clyde

What types of choices will the player be making? This sounds interesting.

I'm glad you are including in-project progress .gifs. I've never heard of the Godot engine, I look forward to seeing how it influences your resulting game.

If you don't use "Duskshade" then I might. If you use "Duskshade", then I probably will too.

Just go with Twine. If you end up wanting more than text, Twine supports images. If you end up wanting more interactivity after that then you can probably use the story and assets that you already made and put them in a game-engine that supports physics (or whatever). That would probably happen after the 2-weeks though. I guess what I'm trying to say is that if Twine supports everything you want to be able to do in the game then it's a great choice of engine.

It's looking good. You've already done the episode-title justice, and it's Day 1 ! Is there some sort of behavior-screen that you can screenshot, I haven't used Stencyl, but something might pop out about the ricochet if I see a depiction of the game's logic.

Foiled again. You'll get me next time Dinosaursssssss! Oh and Ren'Py is great, it's got an established community and a lot more resources, but it does require scripting/coding.

@Santo If The Mind-Tech Contigency doesn't require more interaction than clicking on text-choices, I would really consider building it in TyranoBuilder. Check out this tutorial-page (very short) and see if it looks like something you would want to do. http://tyranobuilder.com/1-getting-started/ It's $15 on Steam and you can make a game without any scripting (it has a drag&drop system). I will warn you that it is new and a bit buggy. For instance, I ran into a problem where the... Ok so there are 3 types of image files, "backgrounds", "images" and "characters". You can put any image in any of them, but placing it in the "background" category for instance makes it go away when another background becomes active. Well, the "image" files broke on a web-build. I was able to fix it by turning them all into "characters". It wasn't a huge hassle, and that's the only problem I've had but still. If you decide to do that I can answer game-engine questions for you. I'm frequently on the forums. I really think you could do it. Look at that tutorial and if you have any questions, ask me here or PM me.

I'm interested in playing your first game.

Blender video-tutorials are awful in my experience. If you are a video-tutorial person, look for tutorials where they have the key-logger thing on the screen because they will inevitably use a short-cut without telling you how to get there. The tutorial that I found most helpful was one where dude builds a car and paints in in less than an hour. It was helpful to me to see the entire process before seeing things like adjusting how the screen is arranged and having all the "why"s explained. I'll find that tutorial. I know some people don't use video-tutorials though. Here it is:

Psyched. I've changed font-color and background-color in Twine. This is the guide I used: http://twinery.org/forum/index.php?topic=1528.0

I got as far as making the tiny grappling-hook, but I couldn't figure out how to use it. I'm not very good at adventure games. I when I looked in the trash can after asking to three times, I was surprised because I wouldn't usually click on something multiple times. Like I said, I'm not very good at adventure games.

Even though I initially didn't have anything to say about this, I kept thinking about it and my response is related to one of the things I feel is lost from the constraints of using only images and sounds that you have licensed permission for.Many of the aesthetics I enjoy involve pastiche. I enjoy collages and interesting uses of sound samples, especially when they seem to express pools of styles or eras that have been pulled from. I don't always think they look good, in fact I think a lot of that stuff looks crappy, but I like crappy. It's similar to how VHS corruption has a desirable aesthetic. HD movies look way better, but the distribution of media on various devices offers flavors that I appreciate. Here is a game I made last December that seems relevant. http://www.glorioustrainwrecks.com/node/9011 Yes, it looks crappy, but I value that crappiness. It reminds me of cutting up Encyclopedias and putting the characters in my sketchbooks. It reminds me of the youth-pamphlets that I helped with at the church I went to. It also reminds me of reading the Book of the Subgenius in highschool. There exist aesthetics that require reappropriated images.

This is the best royalty-free asset-source I've seen. I don't get the impression that that even desire attribution. https://openclipart.org/may-clipart-be-used-comparison Thanks for sharing.

Here is one that can be added to. https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/topic/9232-where-to-find-game-assets-audiotexturesmodelsetc/

I'm interested in being in a team with folks who feel that they have little time and little skill to offer. I'm a big fan of low expectations. Feel free to mention interest in letting me join here or private message me if that's more comfortable.

