Professional Games, Casual and Hobby development

I first wanted to write that in german language, but i realized that this is too important for everyone of us to shut someone out, so i wrote it in english. Please excuse a few typing errors, for i am legastenic.

During this years E3, we saw a massive change in the industry. A change, that goes on for years now, unrecognized but growing.
The casual gamers grow.
It started with the announcement of microsofts avatar system, a cheap Mii ripoff, but clever nontheless.
however, people who own an XBox 360 probably wont give a damn, and the few who will wont base their decision of what console to buy on the fact that the avatars have necks, and the Miis have too, but microsoft choses to ignore them. Who cares anyway?

Core gamers were dissapointed by Nintendo, and the lack of hardcore games. Sony gamers got what they always get, a graphicsl overhaul over an already exisiting game. microsoft is still doing their best, namely stealing, and in pc gameing... was there even any pc gaming at E3 anymore?

thing is, casual games are big. they bring the developers big bucks, big money for little ivnestment. they almost allways sell, and they sell long, not just the ten week span after its release, no they have legs.

look at games like zuma, the clumsys or moorhuhn (chicken shoot)
those games exist for years now, adn are still popular, with new entries any day and each one sells.
nobody gives a damn about a bad game if its only 5 bucks. but the company can make thousands of dollars/euros with those budget games.

you can even sell them online, in those online game portals, and you will sell units.

but what about the hobby game developer, you ask? it is pretty simple.
over the course of four years, a hobby game developer seperated itself from a professionald eveloper miles.
when a game in 2003 had OK graphics, ususally, you were able to reproduce something similar with your hobby team, if you tried hard and knew your stuff.
nowadays, this is just not possible.

not matter what any fanboy of any engine says, if you use a game developing tool like A7, Torque or irrlicht, you may create good lookign results, but those are miles away from what a really god looking game nowadays looks like.

the next hook is, that game developers, especially wannabe game developers, are blinded by the "knowledge" of the internet and tutorials.
they may create a shader or even their own real model, but they are mssing the basics in design and gameplay, because those are things yu learn over time. and this is something, most people dont want to invest. no wonder gamemaker booms, or shooter creator, because you get results easy.

there is a chance, that of 100 "develoeprs" 2 actually finish a game, and 1 of those 2 is actually good. and that is probably a casual game.

you just have to look into the forums. the best games, games, not projects, mind you, are casual games. a7ttitude for example. casual as hell, but fun as hell aswell.
this game is actually worth money, if HeelX gets rid of the A7 monicker and creates a few more graphics and his own music.
you can sell that for 10 bucks online and you get money out of it.

when i released Monster Mega Mayhem, i soon realized that there is no money in hardcore games for us hobby developers anymore. but with casual, there is.

who do you think creates casual games? Nowadays, ubisoft and co realized their money is in casual, but years ago, people like you and me did.
the creator of "Moorhuhn" is rich today. he had nothing back in the day. david jaffe did not create zuma. some unknown dude from somewhere did, and he has his cash now.

the future, my friends, lies in casual gaming for us. hardcore gaming will not die. it never will. but people with money and hardware will create those game sin the future. and if you want to be one of them, get a good idea, create a casual game, take your time, look for a good way to distribute and then you can start being the man who does the hardcore game.

and, on a special note for all the newbies here: dont get me wrong. it is good you want to create a game. but dont think it is going to be easy.
creating a game needs the same things like creating music: knowhow, time and especially money. the best games take each of those. start small, and learn. you never know enough!

hope that helps

nice read.

Nice, I agree. =)

Sorry, I made huge post, and then realized none of it actually fit the topic. Well whatever.

Make the big post, its Morbius! Who knows, maybe, it fits better then most replies in other threads!

totally agree here

Yeah. I got an offer for a7titude on the Dusmania and most of the overnight contest games were casual games, too, nothing big, but they were funny. We got an offer for our game we made (which I will present later here) and I think.. "hell yeah". Who wants to make big games if he can still make small but funny games in that short time. Best example: Ichiro's game got onto steam. Really outstanding. And it is Gaaaaame Studioooooo!

