[*] POV switching[/*:m]
[*] Multimedia content (use it well, not profusely, IF is text based)[/*:m]
[*] Inserted links within main text body ("ObjectLink" "ExitLink" etc)[/*:m]
[*] Panes and/or UI customization
-NEW/IMPROVED IN QUEST 5.4[/*:m]
[*] Direct html text processor[/*:m]
[*] Gamebook scripts[/*:m]
[*] Scope controlled object/exit hyperlink activity[/*:m]
[*] Enhanced list and dictionary attribute types[/*:m][/list:u][/*:m][/list:u]
Alex wrote:Thanks, those rules sounds good to me. I'll put a page up on the main website in the next day or two, assuming nobody wants to make any modifications.
Asyranok wrote:So my game, WAKE, is a plague-themed IF. Since I've already started it, would I be unable to enter the competition?
OLD wrote:I'm a little torn on that. To me, it mostly depends on exactly how long ago you started it. I know it's been at least a few days, but frankly with the way we rushed from coming up with the idea for the comp to actually "starting" it, I sort of expect people may have already begun working on submissions.
I wish we could've gotten it set-up a little earlier, so people had more time to work, and I hope to provide at least a little more time next year. Also, since this is the first year (and because it was put together very quickly) there's no real prize beyond bragging rights, so I don't expect people to be real touchy about who started when. I'll let you give me some idea how far into it you are before I make a final decision, and if people want to weigh-in their opinions, I'll hear them out. Also, keep in mind that submission games are to be "approximately" movie length (1-1/2 to 2 hours), must be complete and submitted by May31, and will be freely distributed on the site when judging starts. So, if you wanted to make WAKE a bigger game and take more time to work on it, that might be something to consider.
Try to reach as many people as possible. Ideally, players should be able to choose whether they play your game in an online browser or offline. Not everybody can be online all the time, or wants to be; not everybody wants to bother with getting the right interpreter. Of course, this is not possible for every platform; but if it's possible, you should do it. Similarly, a game that runs only in Windows is not the best idea.
...There's still about two weeks left until the cutoff date for intent to enter, so I'm hoping to see things pick up. A comp of 2 to 4 people would be a little ... adjective
Agreed. I think I'll send a mini newsletter to the mailing list, to see if that captures more interest.
Asyranok wrote:Does every judge have to focus on all aspects ...
... can a judge focus on the gameplay and mechanics ...
... I am not good enough at quest, nor do i have enough time to go through the code and back end of a game ...
TriangleGames wrote:Based on how Quest works and the ways in which the features affect the games, I believe this will be enough. If any entrants take issue with this "plan," I shall have to strive to find at least one judge who can examine the code more closely, but I can't force anyone to be a judge, so I can't promise that that will be possible. Fortunately, again, I don't believe it would be necessary anyway.
TriangleGames wrote:I've been meaning to ask about how people usually "measure game length" for text adventures. In other words, what exactly does "two hours" mean?
A couple of things have occurred to me that leave me unsure what the general view on that is. One is the fact that many games have a lot of "flavor text," which could use up a person's time reading scenery descriptions or fiddling with "throw-away" items. The second is that it takes much longer to finish while trying to figure everything out. Where as, if a person already knows what to do, they could blast through the game in a fraction of the time.
QuestComp wrote:Judges are encouraged to play each game as long as they want and try to finish each one. However, they are not required to finish before voting (especially if the game takes more than about 1-1/2 to 2 hours). There is no minimum time length that must be spent on each game.
Spring Thing wrote:Judges are encouraged to spend as long as they want on each game, and are encouraged to try to finish each one. In the end, however, they are not required to finish before voting (especially if the game takes more than about two evenings to complete). Nor, for that matter, is there any particular minimum time length that must be spent on each game.
IF Comp wrote:Judges must base their judgement of each game on at most the first two hours of play. If a judge is still playing a game at the end of a cumulative two hours of playing time and wishes to continue playing it, the judge must rate the game and not change that rating later before continuing play. Authors may write a game of any length they desire, but should keep this rule in mind when determining the length of their entry.
The Pixie wrote:I would have no problem with authors also being judges, though obviously they cannot judge their own. You might want to normalize a judge's score before adding them in though (easier said than done I admit). You may well find some people fail to complete their game and could then judge too.
You do need more than one judge though!
My e-mail wrote:Okay, it's two weeks past the deadline. This is what's ready for judging, so here they are.
1. “Worship the Pig” by Heal Butcher
http://textadventures.co.uk/games/view/ ... ip-the-pig
2. “Pest” by Jonathan Estis
http://textadventures.co.uk/games/view/ ... v2t9w/pest
Score as 1 - 10, mark any discussion threads in the forum appropriately so people aren't led into spoilers accidentally, and I encourage you to post reviews on the game's page.
Since things are already off-kilter, we'll judge until we're done judging, but no more than a month from now.
If anyone else pops in and says, "hey, I got my game finished!" I'll leave it up to the judges whether they want to review the late entries.
The Pixie wrote:I have now reviewed/judged both games. Two criticisms about both of them:
Neither game had any credits to beta-testers. They seemed pretty free of spelling and grammar mistakes, and I found no bugs, so perhaps they were tested. Always test you games, and always credit the testers - you would be marked down for not doing so in the "big" contests.
The rules require games to focus on a coupe of Quest-specific features, and to state those features up front. I think they both did use some features, but neither made clear what the features were up front, so I felt unable to judge them on how they did it.