons. I.e. the whole thing could blow up in their face and end this sweet ride prematurely for all of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q42 got reprimanded for that remark.

Er, what? No we didn't ;-) Not sure what you've been hearing.

 

Fronzel, of course we (Q42) have different motivations for doing this than the Two Guys. But they're not mutually exclusive. We honestly want to help them put out these prototypes as quickly as possible so they can show their progress and learn from them. In fact, the prototypes were our idea. But in order to produce them as quickly as possible, we had to place some limitations on what they could do. We're not getting paid anything for spending time on this - we're doing it because we're huge fans of the Two Guys and want to see them succeed. So we opted to release them in the Chrome Web Store and focus on one specific rendering engine, Webkit. We never expected there to be a backlash over Chrome.

 

If any of you have any questions, I'm active on these forums so you can ask me directly, or you can go through Chris. But please don't make up reasons for things you don't know the full details about. Don't view "Q42" as some distant faceless organisation working for the Two Guys. Even though we're a 40+ employee company, the two people working on these prototypes are myself and Martin, just two fans of Space Quest and classic adventure games like you and we want to contribute our skills to help the Two Guys bring this new game to everyone - including ourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said and thankyou for your dedication, Rahul. I know full well with my website about working hours for fans and not for some altrustic reward. I wish more people would come out of the woodwork and do things to help promote this potentially awesome project, because there aren't many of us doing much (outside of the masses helping promote the thing or directly pledging, of course!).

 

Anyway, kudos, and give Martin my best, I haven't spoken to him in years. Get him on these forums!! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems with making it Chrome exclusive is that it is still a minority browser. An IE exclusive would have left all but Windows users out. Not many outside of Mac OS use Safari. Firefox is a majority browser and is available on most platforms. Even if someone does not want to use Firefox, The portable version will have no impact on the system. Chrome portable is a joke to call it portable since its installer makes registry entries and Chrome will not run without them.

 

That said, anyone that does not want to install Chrome and still wants to see it, you can see a play through on YouTube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Er, what? No we didn't ;-) Not sure what you've been hearing.

 

I'm sorry. I was guessing based on The Pope's comments on KS. :)

 

I don't get all the Chrome backlash either. And I think you guys are doing tremendous work. My jaw drops every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Rahul

 

Thanks for chiming in and addressing my concerns.

 

I read some of the things you posted and felt very... how shall I put it... disenchanted by them. Far be it from me to belittle your work (up until now, I had no idea it was just two people working on those prototypes), I do however question some of the decisions that I feel hurt the campaign. Basically, what this boils down to is a difference of opinion.

 

However, let me stress this again, so far this project has my unwavering support. By extension YOU have my unwavering support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems with making it Chrome exclusive is that it is still a minority browser. An IE exclusive would have left all but Windows users out. Not many outside of Mac OS use Safari. Firefox is a majority browser and is available on most platforms. Even if someone does not want to use Firefox, The portable version will have no impact on the system. Chrome portable is a joke to call it portable since its installer makes registry entries and Chrome will not run without them.

 

That said, anyone that does not want to install Chrome and still wants to see it, you can see a play through on YouTube.

 

http://www.w3schools...wsers_stats.asp

 

http://www.telegraph...eb-browser.html

 

Chrome beat out IE and Firefox and is now the top browser in usage share. It is most assuredly not a "minority browser".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems with making it Chrome exclusive is that it is still a minority browser. An IE exclusive would have left all but Windows users out. Not many outside of Mac OS use Safari. Firefox is a majority browser and is available on most platforms. Even if someone does not want to use Firefox, The portable version will have no impact on the system. Chrome portable is a joke to call it portable since its installer makes registry entries and Chrome will not run without them.

 

That said, anyone that does not want to install Chrome and still wants to see it, you can see a play through on YouTube.

 

Chrome is far from a minority browser - last week, it overtook IE as the #1 browser worldwide. And even if it isn't #1, it's definitely one of the three major browsers. We had to choose one, and the one we chose is also the one that uses the Webkit rendering engine, which is the best engine right now to develop HTML5 games for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't paid that much attention to browser market shares lately, but the logs form the sites I maintain show little has changed over the past year or two. Granted this amounts to little more than anecdotal evidence, but it lead me to believe chrome had not made that much progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×