STEAM?

Anything and everything

Moderators: bert_the_turtle, jelco, Chris

caleb_grey
level0
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:29 am

STEAM?

Postby caleb_grey » Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:48 am

any thoughts on putting this great game onto valve's STEAM? seems to me it would reach a ton more people that way, as well as being much more convienent to purchase. it would also make it possible for episododic content to extend the game a bit. you dont have to use the SOURCE to sell on steam, but a port would make modding easier :P

some other indepedent devs who will soon appear on STEAM:

sin episodes, ritual
http://www.sinepisodes.com/

alien swarm: infested, black cat games
http://www.blackcatgames.com/swarm/

ragdoll kung fu, mark healy of lionhead studios
http://personal.lionhead.com/mhealey/
User avatar
edd8990
level5
level5
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 8:26 pm
Location: Crewe, Cheshire, England
Contact:

Postby edd8990 » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:06 am

Although I've hd no problem with it, the general opinion is Steam Sucks. When most people have a plesant experience with steam, then it would be a considerable idea.

And porting darwinia to steam? Why? that would be totally pointless, hard and probably impossible.
User avatar
Dr4goN
level3
level3
Posts: 264
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Postby Dr4goN » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:27 am

edd's right. Darwinia in Steam would suck coz almost all population of Earth plays CS/other games through it.
panda of doom
level1
level1
Posts: 39
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 8:32 pm

Postby panda of doom » Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:17 am

I like steams online distribution system, it works great (when it actually doesl :P). Also a lot of people play HL2/HL1 and its mods. Just seeing Darwinia in 3rd party games would get a lot of publicity.
Darksun
level5
level5
Posts: 6461
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:08 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Postby Darksun » Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:06 pm

The question is would it be cost effective. How much does it cost to get your game on steam, what percentage of the sale do you get, how much would this *actually* increase sales, how much of the games rights would be retained by IV and how much control would Valve/Steam have.
User avatar
Josh mc
level3
level3
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri May 02, 2003 8:30 pm
Location: :noitacoL . .///////|\\\\\\\ . . . . . . |..---...,...---..| . |........|........| . |...\__.__/...|
Contact:

Postby Josh mc » Sat Aug 13, 2005 3:37 pm

Personally, Steam has worked fine for me and Darwinia would probably sell loads if put on it. However, its not really feasable is it?
caleb_grey
level0
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:29 am

Postby caleb_grey » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:04 pm

edd8990 wrote:Although I've hd no problem with it, the general opinion is Steam Sucks. When most people have a plesant experience with steam, then it would be a considerable idea.


i've had no problems with it either. i think saying that the general opinion is it sucks is true, but in reality most people do have a pleasant experience with it. you just hear about the bad things more than the good.

And porting darwinia to steam? Why? that would be totally pointless, hard and probably impossible.


pointless? hardly. reaching out to one of the biggest modding communities around can only be a good thing for the game. as for a port being possible, you would have to give some reasons why you think it would be so hard. im not seeing anything in this game that couldnt be reproduced with the source engine.
Darksun
level5
level5
Posts: 6461
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2002 7:08 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1

Postby Darksun » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:31 pm

Wait, port Darwinia to the source engine? Do you have any concept whatsoever of game design?
User avatar
Dr4goN
level3
level3
Posts: 264
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Poland
Contact:

Postby Dr4goN » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:37 pm

caleb_grey wrote:im not seeing anything in this game that couldnt be reproduced with the source engine.

There is something in Darwinia that couldn't be reproduced with the Source: its gameplay. CS:S sucks in this category, but CS 1.6 not. Half-Life 2 isn't so good as first HL. And here HL2's GFX doesn't matter. Here rules the gameplay. Look at Doom 3 - GFX there looks AWESOME. But Doom's gameplay suxxxxxxx. And now look at first Halo - maybe its GFX isn't so stunning as D3's, but it has amazing gameplay and replay-ability values.

Darksun wrote:Wait, port Darwinia to the source engine? Do you have any concept whatsoever of game design?

I haven't but I know how to do it. Use Softimage XSI Exp for Half-Life 2.
caleb_grey
level0
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:29 am

Postby caleb_grey » Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:09 pm

Darksun wrote:Wait, port Darwinia to the source engine? Do you have any concept whatsoever of game design?


i have enough, and people i have talked to who work on major mods for hl2 have said darwinia would be not that difficult to reproduce using source. a few expressed an interest in doing exactly that, and would if they werent already tied down to other projects.


Dr4goN wrote:
caleb_grey wrote:im not seeing anything in this game that couldnt be reproduced with the source engine.

There is something in Darwinia that couldn't be reproduced with the Source: its gameplay. CS:S sucks in this category, but CS 1.6 not. Half-Life 2 isn't so good as first HL. And here HL2's GFX doesn't matter. Here rules the gameplay. Look at Doom 3 - GFX there looks AWESOME. But Doom's gameplay suxxxxxxx. And now look at first Halo - maybe its GFX isn't so stunning as D3's, but it has amazing gameplay and replay-ability values.


opinion, opinion, and more opinion. if the gameplay for darwinia is soo key, why are the devs in the process of removing the key gameplay to reach a wider audience? why dumb down the game and turn it into a boring point and click adventure? they think its going to sell better if its easier? thats a joke.
my point of the thread is they can reach many more gamers with the core gameplay intact on steam. its not about porting to source. the game doesnt have to run on source to be sold on steam. the whole point of a source conversion would be to make it easier to mod the game.
ttm
level2
level2
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 5:11 pm
Location: Cardboard box on the M40
Contact:

Postby ttm » Sat Aug 13, 2005 11:56 pm

Where the hell did porting Darwinia to the Source engine even come in to this topic? Steam games don't have to use source, I thought that would be glaringly obvious considering the fact that Half-Life 1 and it's spin-offs have been on Steam longer than Half-Life 2
User avatar
NeoThermic
Introversion Staff
Introversion Staff
Posts: 6254
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2002 10:55 am
Location: ::1
Contact:

Postby NeoThermic » Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:31 am

caleb_grey wrote:
Darksun wrote:Wait, port Darwinia to the source engine? Do you have any concept whatsoever of game design?


i have enough, and people i have talked to who work on major mods for hl2 have said darwinia would be not that difficult to reproduce using source. a few expressed an interest in doing exactly that, and would if they werent already tied down to other projects.


I dunno if its just me, but I died of laughter reading that.

First... the source engine is DirectX, while Darwinia is OpenGL. The diffrence there is like saying you can convert a McLaren into a Ferrari. It just won't happen.

Secondly the Source Engine is chunky for a game that doesn't need its features.

Where does Darwinia use Version 2.0 (and below) shaders, bump mapping, LOD on models and world? (more LOD wouldn't go amiss in Darwinia however ;) ). Why does Darwinia need HLSL and HDRL when its trying to replicate a retro feel? Since when does water in Darwinia reflect?

The Source Engine is great and all, but thats like trying to use a sledge to kill a fly. Its really uneeded and will cause more damage than needed.



caleb_grey wrote:
Dr4goN wrote:
caleb_grey wrote:im not seeing anything in this game that couldnt be reproduced with the source engine.

There is something in Darwinia that couldn't be reproduced with the Source: its gameplay. CS:S sucks in this category, but CS 1.6 not. Half-Life 2 isn't so good as first HL. And here HL2's GFX doesn't matter. Here rules the gameplay. Look at Doom 3 - GFX there looks AWESOME. But Doom's gameplay suxxxxxxx. And now look at first Halo - maybe its GFX isn't so stunning as D3's, but it has amazing gameplay and replay-ability values.


opinion, opinion, and more opinion. if the gameplay for darwinia is soo key, why are the devs in the process of removing the key gameplay to reach a wider audience? why dumb down the game and turn it into a boring point and click adventure? they think its going to sell better if its easier? thats a joke.
my point of the thread is they can reach many more gamers with the core gameplay intact on steam. its not about porting to source. the game doesnt have to run on source to be sold on steam. the whole point of a source conversion would be to make it easier to mod the game.


