NPCComp submissions

0 views
Skip to first unread message

David Fisher

unread,
Jun 14, 2009, 5:24:10 PM6/14/09
to
If there are any entries for NPCComp, please send them to:

david...@australiaonline.net.au

If anyone requires an extension to the deadline, let me know ...

David Fisher

PS. This is also the halfway point for SenseComp; the last in
this series, GameplayComp, is about to start:

http://www.ifwiki.org/index.php/SenseComp
http://www.ifwiki.org/index.php/GameplayComp


David Fisher

unread,
Jun 18, 2009, 8:06:38 PM6/18/09
to
"David Fisher" <david...@australiaonline.net.au> wrote in message
news:12450146...@kangaroo.ozonline.com.au...

> If there are any entries for NPCComp
...

There don't seem to be any submissions for NPCComp, which is fine ...

David Fisher


Michael Neal Tenuis

unread,
Jun 19, 2009, 8:40:02 AM6/19/09
to
David Fisher wrote:
> [...]

> There don't seem to be any submissions for NPCComp, which is fine ...
>

FWIW, let me just say that NPCComp did not go unnoticed.

I had already started an entry for AbilityComp, but after coding the
bare beginnings of a few rooms and people, I realized that the envisaged
special ability sounded cooler on paper than it would play out in the game.

I also started one for NPCComp, trying to use Nate Cull's I7 AI
extensions, but Real Life intervened and I didn't have the time (also,
I'm an Inform newbie and was learning while writing).

Maybe I'll finish these fragments some other time (watch out for the
title "Empathy at the Embassy" - no promises, though).

I still think the Minicomps are a very good idea, but maybe the rather
low turnout is empirical evidence that the pool of IF authors is too
small (at the moment) to produce a significantly bigger number of games
per year. But I hope that's not the case.

Another possible explanation might be that three months is a bit too
long: this time period just about crosses the boundary into "real
seriousness". Authors might feel compelled to produce long, very
polished works, and to make a significant psychological commitment to
their ideas.
I realize that these are actually _positive_ features, because we
certainly don't want under-implemented buggy entries. But in the end,
maybe people are scared off because they feel they have to write
something on the scale of Spring Thing or the IFComp. Or they start with
enthusiasm, but lose steam after two months. I think George Oliver said
something along the lines of this when we voted on David's proposal for
the minicomps (but he probably expressed it better than I do here). If
the duration was shorter, maybe we'd have three games per Comp, possibly
two of them bad - still better than none. (Of course, I'm just wildly
guessing here.)

Regards,
Michael

David Fisher

unread,
Jun 19, 2009, 10:44:49 AM6/19/09
to
"Michael Neal Tenuis" <michael.n...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h1g12o$k61$1...@aioe.org...

>
> FWIW, let me just say that NPCComp did not go unnoticed.

That's good to hear!

> I also started one for NPCComp, trying to use Nate Cull's I7 AI
> extensions, but Real Life intervened and I didn't have the time (also, I'm
> an Inform newbie and was learning while writing).
>
> Maybe I'll finish these fragments some other time (watch out for the title
> "Empathy at the Embassy" - no promises, though).

No problem; glad you were inspired to try something.

It's (almost) the same thing to me whether someone enters one
of these competitions or starts writing something and ends up
entering it somewhere else (or just releases it outside any
competition). This is really just an organised thingy for people
to take advantage of it they want to, and get some feedback
on their creations (from people I think are helpful reviewers).

So there's no obligation for anyone to enter, it's just an opportunity.

It's possible that most people's focus is on the annual IF comp
(or not on competitions at all -- S. John Ross, I'm looking at
you!), which is not a problem.

> Another possible explanation might be that three months is a bit too long:
> this time period just about crosses the boundary into "real seriousness".
> Authors might feel compelled to produce long, very polished works, and to
> make a significant psychological commitment
> to their ideas.

I have no idea -- anyone else?

David Fisher


Michael Neal Tenuis

unread,
Jun 21, 2009, 11:01:42 PM6/21/09
to
David Fisher wrote:
> [...]
> This is really just an organised thingy for people to [...] get some feedback

> on their creations (from people I think are helpful reviewers).

The prospect of those reviews is definitely a great motivating factor.
What I also like about the minicomps (probably stating the obvious here)
is that they provide a certain focus and external impulse to one's
creativity. Without that, I'm in danger of just sitting around
indecisively in front of the blank I7 IDE, pondering various game ideas.
The minicomps' aims and deadlines are obviously helpful there.

Regards,
Michael

S. John Ross

unread,
Jun 22, 2009, 4:55:09 AM6/22/09
to

> It's possible that most people's focus is on the annual IF comp
> (or not on competitions at all -- S. John Ross, I'm looking at
> you!), which is not a problem.

Guilty as charged; I'm not a comp guy. :(

But I'm a comp-game _fan,_ so that has to count for something :) (and
I did a review of one of the EnvComp games! I'm contributing! A
little ...)

David Fisher

unread,
Jun 22, 2009, 8:46:17 AM6/22/09
to
"S. John Ross" <sj...@io.com> wrote in message
news:7e59a790-8a67-45dd...@y33g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

>
>> It's possible that most people's focus is on the annual IF comp
>> (or not on competitions at all -- S. John Ross, I'm looking at
>> you!), which is not a problem.
>
> Guilty as charged; I'm not a comp guy. :(
>
> But I'm a comp-game _fan,_ so that has to count for something :)

Lots and lots ...

> (and I did a review of one of the EnvComp games! I'm contributing!
> A little ...)

Er -- guilt seems highly out of place here ...

Thanks for the review! I can't find it anywhere, though. Is it
hidden somewhere secret, or am I missing something obvious?

David Fisher


Eriorg

unread,
Jun 22, 2009, 8:55:17 AM6/22/09
to
On 22 juin, 14:46, "David Fisher" <davidfis...@australiaonline.net.au>
wrote:

> "S. John Ross" <sj...@io.com> wrote in messagenews:7e59a790-8a67-45dd...@y33g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > (and I did a review of one of the EnvComp games! I'm contributing!
> > A little ...)
>
> Er -- guilt seems highly out of place here ...
>
> Thanks for the review! I can't find it anywhere, though. Is it
> hidden somewhere secret, or am I missing something obvious?
>

It's at http://ifdb.tads.org/viewgame?id=p8jq87dmq2xo1nze&review=7607
.

S. John Ross

unread,
Jun 22, 2009, 8:56:25 AM6/22/09
to

> Thanks for the review! I can't find it anywhere, though. Is it
> hidden somewhere secret, or am I missing something obvious?

It's on IFDB. I think this URL should do the trick:

http://ifdb.tads.org/viewgame?id=p8jq87dmq2xo1nze&review=7607

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages