Of course, that is the other side of the story. I like that explanation very much - good art will not help you if you don’t know how to code 
And I wasn’t talking AGAINST j4k contest, I just wanted to know if there is “bigger” contest (not in value but in size) out there.
It’s possible to make a good game in 4k, but it takes a lot of trickery.
In 16k with an opengl binding, it gets easier, but starts to take a lot of time.
Beyond that, I could just make a proper game instead. (And I am!)
I just wanted to know if there is “bigger” contest
Sure. There are like a handfull compos each year. Eg this one:
http://idevgames.com/index.php/contest/omg_info/omg_cup_2005
If you ever intend to participate in one of the bigger ones be sure to read the rules very carefully. Some are kinda dodgy… well, when in doubt you can just discuss it here 
[quote]I would like to do a bigger game with better graphics (my graphics really suck), but am so pushed for time these days.
[/quote]
This is another reason I like the 4k; the expectation for gfx is very low so anything you can do is exceptional. You must be an artist or know one to develope a game with no size restrictions that will impress anyone.
[quote=“Markus_Persson,post:16,topic:25185”]
who did when last years contest?
Huh? I thought that tetris thing won?
If that’s the official results, then I’m more than happy. =D
Kev did a really nice job with T4XI.
[quote]Huh? I thought that tetris thing won?
[/quote]
That’s probably because you were looking at the name-sorted “Totals” list rather than the score-sorted “Winners” list. 4K-Tris comes first in name-sorted order.
Also, there were a few hiccups in scoring last year, with the early scores reflecting oddities like a double count for sound and music, when it should have gotten one or the other. It was eventually sorted out.
Still, we’ll need to rethink scoring this year to ensure that it’s a little less random. Each judge went into the scoring with a different idea of how it should work (regardless of how we all tried to get it to work), making the scores run all over the board. We’ll need to discuss how we can improve things. T4xi was still the unquestionable winner, however.
Agreed. There were ALOT of problems last year; the rules and judging criteria were undecided until after the contest was over.
After reviewing last years rules I’d like to see:
-
jdk 1.5 required, pack200 is just too good
-
all entries must be self executing jars; pak200 makes this much less painful
-
No matter what, somebody set the rules in stone soon so there’s not as much confusion
Number 3 is hard because no one actually owns this thing, unless it’s jbanes?
I agree on 1.5 just because it’s the mainstream version at the moment. However, I believe your next requirement defeats the availability of pack200.
[quote=“nonnus29,post:29,topic:25185”]
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Pack200 is only for Webstart, isn’t it? Last time I did tests, I found that Pack200 JAR files were no longer directly executable. Instead, the file had to be unpacked prior to execution. Thus Pack200ed files really can’t count as being under the 4k limit.
[quote=“nonnus29,post:29,topic:25185”]
I’m just a messanger. The real “owner” of the contest has been Mlk. Now the rules were decided by committee last time, but Mlk’s decisions were deferred to as the final say.
What about having the games this time around be applets?
That takes care of any and all launching issues, and it could add some extra sexiness to the competition.
Additionally, it provides a nice sandbox so we can trust that the games don’t mess stuff up.
I wasn’t aware that this was an issue? Have we had someone try to trick others by using 4K JARs?
First of all, applets are neither dead nor slow, and are a hell of a lot sexier than having to download a .jar.
Requiring an executable jar file is silly as you need to put a lot of extra non-code stuff in the jar just because the judges happen to be lazy.
I think woogley may have some set rules or something for this years rendition…
Kev
PS. It seems I might be unable to play this year 
Lack of net access might be an issue.
Yes, they’re dead. If I could personally drive the last stake in them, I would. Applets today aren’t slow, but they do have poor startup times and they are associated with the “slowness” of old-fashioned Java. Too many people still think that Java == Applets when nothing could be farther from the truth.
Tell me, are you targetting applets for Wurm Online?
Forget the judges. Any players who want to download the game should be able to simply double-click and run it. Simplifying it for the judges is a nice side effect. Webstart is an even better technology, but it offers several complications when trying to cram the code into 4K…
Out of curiosity, I ported Dungeon4k to an applet. Just right of the bat, it shrunk 5% to 3893 bytes, without me doing any optimisation.
Loading the page in firefox (totally clean and restarted, I’ve killed all firefox processes) takes about three seconds before the applet shows up.
http://www.mojang.com/j4k/dungeon4ka/
Of course we’re not designing wurm to run in an applet. That’s just a silly question.
But that doesn’t mean that people don’t like small (not wurm) games that they can play at work (not wurm) in their browsers. You know, like all those million flash games that people love (and pay for) despite their horrible performance compared to java.
[edit:]
Oops, I had a small bug with static variables (the game didn’t survive a refresh). It’s up to 3910 bytes now.
I’d have to see your comparitive code to actually make a judgement on what’s going on. However, my guess is it’s the fact that you removed the full screen code (a feature that is not required by an executable JAR but many of us like to include). Not quite apples to apples, especially when most people saw the Webstart version in an applet-sized window.
You mentioned the key word: “Flash”. Java in the webbrowser was a nice idea, back in the day. I did a couple of Applet games myself. Unfortuantely, it lost in the market. IMHO, trying to regain the marketshare is a lost cause and only serves to reinforce the logic, “Java == Applets, Last I checked Applets == Slow, thus Java == Slow.”
In any case, I’d like to hear what others think on the issue rather than arguing it out. Personally, I would not enter the contest if Applets were a requirement.
And I’m not going to enter if an executable jar file is required.
So then, shall we go for middle ground and say that it must be an executable JAR, or an Applet? For judging (and archiving) purposes, I’d say that adding a simple requirement to provide a downloadable version of the applet and webpage is a reasonable requirement.
Is that an acceptable compromise? (Assuming that Mlk, or whoever is taking over the competition this year is okay with it.)
P.S. I still think Applets should be taken out back and shot. ;D
We should have the choice to choose betwen applets and apps. If anyone chooses a form that takes more or less space, or lookds better, or plays better, than that is their problem.