Misinformation, misinformation, and more misinformation!

The "key gameplay" (I assume you mean gestures) isn't being removed. They are adding a simpler way to play the game. Since IV are not tied down to some money sucking corperation, they can make such intresting changes as they please without giving any higher management heart attacks. If it gets Darwinia to those who hated the gestures system, then great.

NeoThermic
Stewsburntmonkey
level5
level5
Posts: 11553
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 7:44 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Postby Stewsburntmonkey » Sun Aug 14, 2005 1:44 am

Depending on how Darwinia is coded it might not be too difficult to port it to a DirectX bases system (many games are coded so they can use both OpenGL and DirectX). While I agree there is no good reason to even be discussing a port to the Source engine, one should certainly be possible. :)
caleb_grey
level0
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:29 am

Postby caleb_grey » Sun Aug 14, 2005 1:51 am

I dunno if its just me, but I died of laughter reading that.

First... the source engine is DirectX, while Darwinia is OpenGL. The diffrence there is like saying you can convert a McLaren into a Ferrari. It just won't happen.

Secondly the Source Engine is chunky for a game that doesn't need its features.

Where does Darwinia use Version 2.0 (and below) shaders, bump mapping, LOD on models and world? (more LOD wouldn't go amiss in Darwinia however ;) ). Why does Darwinia need HLSL and HDRL when its trying to replicate a retro feel? Since when does water in Darwinia reflect?

The Source Engine is great and all, but thats like trying to use a sledge to kill a fly. Its really uneeded and will cause more damage than needed.


:lol: thats a load of crock. if small mod team had 3 months to seriously recreate the game in source it would be done, and run better at that. and with mp in there as well.


Misinformation, misinformation, and more misinformation!

The "key gameplay" (I assume you mean gestures) isn't being removed. They are adding a simpler way to play the game. Since IV are not tied down to some money sucking corperation, they can make such intresting changes as they please without giving any higher management heart attacks. If it gets Darwinia to those who hated the gestures system, then great.

NeoThermic


where exactly do you get the idea that iv would lose any control over their game? talk about misinformation. steam is there for independant developers to use to distribute. valve has no interest in mucking around with others games, they have enough on their plate as it is. lets not forget valve is an indepentent developer themselves. a highly successful one at that.

if you seriously think "adding" a simpler way to play the game is going to magically make it into a retail success you are fooling yourself. the gestures are the key gameplay element. any other control scheme that deviates from the gestures just rips the soul out of the game. so instead of a fun, short, original game, with a unique control aspect, you end up with a boring, short, point and click kinda been there done that game.
it might as well be doom3. pretty, but pretty boring.

its funny you think iv making the change is innovative, its actually exactly the kind of thing a money sucking corperation would have had them do. i cant imagine the game has sold particularly well, especially with all the hoops one had to goto to get a legal copy. the delays with the store havent helped either, and is still dodgy to buy something from. they would have been better off setting up an ebay store. judging by the 20,000+ downloads of the game illegally, iv have lost a ton of customers by releasing in the manner they did.

the point of the thread wasnt to port to source, that was just a side thought i had while creating the thread. maybe you missed the :P after the source comment? the point is, putting the game on steam would have many advantages for an indepedent dev like iv.

1. huge base of gamers to sell directly to
2. huge amounts of free publicity
3. secure online payment options
4. no hassle and headaches of setting up and maintaining an online store
5. piracy made much more difficult
Stewsburntmonkey
level5
level5
Posts: 11553
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2002 7:44 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Postby Stewsburntmonkey » Sun Aug 14, 2005 1:54 am

What's not secure about the current system or the old one for that matter? Both are much better than E-bay. . .

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests