As you know, kingaschi (Christoph) wants to make his own Java games website with less restrictive rules whereas he accepted the rules I suggested some months ago. I would have preferred him to tell me earlier than he disagreed with me so that I wouldn’t have wasted my time in such a project as he wants to rewrite all the source code and change the rules. What do you want for the future of the Java Game Tome? A fork? I don’t have enough time to work alone on such a project and I don’t want him to write another website with almost the same objectives as the Tome.
Well nothing wrong of him making his own website if he wants too.
More the merrier.
But what rules are we talking about here? I find it stupid if Tome just going to split over some basic rules?
I think that Java is by definition multiplatform and users expects it’s multiplatformness. So I would stick with that requirement. And JGT now looks good with the new design
BTW, what about case when the game supports different platforms by native installers? It is supported as is, or will having small webstart-based installer launcher suffice? This launcher would just download the platform dependant installer (exe, dmg, etc.) and run it to finish installation without webstart interaction.
[quote]The Java™ Game Tome is neutral. We are not associated to any trade union or political party. We respect the freedom of expression. Therefore, an addition of a new game can be refused only for technical reasons, for example:
the game doesn’t work under one of the main families of operating systems (Macintosh, Linux, Windows)
the game is not stable enough
the game is too much complicated to install (it requires the users to install any library manually)
Games that aren’t mature enough may be put into the incubator until they are more “playable”.
[/quote]
doesn’t work under …
For me, i don’t see the point to do something in java if it not crossplaform. But there can be some technical restriction…
We should encourage to make things crossplaform without being too strict. So for me, if it can’t be play anywhere, it is not mature game (=> incubator)
Not stable enough (so not mature => incubator)
too mush complicated to install. Well, games should be the easiest possible to use (Webstart, applet are pretty easy but a setup file to download is not that more difficult)
But somes, for technical reason, may need some extrat library… (I begin to see how to use a WiiMote for game, and i wonder how to deal with the bluetooth library and webstart)
Even with those rules, i don’t see much games that will be refused (if it doesn’t go in the main section, it goes in the incubator to encourage autor)
To me, saying “it has to run everywhere, or we won’t include your game” is a non-neutral thing to say. It aggressively promotes cross platform gaming.
There’s nothing wrong with that, of course, but claiming to be neutral while enforcing something like that seems very contradictory to me.
Google doesn’t require all web pages it indexes to render properly across all browsers. If it did, it wouldn’t have much content.
As for this conflict, it’s sad to see you part, but I wish you both good luck with both your respective sites, and I hope to see my future games on both. =)
I have to agree. If the aim of the Tome is to promote cross-platform java games then that’s a reasonable restriction to apply, but if you choose to stick with it then you shouldn’t be surprised if someone wants to set up a similar website with the more broader goal of promoting java games in general (be they cross platform or not).
The current website is slightly misleading, as it implies it’s a general collection of java games, not a collection of cross platform java games. I guess you’d have to resolve that ambiguity one way or the other.
I agree with you about the fact that users expects Java’s “multiplatformness”.
I prefer a single webstart link as it is simple for children that don’t even know what an operating system is but we can authorize native installers if they work reliably.
Only a very few games have been refused. As far as I know, only one game won’t be added because the author refuses to drive it compatible with Linux and Mac.
Maybe it can be considered as a contradiction but I disagree with you about your example because I don’t demand that Java games on JGT work on all the operating systems but at least under Linux, Mac and Windows. If it doesn’t work under Unix, it is not a big problem, it is just less cross-platform.
I don’t want to go on working on a website alone. If Christoph creates his own website, I won’t go on working on the JGT. We don’t need 2 websites that do the same thing with only a small difference of rule and a better graphical user interface for him. We don’t need to spend twice more time to develop 2 websites. I’m really sad, it is really unfair. Our work is wasted. I don’t understand why nobody (except me) criticizes Christoph’s decision. He accepted the rules when we began and now, he changes his mind and really ruins OUR common effort without asking you your opinion, it is my initiative.
I don’t see what you mean. Now, I’m preparing to leave the project if Christoph doesn’t agree with the rules and goes on planning to create his own website.
Make 1 extra column in your database table that holds a boolean indicating whether or not the game obeys these rules. Let the user decide which games gets filtered, if any.
And if the style is really that important, write 2 darn stylesheets.
@gouessej
I really appreciate your work and your energy on promoting an idea. Even if we are not always the same opinion :), java gaming needs some “evangelism” like JGT and people with your enthusiasm as these days java gaming seems a bit stale (except maybe JME). And while I agree, that one should expect a partner to stick to his claims, Christoph also has the right to change his opinion on something - it’s a hobby and not contract work.
Please find a compromise, since I also agree not to waste all the work so far. Perhaps you can try to redesign the site in a way, that promotes multiplatform instead of enforcing it. You could e.g make an “JGT Official Selection” category, that only contains the multiplatform compatible games. You could promote this category on the main page and “hide” the rest in a “Full List” category a button click away. Just find a way to work together.
I don’t feel like arguing about it. I decided to be better on my own; that way I can do whatever I want with the site. Don’t take that personal. Also, there is no reason that there can only be one game site? Right now there is none for Java, which is a shame! We have different ideas on how things are to be implemented, so who knows, maybe your idea is better in the end?
As far as the graphics go, feel free to use whatever I created so far for your own site. I believe that’s fair? If you want the domain name, I’ll transfer it to you.
I have spent months on the Java Game Tome and if you disagreed with the rules, you should have said it earlier. It is not a problem of implementation, I only said that I had a very little time currently to apply the template, you’re not patient, we all have some periods where we are less available, we have to explain it to the other members at the team to allow a better organization of the tasks.
Don’t lie, the true problem is that you only say now that we have different ideas on which games should be in the Tome. I don’t want 2 separate websites to be created, it is a waste of energy and time. If you go on wishing to create your own website, keep the domain name, the current website, do whatever you want with it, I will set you as root and create a “normal” user for me and I will leave the project definitively in some days without creating a second Java Game Tome. I will have to do a very important announce on the forum about “General Business Discussions”, life goes on and my other projects too. If you want to punish Linux and Mac users by accepting games working only under Windows or if you want to accept games (directly without using the incubator) that a seven-year-old child would be unable to install, it is your choice, not mine.
Do you have any concrete ideas? Would be nice to write them down, so we can see them and discuss them. Maybe they are not much different? Or maybe community here will find some way to satisfy both views by choosing a third way?
I agree with you. I wanted to use the template step by step to allow the website to keep fully functional. I’m the author of the rules of JGT but demonpants and kingaschi agreed with them even though demonpants said it was a bit too strict. The rules I wrote give a meaning to my investment in the Java Game Tome. If the rules are changed so that it has nothing common with the previous rules, my investment will have no meaning. I have made an effort not to write stricter rules and by creating the incubator. If the rules are changed, I will leave the project.
Hi, I have another view on this conflict. I’m deferring voting until I gather more information about the problem. Now I’m leaning toward the option of coexistance of both projects. It’s proven fact that competition drives innovations. What about taking it as a challenge to make a better site with better goals? I know it’s partly against cooperation… but there are somewhat always at least two views on things that are incompatible with each other. You can’t cooperate with people on the other side, but you can cooperate with people on your side.
Or just another view, this time from your own point of view. Would you want someone to ruin your work and goals because he does something similar but without major elements of your vision? Many people like the idea, even if they won’t tell you (unfortunatelly you don’t get feedback from majority of people, so it might not be that visible, whereas negative comments are more visible…).
It would be a shame if this interesting website would be abandoned already after such a short life. I guess I’m not really concerned about the holy multiplatform-war, IMO the players won’t really mind too much if a game is Windows only if this is properly communicated on a game’s page. Since so many of these games are made either by hobbyists, students or small studios I guess it’s not unreasonable if someone doesn’t feel safe on creating non-Windows versions without testing them properly.
Still, this point is completely trivial compared to the existence of the site, so I hope that you can find some sort of agreement. If not, I hope that both of you will manage to create nice websites with lots of games and a large number of visitors.
As people say, it should be up to the user.
Why not simply have a site that lists as many games as possible, in way that is as good as possible?
It would be easy to implement in a search feature, to return games that work on selected platforms.
I was also thinking about it, not just search it, but automatically detect which OS visitor have and select games available for that platform. But this have one problem when the player on Windows sends link to the game to his friend and he can’t play it because he has Mac or Linux. Even worse if the game is a multiplayer one.
I agree. I don’t think the end user really expects cross-platform games, that’s just something we like to promote. But if I’m just an end user and I run platform X, would it matter if a game doesn’t run on platform Y? As long as the website clearly indicates what platforms a game runs on, it should be fine. It only matters when a player on platform X wants to tell his/her friends on unsupported platform Y about the game… but that’s a problem of the game, not of the game website.
Like it has been said earlier, you could introduce a category with cross-platform games or perhaps a special shiny icon on the game description page to encourage authors to create a cross-platform game.