I haven't played the game, but I find the following kinda interesting. I first heard about it on the Rebel FM podcast and didn't think it sounded very interesting. Then I remember hearing that the second game came out very soon after the first and that it was doing well sales-wise. None of that is especially interesting to me. Then I saw this pop up on Gamejolt's blog. It's a explanation of how they have decided to create a mandatory category that will be displayed on the front page of Gamejolt for all the Five Nights at Freddy's fangames. Apparently there are over 2000 of them (after further investigation, most of them don't have anything playable yet) and they were filling the hopper of new game-pages. So I got curious and tried to download and play some of these fangames. Thus far, this one seems the most of kinda what I guess Five Nights at Freddy's is kind of like? It's fun for me to corroborate inclusions in the fangames to piece together what Five NIghts at Freddy's is actually like. There is often a button for a door, a button for a light, a map with cameras that you can click to look in rooms and it always ends with some anthropomorphic animal screaming in your face. Then sometimes you will find a game like this one where someone has taken a shine to a particular character and just wants more. Eventually I got exhausted from searching through the many pages on Gamejolt where the game is announced and a screenshot is provided, but nothing is playable [edit: I just noticed that they are now default organized by "best" which shows the playable ones first, great move Gamejolt team!]. So I checked Youtube to see if anyone had played some of the fangames. There are over one million views of this fellow rating his top ten Five NIghts at Freddy's fangames. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L4y9ADsJ8Q What is going on? This person doesn't just make videos of his favorite Five Nights at Freddy's fangames, but also the top-ten pieces of fanart for the game, top-ten animatron... here I'll just screenshot his videos page to give you an idea. I am old maybe? It doesn't matter. This is strange and interesting to me.

Did y'all see this article by Patrick Klepek about the copyright holder of the troll-meme? http://kotaku.com/the-maker-of-the-trollface-meme-is-counting-his-money-1696228810

This is correct. I want to just go onto youtube, capture gifs, put them in my game. Take sound samples in similar ways, not be bothered with trying to give credit to or get permission from everyone involved in the media or the technologies I use until someone explains to me why it is unethical in a way that I agree with. To be clear, I already have had people present arguments about ethics that already have a role in determining what I do. But in the most basic form of what I describe, I can not think of an ethical argument which has compelled me to think that this is something I don't want to do or a person whom I don't want to be. Since we have been assuming worse-case scenarios and that has distracted us a bit from useful discussion, let's consider banal ones instead. https://s3.amazonaws.com/tyrano/2015-4-4-Duchess/index.html I made this game in about 4-5 hours. I captured the dog gif from a Youtube video that was a compilation of other people's funny dog videos. I didn't attempt to ask for permissions from Youtube, the compiled-video uploader, the original video uploader, the owner of the dog, gif-cam, Gimp or TyranoBuilder. And it is important to consider not only the media, but the tools too; I don't see why some should get credit while others would not. The photo of the woman was cropped from a photo I found on Google search. I didn't attempt to contact the woman, the publisher of the photo, the photographer, or the other tools I'v already mentioned that I used. The background photo is of my dad. I didn't ask him for permission or even tell him that he is in a game (but I got compliments about him so now I will). I didn't credit or attempt to credit any of the fabric-designers in any of the photos nor the people that run the textile-machines. I expect that some of y'all may think that I'm being absurd and hyperbolic by suggesting that textile designers might should be credited, but if it is absurd, then I want to hear why it is significantly different than the other people involved getting their due credit. I am not defaulting towards an intentional obscuring of the labor or existences for which I am grateful, I'm defaulting towards convenience. I would go on Shutterstock and use a bunch of their stuff without removing water-marks if I didn't think I wouldn't get sued or take-down notices. I wouldn't remove it because it would be convenient not to (unless I had some sort of need to remove it I suppose, it depends on the game). I wouldn't use nude photos of Katniss that were hacked out of her phone regardless of convenience, because I have heard ethical arguments that have compelled me not to do that. I didn't know that reverse-image search existed. That's useful info. Yeah, my decision-making is a lot more complex than "Does this promote sexism and white-supremacy?" There are a lot of other factors. The same is true for my environmentalism. I like to have these perspectives available so that I can consider a much larger breadth of my responsibilities, but ultimately I'm going to make a decision that I think is best for myself and those near me (once I have included how my decision will impact the sustainability of the planet, the progress towards equality for all people in the best way that I know how, that I also have time for). I still drive a car and I'm going to accept an easy, high-paying job even if I know that having a woman of color in that position will move society in the direction I want to see it go. Retaining ownership of digital images is absurd to me. But all they are losing is absolute control over all instances of that image, that's something that they never had anyway. It's more likely that we both gain something if someone uses my image I get excited about it rather than pissed off. Why am I so different? I just don't understand. I'm definately going to put an instance of a well-know character in the Appropriation game and then include a piece of fan-art of that character. It's so weird to me that someone would think that the person who made the fan-art is harmed more than the commercial entity that paid for the character to be developed and disseminated. I hope to provoke thoughts on that exact comparison. Do you believe this for reasons that were not included in your post? It sounds like you are fine with using and altering commerically created things, but not ones created without commercial purpose. Is that the case? Edit: So I used reverse search and I think I found an email that would be at the plantation where the Sri Lankan woman works. I sent them this.

Yeah, that was definately a "do". Good post SBM, I still disagree with you a lot on the digital-media issue but it's interesting to see how you come to your personal ethics. One thing I want to clarify (not because you misunderstood me, but because it's worth explaining a little further). I do consider myself of the leaning towards the less ethical side, that is correct. So think of it like I'm aware of social limits, but I don't agree with a lot of them, so I feel compelled to push and poke. I'm this way in many areas. A really good example is that I think graffitti is generally progressive, but I think it's unethical to cover the numbers on train-cars, fronts of businesses, homes, cars, or windows. Is it a douchey thing to spray-paint a picture on the sidewalk? Yup, but I think its worth doing. Not to get too far off topic on that, but one weird thing I found out is.... Well I put some art up once, like these pretty figures in cloaks with crowns and such. The next week it had MS-13 written across it. I didn't think that was progressive or cool. But it was because the issue wasn't about expression, it was about threats and territory. Back to pushing towards the unethical. Something I seem to notice more than others is that consensus kills a lot of initiative and creativity. It does take energy to get consensus and when you don't, it's incredibly demoralizing. I see the need for it when I'm sharing communal space or resources, but with images? I feel that I am unnecessarily burdened and stifled by credit-concerns. Maybe I should start asking for permission, noting how much time and energy goes into that and come back to this thread to give a report. I might meet some artists that way. That doesn't settle the discussion though. Your types of image uses are something I want to address later.

I just reread the last line of my original post with this comment in mind. I wasn't being clear again. When I wrote that last line it was in as a sighing whine. As in "Ugh... I just want to steal images and sounds and words and do whatever I want with them and give no one credit (but I can't because everyone has all these concerns I don't agree with)." Obviously, your reading is far more likely. I'm not saying that I'm going to do it, or that I'm doing it. I'm expressing that I feel unecessarily limited by the idea that I have to default to the concerns of anyone else involved with an sound or image.I don't understand what you are saying here though "Such a strong claim understandably caused some strong reactions, which you then used as a proof there is a clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work, which is not true and nobody said that." I assume you meant "..., which you then used as a proof there is no clear consensus about all possible nuances of using non-original material in your work". I take Gaizokubanoa's claim that there is a good blanket-policy and Super Biased Man's claim that I know it's immoral (and I'm just trying to justify it) are both referencing a consensus that does not exist. Sorry that the way the thread started bothers you, but I still don't think we are in agreement about this stuff. I get the impression that I feel much more limited by the current paradigm in the ethics of appropriation than some of you in this thread. From my view, game-making is way behind, probably because of the crazy amount of commercial influence in comparison to other art forms. Sound-sampling and covers in music is astoundingly more liberal when you compare it to games. The same could be said of cinema, writing and image-creation. It's not like I'm just making up concerns. Look at that comment on Polygon, this a really common concern that is keeping people from creatively interacting with their world and I'm not satisfied by suggestions that I should just do what I want and be quiet about it (not sell it) or that there isn't a problem and that the cultural pressure to not appropriate images by default isn't doing any damage. I can't tell if y'all are aware of distinctions which make sense out of this stuff or if you just ignore massive double-standards of how some art is considered copyable while other art is unethical to copy. Or how some people are fine to photograph without their permission and appropriate the images of, while doing so to others is supposedly inarguably immoral.

