I became busy IRL, and I didn't notice that mini-comp season is coming up again!
Is anyone interested in participating in some sort of minicomp event this year? What sort of event would you prefer? A traditional Minicomp? A CYOA Sneeze comp? An AIF Writing Salon? Something else?
During the last few years of mini-comps, it seems like there has been a struggle to find enough participants or organizers. Some people have also argued that the mini-comp itself distracts authors from writing full games. Would it make sense to press pause on the mini-comp this year?
If there is a minicomp, I think restricting it by theme or genre would be a bad idea.
ReplyDeleteI'm totally down for a minicomp! Maybe just a regular no frills old fashioned minicomp? 3 rooms, 1 interactive npc, etc
ReplyDeleteI'd like to see one this year, although I agree with SeattleMan it should just be an old fashioned no frills one.
ReplyDeleteI always enjoy the idea of a minicomp, even if the turnout isn't always great. I don't think they are *too* difficult to hold (anyone who held one, feel free to correct my ignorance if I am wrong) and at least give some people a bit of motivation to try and play around with things if nothing else.
ReplyDeleteKeeping it unrestricted is likely a good idea with so few folks likely to enter. Offering ideas of course wouldn't hurt for those of us with a bit of a brain freeze on creativity.
An idea I've had for a while is to offer up a dozen or so images for authors to use those as inspiration for their entry. Maybe trashy pulp novel covers? Lurid images and a lot of them have story ideas baked in.
ReplyDeleteFor example,
http://hyperallergic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/artschool-pulp-BIG2.jpg
http://retrovectors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/pulp_10.png
http://retrovectors.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/pulp_6.jpg
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/06/9a/2f/069a2fbb9bb240238d35ad3ebc67cabd.jpg
etc
Beyond that, keep the limitations minimal. Might be fun as a writing exercise, and like SpikeTheGoat said, give a little jump start to creativity.
It seems like there isn't a whole lot of enthusiasm for a minicomp event this year, but it isn't too much work to organize one, so maybe we can still run one anyway.
ReplyDeleteIs anyone particularly keen on organizing one this year?
If not, I can do it. I tend to be pretty lazy about rules though, so if I do the organizing, I'll just set a tentative deadline for the end of July, and throw out some broad guidelines setting limits like:
* 3 interactive NPCs and up to 2 locations
* 2 interactive NPCs and up to 4 locations
* 1 interactive NPC and up to 8 locations
* 0 interactive NPCs and up to 16 locations
and that's it.
I think those limits seem a little too wide, personally. I think 1 npc and three rooms is a good structure because it forces people to make a small game they can finish in the time limit. With some creativity a game can get really big with, say, 2 npcs and 4 rooms. People always complain about the limits no matter how generous they are.
DeleteYeah, it's a bit of a tough one, and not sure if there is a 'right' answer. I've nothing to base it on but gut feeling, but I'd imagine either 1/4 or 2/4 is the closest to my best guess.
DeleteThat is: must contain 1 - 4 rooms (doesn't need to have more than 1), 1 - 2 NPCS (at least one), and must have at least 1 sex scene.
That way someone more adventurous could have two sexual characters if they wanted, but it wouldn't be necessary. The only problem I see is the one you mentioned - they might strive for that and never finish the game.
The 1/4 makes it a bit more controlled and probably easy to finish. I've never felt room count really had much to do with difficulty in finished unless it gets really extreme but certainly shouldn't be required to go that big.
In the end, either are fine to me. The latter may sound a bit limiting, but if the author is really into the story/characters, there is absolutely nothing stopping them from continuing on and releasing a more fuller game using the minicomp simply as a base.
The reason you don't want to leave room for more enthusiastic creators to make a bigger game is that people will feel like they have to do that, if only to compete in the comp. Then they won't finish it and it pushes out the people just wanting to dip their toe in the water. With every little bit you widen the boundaries there's an exponential expansion in the amount of possible gameplay you can increase it by.
DeleteThe last few minicomps allowed up to three interactive NPCs and up to five rooms, so my proposed rules are already more restrictive than previous mini-comps. The previous mini-comps also had complicated restrictions on who could sex up whom and how often, but those rules were regularly circumvented with the non-interactive sexual cutscenes exception.
DeleteMy takeaway from last year's AIF Writing Salon was that minicomp rules exist mainly to provide a creative challenge to experienced authors. Beginner authors have no idea about what's hard and what's easy in making a game, so they have absolutely no ability to control the scope of their ideas. Once a beginner author becomes inspired by an idea they've had, that's the game they want to make; the rules won't influence them that much. The minicomp could be restricted to a single room and a single NPC, and a beginner author will somehow try to shoehorn in a multi-layer clothing system, a procedural appearance generator, a complicated romantic seduction conversation system, multiple sex positions, and some sort of AI system in there. Many other beginner authors will opt not to participate at all because the particular idea that they have in their head can't be adapted to fit within the rules.
Authors doing their best to shoehorn scope into the small limits is okay, because those limits still keep the brakes on. I just think that authors feel most comfortable getting involved when they know that their small idea has a chance to compete, so knowing it's not up against massive behemoths is encouraging.
DeleteI'd suggest it's also not that hard to understand the scope of a mini-comp game to some extent, so long as you've played a couple. You don't really need to be an experienced author to get that.
I admit that I never understood the competitive aspect of the minicomp. That explains why I organized the non-competitive minifest last year.
DeleteI don't know if it would be a problem or not. Authors still entered the minicomp during the Goblinboy era despite knowing they would likely be outclassed. And I think my proposed rules encourages authors to use fewer characters, and inspires authors to make a wider variety of games such as a "one night with..." sex orgy in one room, a romantic outing with a single partner, or a longer puzzle game with a non-interactive sex scene at the end as a reward.
I agree that my perspective is unusual. Let's wait another week to see if someone wants to step forward to run the minicomp. If no one does, then I can be the fallback option.
I wouldn't mind running the minicomp, unless someone with more experience wants to take the lead. OR if that precludes me from entering a game, which I have a great idea for.
DeleteThe last few Minicomps were organized by Purple Dragon, but no one has heard from Purple Dragon in three years, so we're basically starting from scratch in order to revive the tradition. Basically, there are no rules and no one knows what the best approach is to attract participants. The minicomp wasn't too healthy even when it was a tradition. If you have some ideas on how you think the minicomp should be run, by all means, propose them, and if there aren't any serious objections, feel free to assume the mantle and run it that way.
DeleteSeattleMan, have you decided whether you want to run the Minicomp this year? If you don't want to, I guess I will run it.
DeleteYeah sorry, I spoke to soon! I'm looking at my schedule & I won't have a ton of time for it, not enough to do as good of a job as I'd like anyways, so go for it!
DeleteHey Trout, forgive me in advance if I'm reading into this wrongly - one of the issues with text I suppose ;) But I can't tell if you are worried a bit about how you would run it (it won't go as well as someone else doing it) or if you want it to be done, but don't really want to do it yourself (doing it only because you feel like you have to since no one else will).
DeletePoint in this being, if you just want the minicomp ran but don't want to be involved in doing so, I can throw something together. I don't have any experience in it, but I'm willing to give it a go if that is the case.
But if you want to do it and just are worried about how it will turn out, then I urge you to go ahead and do it! After all, you brought it up when no one else did. I'm sure you would do a fine job and everyone would be pleased to have you run it, offering help if you needed it.
Or maybe you meant it some other way I completely missed ;) Anyhow, just let me know. You can reply here or just send me an email (spike_the_goat at the yahoo) if you wanted to talk.
I just don't want anyone to feel like I'm "claiming" the mini-comp and imposing my will on it. I can organize it and I am willing to do so, but there is no reason that someone else shouldn't do so instead. I am more than happy to have someone else organize it.
DeleteI'm interested, and I might have a short game done. Hopefully I won't be thwarted by a theme.
ReplyDeleteAnd I vote for "the game can be as small as you want, but there are no structural limitations" because sometimes having a work in progress that doesn't fit is a bummer.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't have to be a "competition" per-se. I think the best reward is reading reviews and feedback. So maybe it should be more of a "Review festival" which encourages constructive feedback.
We tried the no-competition minifest last year, and it seems like people prefer the idea of a minicomp. Maybe? It's hard to tell.
DeleteIt's also hard to get people to write reviews. And even good, constructive reviews often sound harsh to authors not used to criticism.
Having a contest involves more people in the process, and it generates a nice number at the end that people can use for self validation/flagellation/improvement afterwards. Once there's a contest, there has to be some rules about scope.
I suppose the final decision is up to whoever decides they want to be the organizer though.
Maybe a good reform would be to award a winner but not rank every entry after that? It always seems a bit outside of the spirit of the thing to designate someone as last place.
DeleteI agree with BBBen. I like the sense of competing, but being 'last' stinks. Maybe a first & second place?
DeleteA more modern alternative to reviews would be for a bunch of people to get together and live-stream themselves playing the games while discussing them. I don't know if any game streaming sites support adult games though. I would personally be uncomfortable with the lack of anonymity.
DeleteI agree with what seems to be the general consensus here, a competition is fun but maybe rank the first two or so.
DeleteThe trickier part is hammering out what the rules will be. Personally I like the traditional 3 rooms, 1 interactive npc, etc route but switching it up might not be a bad idea.
I wouldn't be opposed to a less broken down set of winners. A simple way might be determined by number of entrants. If there are 3 or less you just announce first place, if there are 4 you could give 1st & 2nd, and 5+ give the top 3.
DeleteI'd be down to 'compete' as well, I have several projects in the wings (I get distracted easily) and I would be glad to put something together.
ReplyDeleteI have a finished game that would suit a mini-comp pretty well, depending on whatever rules you guys decide upon. So I guess I'm in.
ReplyDelete