By the way, what is a monicker?

moniker is not a moniker for monicker.

moniker: alias for +someone / something familiar? a shortened alternate name?
a7ttitude == attitude?

QFT...
I especially agree with you on the point that hobby developers nowadays simply can't create games that look as amazing as the "professional" games do. Part of the problem is, that the engines that are used, are to general (which they have to be, to offer a wide range of possibilities to all users) to be capable of running games in a quality like, let's say chrysis. Additional to that, the regular gamer nowadays looks at the back of a case, taking an automatic look at the 4 screenshots that are on there and either says: "wow, cool graphics, nice shaders here, let's buy!" or sees "well doesn't look too good really" and throws it back into the box. whilst a couple years ago, people were also having a good look at gameplay, storyline and things like that, people today don't really care if these things are crappy, if the graphics are alright, the game can't be too bad. don't get me wrong, a game with good graphics is a lot of fun, definitly, but a game with medium graphics (and i know what i am talking about here, my 6 year old machine urges me to play only these) can - with the right storytelling - be a hell of a lot more fun. in that, i kinda see a backward-development to the starting days of game design, where shooters without no real story at all (DOOM, Quake...) could facinate people, simply because - well - the graphics were amazing at that time. but i am certain, that in a couple years people will come back to where we were in the past, realizing that gaming isn't just about nice 3D Clouds, Bloom Shaders, but as a movie with great special effects might be nice to look at and thus entertaining, only a game with a good story and background can truly satisfy a real gamer

No, people will not come to a new conclusion. Hardcore gamers will not turn into a white bunny playing Tetris all day.

There are several people and several tastes. Some love hardcore some love casual. It just depends.

And since the number of casual gamers is growing it is worth to develop for them. Now all the big publishers are doing it and this leads to a point to wonder if indies are not too late?

Even a casual game is professional. Look into the casual web platforms. Graphics are fantastic, music is great and gameplay is often very good with much gameplay elements, effects and well-thought timing for levels or incentives.

You cannot easily compete as a one-man-army against them. Yes, you can sell an over-night project or A7titude, but it is still another league than the games offered at Steam.
We can take Ichiro as an example. He worked very long and very hard to come to this point. And he did not do everything alone. Even the idea is a derivate of a japanese project. But I consider him very professional though he still is indie.

Good post and good read.

The funny thing is that it's mostly a matter of indie developer attitude thinking they can (or must) compete with the big boys... There are so many people trying to make games that are only really possible with a huge budget, big team and probably a 'better-than-3dgs' engine.

I think a lot of time gets wasted by indie developers all over the place. Casual games, small games and innovative games is where it's at for the indie developer. Really interesting and uncommon / different ideas rarely will get a green light at the big AAA companies. Think about The Sims that had a lot of trouble convincing the people that backed the project with money.

Indie developers, unless they have great talent at making their own tools and engines (Project Offset for example, but they will grow into a AAA company soon, just mark my words. ), shouldn't even try to really compete with the AAA games in my opinion.

There's a ton of things indie developers should and can do, but directly competing with the AAA games isn't usually one of them.



I agree with both points here by the way. As an example I think it's crazy that those guys think gamers will have no issues with 'shorter' games, as they claim bigger and longer games are becoming too expensive to make.

Also, in general it's no wonder that they are thinking about the casual game market now as profits per project are much higher and it just took a long time for them to realize this.

I do think that in the near future indie developers will get more real competition from the AAA companies when their trend of changing their main focus to the casual game market continues.



Doesn't that contradict the point you tried to make as Ichiro as far as I know actually used a game studio project to get on steam?

Perhaps I am reading to much into what you've just said, but do you think we should not stick to smaller projects as indies? The over-night projects actually are what people here should make far more often, small accessible games that are fun to play (and fun to make)... It doesn't even have to be real 'casual' games either, there's a lot of abuse of that term going on in my opinion,

Cheers

I guess if you think that you have just made a professional market analysis then you should be proud of yourself, but there are much smarter statistical mathmaticians and economists looking at game trends and game sales than you. And believe me, those guys are pretty confused over the game industry right now.

In a sense you are right, if you want to compete with so called hard-core games you might fail, but if you have your own ideas you could revolutionize the game industry.

All it takes is a new idea. I picture myself as sort of a computer scientist rather than just a game developer. I am constantly in a lab trying new ideas. Like any scientist, if you come upo with a new invention you can change the world. If not, you continue to go "back to the drawing board"

I got into game design and development 7 or 8 years ago,...thats almost a whole decade ago! If I have been trying this long I will not be giving up to make bunny games any time in the future.

Casual games are fine, IM not condemning them, but I personally would rather shovel cow dung then make MArio jumping around.

I don't know if that was directed at me or Spike, but to be honest, it wasn't really an analysis so much in that I thoroughly checked the market, but more based on my own experience and what AAA developers tend to scream from time to time (as in 'more casual gamers' and 'there's more money in casual games to be made' things like that) and you are right there are people out there doing a way more professional job at that.



I understand what you mean, but when I think about indie developers, I'm not thinking about Tetris, Bejeweled and all that crap.

A Mario-clone might be what I'm talking about to some extent, but then I'm thinking about a true indie game-version of it like for example Braid. Yes, it's basically just another Mario clone, but it has really innovative gameplay that makes it incredible.

This is exactly why I think people should stop abusing the word 'casual' for the 'smaller' games we should be talking about when it's about indie games... Take games like Aquaria, Cortex Command, Uplink, DefCon, Braid, Mr Robot and a whole bunch more. I would not categorize them as 'casual', but instead as 'indie'. Those games are nothing like Bejeweled, Tetris, the countless of PacMan and BreakOut clones that I would call 'casual' games...

Cheers

Back to the part about experience... In my experience, doing about the hardest project type there is, I would suggest the following to any new game maker.

1) spend the $50 or less on an old computer that runs windows 95

2) get DOOM and/or DOOM2

3) Make your own DOOM levels

4) Now learn to convert the textures, sounds, sprites etc

5) Now get Gamestudio, and make a level.. not just any level, but reproduce a REAL location

The reason i bring up making doom levels first, is because the graphics are bad, and the game engines very limited.
This will teach you how to 'fake' things like lighting and shadows, and creating objects with only box shapes.

You'll be working in DOS, so you'll learn how to use command lines.

When you convert levels, you'll learn to use only power of 2 sized 'pictures', and learn very basic artistry. You'll also learn how to fake things more, how to take a large wall texture, and shrink it down to only 256 x 256.

Game engines today will easily use photographic quality textures. But if you don't know how to adjust them to look perfect for their use, your whole level will look wrong. learn how to make them appear as one thing, and that means learning to edit pixel by pixel in an older engine.

Finally, making a level to use a real life location is as hard as it gets.

You, like I did, will think it easy... because everything is already 'mapped out' for you as a guide. But thats why its hard.. YOU dont choose where the tree goes, or the park bench, and you don't chose what they look like...
...noooo.. you have to make everything as it is in real life, and THAT is hard.

OK enough of that... even if the bigwig companies are starting to sell casual games, it is true that they have bigwigs that 'vote' on ideas...

And we know those people just THINK theyre smart, and they will not make certain games because the content may be too risky, whereas we can make anything we want.

Look at id software. One of the big guys, always ahead in the game engine department... whats their latest project?

Another DOOM!

Like most big companies, theyre sticking with a popular title instead of risking doing anyhing else.

Look at how many GTA games there are...

Big companies are cowards who wont try anything new. Thats where we come in

For the OP(original post)

Yeah I aqree, if smaller means casual than I agree.

There are tons of stories like this, I was just reading today about these guys; just 10 years ago they were just fresh out of college working out of a garage, now this year they are accepting an academy award, you can read it here:

http://www.nextlimit.com/newsletters/may08/nl_turning_ten.html

All this money because they developed a few nice algorithms...which were based on other mathmaticians!

The field of 3d is WIDE WIDE open, and I will not be delegated to some 'casual gaming' catagory because spike had bad luck selling monster madness. Spike, get a clue, if monster madness didnt sell was because your ideas just didnt work. If your game isnt good it doesnt mean the entire indie gamers should quit.

Now rant is over.

I agree that casual gaming is getting bigger, and triple A titles arent selling as well, but thats because of other reasons, which have nothing to do with indie gamers. Casual games are selling because they offer more variety than big games. Basically in this age people are just making newer adaptations of the same old ideas. Thats why game sales are down.

Exactly! Big Companies are run by market research. Everyone copies everyone else. If someone gets a new idea, everybody tries to produce variations of it.Nothing new is produced, just small changes.


I agree with you BlueBeast.

What about this elephant in the living room?

Big companies have access to testkits whilst indies are marginalised to the PC market. Ok we have XNA but what about the Wii, the dominant console for the casual market?

If Nintendo were really open to the indie developer then they would have a crap load of innovative content (which is frankly in great need) but unfortunately due to their family friendly idealism (MadWorld seems to be the exception) they dont want to taint their image or are just not interested which is a bit sad.

It is not the entire truth if you say: "big companies are cowards."

Many of them published innovative projects. I read an article about that and it was easy to see that another version like Call of Duty 4, Quake 4 or GTA 4, Sims 71 sells much much better than a new innovative idea. The usual gamer is suspicious of new technologies and new ideas. They are afraid that it will be less fun. They don't feel comfortable to risk their money to just check that out.

Because of that new ideas are often not successful in a commercial way. Big publishers only see the money. But the real one to blame is YOU, the gamer

Nevertheless there are some smaller groups that are interested in new ideas but this is simply a smaller market. And this can indeed be an interesting market for an indie project.

I have to agree with many of Spike's points, but i have to say that there is nothing really new about it...

As many of you already recognized is the casual gaming market in an big rise atm. But we know or should know that the coregamers is our focus - since we want Video games be Art! As the Lead Director of Eidos said (Last year at GCDC in Leipzig): its up to you, the upcoming Developer, to return to the way of the Game ARTISTS.

Casual games reaches people who didn't play any game before, but they dont earn as much money as a Core games. Most Casual gamer buy 1-3 games a year (low Price Games). Most Core gamers buy up to 8 titels a year (Most AAA Games).

And the other Thing is that to develop casual games is ...uuuuh... BORING! at least to me and my team ... We was forced to develop 2 casual games last and this year ... and it wasn't the big thing we wanted to do at all. And since the new Law from July, 1st our 2nd Game is banned before its supposed to launce next month ...

Nevermind ... just hold on the Core games if you want to enjoy your work - thats what i would tell you and what many people at GCDC and GDC told me

So out there, have a nice Day and do what you like!
If it's good, they'll buy it, even its no casual

I think portals was very innovative, and it sold great. Same with HALO, rayman and same will it be with spore. Big companies make great new innovative games (and if they are sequels to the previous story, it doesn't mean they are not innovative anymore).

If you drag one idea too much around, the public will discard it as well. Especially if your new "same-idea" game turns out to be worse than it's ancestors.

you obviously havent read what i wrote, or else your wouldnt write something out of context like that -.-

i said its easier for us to do casual games to make money for biger projects, instead of starting with big projects. got the clue?

This is a silly thread.

Please, all this talk of casual games and there significance is really foolish. Who fricking cares.....

Most consumers could care less if a game is considered casual or a AAA game. They really do'nt notice, so why should we as game developers....

It's really stupid to go around and classify games as casual and non casual. What metric are you using to measure with, and again why bother, it makes little difference to 80 percent of the consumers.

Stop being concerned wether game corp's are making casual games or not, for Pete's sake they are game companies and thats what they do, they create games, for target audiences.

Go make the game that gives you the most pleasure. That's the core purpose of an artist. Make something special, and if you do a good job expressing that specialness in your game you will find an audience.

We have the tools to make fulling games, do you have the passion to follow through. I think all games left unfinished are "Casual Games".

A one or two person team can still create great gaming experiences, the tools are there, all that is left is some passion and sweat....

Quit whining, get off your ass, and build the next great game...

Ken

some of us need money to build our artistic game. please, read, think about it, let it sink and then write. not read a few sentences and argue back...

I actually agree with Nardulus. I might not have put it quite as harshly however, but in a sense he is right.

Spike let me say it louder.....

QUIT WHINNING

I read the thread it's mainly drivel....

If you need money to build your artistic game, so be it.

Many games can be built with lousy art. "Crayon Physic's" comes to mind, even "Line Rider" has what what I would call programmer art. They both have been picked up and are being turned into retail games, before that they had great success online.

Use this forum to find some art help. Spend a $1000 on some art or barter with an artist....

If you do'nt have the resources to make a graphic's heavy game, try something else...

Go outside of you narrow game style box, and think differently...

All game creation is art, it's not locked away from those that do not have money for art or code. Use the tools that are available, work within your art constraints, and make something amazing... That's what truly creative artists do in all mediums........ Posers whine and quit....

Ken

I agree 110%.

Of course he is right, what is this? Sesame street game development? Just like Larry The Cable Guy says: Quit whining and Git R Done!

so, you are bringing casual games as argument that we should not make casual games? wow...

he's not saying "don't make casual games". he's saying "don't limit yourselves to your definition of 'casual' games".

don't think to yourself "i'm going to make a casual game as opposed to a AAA game". make a game designed around your skills and desires, and built around your resources and attention span.

is it the typical lastability, price, development time, or what that makes a game casual? if you make a game that'll last longer than your typical casual game but is much cheaper than a AAA game and sells somewhere in between, what type of game did you just make? or do you even care?

julz

I wouldn't care, but it would be most likely still categorized as casual game.

Yes, there is some innovation. Portals felt a bit innovative but only because they extended a very old game concept. Some portals already existed in the first old Doom. But some new elements like the physics, the second portal, the jumping techniques are new and fun. But don't forget: This game was originally built by a small company and then bought by Valve.

I dont see any innovation in Halo though. Rayman was funny and interesting especially for my son. But it was just another action game with influence from jump&run and shooting and a few narrative elements.

Spore is another interesting story. The hype tells it was innovative. And yes, the procedural animation is. But the game-play is just a mixture of shooting and collecting (first episode), rpg and rts (the following episodes). I feel nothing new in here, only a new combination or composition.

Regarding casual or not: I agree with you to dismiss this definition in our heads. An artist shall be free of any constraints. This is a good approach. But the world outside, the game magazines and web reporters still will put it into a drawer and categorize as they learned it.

Hi Frank,



Your world is indeed small, if it only extends to game magazines and web reporters. None of these groups actually counts as a consumer.

We really should not care what "Dorky, live in mom and dads basement, web game reviewers", think. Yes, I have an opinion on this....

There are some wonderful games being sold at the iPhone store, most of which would be classifed as casual by some game blogging asshole. Funny, I have yet to see the word casual used much if at all in regards to iPhone games...

To me I think Guitar Hero is a casual game, it could easily be done by a small team and small budget. Nobody refers to Guitar Hero as a casual game. That's because marketing can convince lap dog gamers, that its more than a casual game....

Go forth, build with your tools, make some kick ass games, sell them everywhere. Create, thats all that matters....

There was a saying, a while back, popular with us "Punk Rock" guys, it said, "F**K Art, Let's Dance". That's when Punk rock was under a simular assualt from the media, and trying to categorize it as something. It's music, dumb ass, all music is art, all games are art. It's that simple....

Ken

Whether or not you like to make casual games, there is alot of money to make from them (and especially if the browser plugin is done!!). I predict playing small funny games from browser will be a true cashcow. People can spent how much they like, and if you do this clever, you can let them keep spending on the same game . They really pay the amount how much they think it's worth.

But that casual games can be cashcows, doesn't mean that other types can't. To create a big quality title, you really don't need hundreds of dollars. In fact, if you are a programmer, then you can achieve a tremendous amount of (graphically good looking!) work by just doing research to latest techniques, and don't be satisfied by average movement/animation results. If you can create "self-learning" movements and take in account the physics, then you barely need an animator.

But who of us already tried to achieve this? Barely half a hand full of people are researching in the innovation field (like ChrisB with his procedural terrains and Slin with his research to over 6 different physic engines!), but I think most of us just look and stand back, watching what those few other can do. I agree that the look of models and environment are important, but seriously, a great textured environment looks just as good as a "stuffed together" environment with detailed particle effects, lensflares and waving grass everywhere. Those aren't artiscian jobs, those are programmer jobs. New revolutions in the 3d world cán be implemented in lite-c, and google is your friend

you are all talking awaqy from ym main point.
my main point was, that we cannot compete with whatever super grafix game is out there, because we just dont have the cash, amrketing and whatever is needed to convice the idiots that should buy the game that our game is must have.

but when we focus on smaller games that are fun, we have a chance to sell them. whatever you call those games wont matter, but the general public calls them casual.

Wrong, I am selling more games than Crysis.



Bingo, ding... ding... correct...

But, they are only small to us, on the inside. Consumers have no idea, nor care, if they are limited resource games or not..

Spike, I love your game with the Crazy Pumpkin head guys. I think it's brillant. I want to see it as a complete game.

Have you thought about trying different play machanic's using your current work. How about a "Battle Chess" style game. Where you move and then battle for the square.

Maybe a Bomberman play mechanic frantic mayhem using your cool killing techniques, to acquire the most squares...

Maybe to you think this would be a small game / effort. To me it would be a full game, and I would never call it casual....

Profit is the key, as long as you are making a profit, you will be able to create more games. Stop making a profit, and you will disappear like many of these grafix / money heavy developers.

I am having no trouble competing with the big boys. Hell, since I make a profit each year, I am in a better position than 75 percent of these guys....

Ken

Well didn't I say that you can finish a big title without cash?
Aside good skills, you do need to know how to push it into the market. There are some tricks to do that without the need of massive advertisement launches for the media. You can get the ball rolling by starting on the net .

Knock at the doors of big game communities and forums, and if they like your game (yes, "if", well it's up to you to create a good game, this is about the marketing part) make sure they keep playing it. (e.g. multiplayer is one big important factor). Mouth to mouth advertisement is nearly as good as a tv-commercial. Just keep promoting the game everywhere for a while, I'm confident that the big masses will notice it soon enough.

I think you've got it up-side down there... if publishers don't feel like pumping millions into a project that really does need these resources to become a commercial success, you can hardly blame the gamer when a publisher decides not to give more money to make the game better.

Lets face it, gamers won't buy bad games, in fact, nowadays many won't even buy mediocre games... From a publisher's point of view it makes sense to not do too much risky things, but developers should insist on getting more money for the more risky projects.

Also, there are a couple of examples of ideas that really weren't great to start with, no matter how much money they would have pumped into it.



I disagree... usually they go with a commercially tested kind of game, lets say the standard kind of sci-fi fps game, but they add a new (usually gameplay related) gimmick and then call it 'innovation'.

That's not the kind of innovation that's really risky, unless you make the entire game bad. Examples that come to mind are Infernal or some of the other games that have time altering gimmicks... versus for example Prince of Persia Sands of Time, a game with somewhat similar features DID work and had great commercial success.

I have no doubt that for example Infernal could have been much much better than what it turned out to be... Ubisoft had all confidence in PoP and came with the resources needed. I think, to some extent at least, that it's as simple as that. Also the whole innovativeness of Prince of Persia wasn't the actual gimmick, but more so it's implications on the actual gameplay.

I think Rayman is also a very good example when it comes to gameplay that got an extra boost by the various new innovative 'gimmicks' in the last few games yes, but it's a game series that started out more or less like a 'Mario' type standard gameplay thing. They simply build up the game's name, put enough money into the series and that's why it's where it's now.



There are all kinds of ways to make money while making your artistic game. NOT to start your artistic game because you have no money is actually fooling yourself. Most companies that make even smaller games in between to get some development money usually end up making only these smaller games, as it's easy money.

It's somewhat of an illusion that this would really work... especially because those in between games have to be of good quality as well.



This should be heard and said WAY more often... as it's definitely applicable to most indie developers.



Yeah, I agree. As a developer you have to also treat those games like 'full games', not like 'in between cash cows', because quality will inevitably suffer when the attitude isn't right.

I think the spin-off game ideas are great by the way, probably something to look into indeed!



If your game ends up getting mentioned a few times on some of the bigger blogs and your game is at least mediocre / good, then you can expect a reasonable amount of mouth-to-mouth advertising for free and a percentage of sales because of that... It's usually / probably a short-time thing, but if people like your game, then they might be interested in your next game. 'Creating' a core fan-base is probably the most important thing for a indie developer to achieve, but at the same time spending a fortune at advertising for their indie games usually isn't.

Cheers

Better read before you quote! I got nothing there. I talked about sales statistics and reports from magazines.
Because of this no comments are needed on your other quotes as well. It will save us a lot of discussions.


@Nardulus:
This is an interesting view point. I will keep this in mind. Though I have to learn some new technolgies now to make games for the phones

From Gamasutra Today....



No Shit Sherlock.....

The elusive casual gamer classification fools them again.

So why fricking bother.... Since it's made up bull crap, it will get further mushy reclassification next year....

PS. Funny on the Big Fish Games site, I have not been able to find the word "CASUAL"... HMMM wonder why??? Because it's bullshit maybeee...

Ken

How very close minded of you... so because it was written in some magazine, by some guy it must be true or did you mean to say you did not agree with the magazines? In that case I misunderstood.

But if you really believe in what those magazines wrote there, then I was also criticizing what you think. Take it any way you see fit, you don't have to discuss anything with me if you do not want to and with all due respect I couldn't really care less.



To me it's easier to see the innovation in a title like Spore than in a title like Bioshock or Halo 3...

Cheers

I believe calling me "close minded" is a personal attack.

Gee, you are touchy! How old are you? That´s so childish. How about using the ignore function of the forum if almost every post of phemox agitates you like that?

Amy: Your post is personal as well and against the rules!

Maybe I am old enough to be your father amy. Because of that my point of moral is just a bit higher than yours.

I am a sportsmen, a father and I used to be a teacher for students. That is why I like fair discussions, with all neded repsect. I play by the rules and I expect others to do so.

I also don't use pirated software and I don't spit on others.

But to be honest: I am not more touchy or picky than the forum rules forced me to be. I could also stop to be that "touchy" and just adapt ot your behaviour. Then I simply start to call you and Phemox "close minded" as well, treating you without the needed respect, if you dont mind

But this all belongs not here. Write me a PM instead! A moderator should please delete this post and the personal post from Amy!

@Machinery_Frank:

And just because of your age, you should be a bit more sensitive
about whats really a breach against the rules and whats not.

Phemox clearly marked his sentence with a smiley, and explained afterwards
how he got your sentence, but also said that this might just be a misunderstanding
and therefore the prior part of his sentence is no more valid.

So please dont estimate a personal attack against you in every discussion you're participating.

I know you and Phemox have a common history when it comes to personal treatment,
but no'one of the moderators here is very motivated to go through dozent of pages
of the forum for analyzing if a certain sentence has some subliminal personal attack in it.

Ok, then I will simply adapt to this behaviour (though you know that it often produced long off-topic explanations and defendings from different sides). Thanks for the explanation Old_Bill.

No it's not, in my opinion it's freedom of expression. Please stop the missuse of the "Notify moderator"-Button, it's only for urgent requests not for solving your personal differences. If you have a personal problem with Phemox, please clear that in private.

Thanks checkbutton. I already understood that because of Old_Bills posting. I will express my opinion also more freely now, though I am not used to call people simple minded.
But I will do my best to do so in the future. I hope you don't mind then