The ethics of it is not clear to me. I think discussions such as this one can have an effect on what is considered scummy and what is considered rebellious. But I agree, my reputation is a valuable thing to me. That's why I want to consider many angles on this confusing and controversial issue. Re-reading my original post, I can see how you came to this conclusion. I wrote that portion poorly, it doesn't really express how I feel about it. What I mean to say is that I respect some fears and concerns that people have about having their photos taken and used while I do not respect other sincerely held fears and concerns. I'm trying to think of an example. Ugh. I should really stick to scenerios that I am actually deliberating over. The biggest problem isn't that I want to walk up to someone, snap their portrait and then use it as a dart-board or urinal-cake. The problem I often run into is that I take a photo of a building or crowd and then see an individual in the photo who I want to use after the fact. I think that taking screenshots of folks in Youtube videos and using those is a similar situation. Edit: I didn't want to make three posts in a row so I'm going to put the relevant link here: Check out what's going on with 8bitBonfire I didn't ask them for permission to use their experience in a controversial thread. I would consider my actions as both douchey and fine.

I appreciative of your willingness to share a difference of opinion on this issue. This goes for everyone else in this thread also. It's nice to have a place where I can find people who have very strong opinions that are different than my own strong opinions and who are willing to tell me about them. My interest in social justice and feminism greatly inform how I feel about these issues, but obviously I am coming to different conclusions in some cases. This is largely because I don't make all of my decisions and craft my personal ethics from social justice and feminism alone. My views are heavily influenced by my personal desires to create and exist as the things and purposes with which I identify. My views on property-rights have a huge impact on how I view these issues. Using a stranger's face is not as binary as you want to claim. This fellow routinely walks through Seoul with his camera, asking no one for permission to use their face. While I can see how being knowledgable about feminism and social-justice can help the artist determine where to point the camera, how long of a shot to take, and which doors to enter; I don't personally find this walking-video unethical. I find it both valuable, worthwhile, and simultaneously douchey. I certainly understand why one would want to assume the worst when discussing permissions and hypotheticals, but it's worthwhile to consider more breadth in the spectrum of ethics. I know that I appear trollish and inflammatory, but this is largely because I have a pretty good idea on where my limits lie on the ethical spectrum and I'm trying to ask questions that are a little bit before and a little bit after my personal threshold (because that is the interesting part for me). We can't consider these issues in absolutes because if we do, then we have to admit that we break these rules all the time, or start lying to ourselves about it. While I often go out of my way to listen to people's concerns and fears, I certainly don't stop doing something simply because someone doesn't like what I'm doing. I don't know what y'all's surrounding populace is like, but in my circumstances I'm witness to conflicting beliefs of what is permissable and what is not on a daily basis. Y'all act like there is consensus, but there is not. I don't think I'm entitled to use whatever I like, nor do I think that others are entitled to not have me use their assets as an absolute blanket-policy. Which party am I wronging if I use fan-art of a well-known IP in my game? While my personal ethics do often respect property-rights, they also attempt to destroy rent-seeking. I have a lot of other views on this matter when considering who owns ideas and thoughts and derivatives of them. I think the difference between our view-points might have a lot to do with how I am considering how intellectual property-rights constrain expression along with how it can encourage it. This is offensive, but that's ok. What I'm finding out from bringing this issue up is that people seem to assume that everyone knows what is right and wrong and that we are all in silent consensus, but this is not the case. While some people are saying "Oh just don't sell it and you are not doing anything wrong" others say " stick to stuff explicitly marked as free for non commercial use". This is a taboo subject that needs to be explored. Your suggestion that I shouldn't question or explore what is determining the ethics of these practices is really lazy and presumptive. I don really appreciate your input and hope you continue to contribute to the discussion.

I am a person who is okay with doing some douchey things. Edit: sometimes.

What an embarassment. I'll work on it.

I can't tell if you are responding to my post or to the playable I posted. I should mention that my personal feelings on these matters is influenced by the belief that people want more credit and power than is reasonable. For instance, it seems absurd to me that paparazzi take candid photos of celebrities and then enforce copyright claims on the resulting media. Someone saying that I shouldn't do something is not a convincing claim in itself for me.