|
1 registered members (henrybane),
732
guests, and 2
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
#180315
01/28/08 11:47
01/28/08 11:47
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,904
HeelX
OP
Senior Expert
|
OP
Senior Expert
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,904
|
Hello, I want to collect some information here on how a developer can remove all connections between a game/application and acknex/A7/gamestudio/conitec. The point is: when showing games to others, presenting prototypes to potential publishers or showcasing a game demo, Gamestudio developers have to fight prejudices which are well known. Maybe you don't understand / don't like that idea, but what I want is a simple thing: I want to cloak the engine game distribution meaning all visible stuff that connects my game with the Gamestudio brand. People tend to raise their eyebrows when I say "its made with Gamestudio" - I'm sorry. So here is my ultimate list of things I want to do. Some things have already some solutions, but for the unsolved things I want to hear your opinion, even if you have to swallow the pill about this topic. - PROBLEM: the exe icon. I want my own exe icon.
STATUS: solved
METHOD: use reshacker to change icon of the original acknex exe and compile the lite-c code -or- compile your own game exe with the SDK
- PROBLEM: Taskbar icon
STATUS: partly solved
METHOD: I use the following code from within my application to load another icon:
Code:
#include <windows.h>
#define IMAGE_ICON 1
#define ICON_SMALL 0
#define ICON_BIG 1
#define LR_SHARED 0x8000
#define LR_LOADFROMFILE 0x0010
#define LR_VGACOLOR 0x0080
#define WM_SETICON 0x0080
#define ICON_FILE 10000
long hIcon = LoadImage(0,"media\\picto.ico", IMAGE_ICON, 0, 0, LR_SHARED | LR_LOADFROMFILE | LR_VGACOLOR); // icon
SendMessage(hWnd, WM_SETICON, ICON_BIG, hIcon); // refresh window
SetWindowPos(hWnd, NULL, 0, 0, 0, 0, SWP_DRAWFRAME | SWP_NOZORDER | SWP_NOMOVE | SWP_NOSIZE); // pose window
But the icon is changed -after- the game has started - during the whole startup process you see that blue Lite-C logo which is not so good. Luckily, the Title attribute from the starter WDF takes account and is displayed in the taskbar. The problem is the icon saved in the acknex.dll. Though, I am not able to res-hack the acknex.dll for changing the icon ... even if I compile the EXE with the -nc flag, the game aborts when I open it with a res-hacked "acknex.dll". - Compile my own EXE with Visual Studio is no option, though, here are my suggestions:
SUGGESTION: 1) when the engine starts and detects a "game.ico" file, this icon is loaded instead of the Lite-C icon into the taskbar -or- 2) you add a new ICON command to the STARTER-compiler which binds an icon file which will be loaded into the taskbar and engine window icon.
- PROBLEM: the filename of the acknex.dll. This is a heavy indicator that I use Gamestudio.
STATUS: unsolved
SUGGESTION: Can't you add a predefined string or something that indicates the name of the dll so that after I compiled the exe, the Lite-C app is loading this specific dll as engine DLL? I just want to name it "engine.dll" or something like that.
- PROBLEM: the file "ACKNEX.WDF". I want to use an own starter image which is fine with the starter-WDF, but why does it have to be named with "ACNEX.WDF"? Why can't I name it "starter.wdf" or so? It is only recognized when its named "acknex.wdf"
STATUS: unsolved
SUGGESTION: search the game directory and use the first *.wdf file that crosses your way.
That's it. Please don't tell me "if you don't want to have the Gamestudio brand in the files, write your own engine or don't use Gamestudio, etc". It's about the wrong bias most people have (and this is a fact!) when talking about the game and the engine. I can lie and I cannot tell them, but I don't want them to have a wrong oppinion, just because I use Gamestudio. I hope you have some delightful answers on these things and how to solve them. Maybe you can also implement one or two of the suggested features. I posted this in ask conitec because its more a discussion between us as your customers/developers and you as provider of the engine and the brand. Thanks in advance, Christian
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: HeelX]
#180316
01/28/08 15:13
01/28/08 15:13
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,659
San Francisco
JetpackMonkey
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,659
San Francisco
|
Dear Conitec:
Like HeelX, this message is for Conitec, and not really written for the 3DGS community at large. I concur with HeelX.
To me, it is disconcerting that if you buy Pro, while you do not have to dislay a Gamestudio splash screen at the beginning, there are so many other clues which reveal that it is gamestudio, that it is not really worth it. Certainly in the Pro version, at least, you should able to do everything HeelX describes here. You do this, and I'll upgrade from Commercial to Pro today. As I am sure many people will. That's nearly 600 Euro I will pay today, in the Conitec till. If money is less important than the bad reputation of gamestudio, it doesn't sound like a good business decision on Conitec's behalf. Don't you want another 600 Euro?
(deleted: 3 lengthy personal accounts where clients have expressed concern and reluctance to invest money on projects when they learn it is made with 3DGS)
Gamestudio has recently been associated as the technology behind what people are calling "one of the "worst games of all time". I do not want to be linked to that by proxy, sorry. Ran Man, while I think your game is awesome, though possibly for some of the wrong reasons, I do not want my game to declare "Made with the technology that brought you Zoo Racing!"
If someone asks me which engine I am using, I won't lie about it. But I don't want the first thing someone sees when they run my game is the gamestudio branding. Especially if that someone is a publisher considering buying my game. I don't want them to see Gamestudio branding anywhere in my game.
These days, I am aware of more and more people who stake considerable amounts of money (savings, loans) in their independent game, at great personal financial risk. The stakes are high. I personally have a lot at risk. I've considered switching to an inferior engine (Torque) simply because it garners better respect and does not have the bad association liability. As a business and marketing decision, not a design or technical decision. That's the way business works.
Again, I'll upgrade to Pro today if you do this, I mean it. Here, Conitec, I have 600 Euro with your name on it, burning a hole in my pocket. If even 10 people upgrade to Pro for this reason, that's 6000 Euro in the bank. 100 upgrades, that's 60,000 EUR. Makes business sense to me.
Please, forum users, do not reply with the typical "get over it" message. It isn't the answer I am seeking. It's fine for hobbyist developers, but for those with a lot of money at risk in professional or semi-professional development, it is not going to change any minds.
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: JetpackMonkey]
#180317
01/28/08 15:41
01/28/08 15:41
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,012
germany, dresden
ulf
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,012
germany, dresden
|
I would agree too, at least for pro users should be a way to hide everything that lets a possible contracting party/publisher see in the first place, with what a game is made.
Unfortunately there is a lot of disregard concerning gamemaker packages like gamestudio, darkbasic, 3drad, torque and so on in the whole scene.
So as a game developer you are in a much better position to negotiate, if a possbile partner just see's your game at first hand, without having in mind 'it's clicked together' with the same engine that he get's 10 bad entries to review a year...
Last edited by ulf; 01/28/08 15:46.
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: HeelX]
#180318
01/28/08 19:54
01/28/08 19:54
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,999
Switzerland Zürich
JeyKey II
Serious User
|
Serious User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,999
Switzerland Zürich
|
Would you sell your program to me and give me the right to rename it in a way that nobody has the possibility to track it to the originator ????
[Jeder ist sich selbst am Nächsten]
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: JeyKey II]
#180321
01/28/08 20:31
01/28/08 20:31
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,713
Lübeck
Slin
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,713
Lübeck
|
Why not just sell the professional version with an other name and give it an extra website which shows how powerfull it is and how many posibilities it provides, but not "Games authoring never was easier". From there you could then link to the 3DGS main page and point out that there are also other editions available. But basicly I think you shouldn´t try to denie which engine you are using, but to make people getting a "better" impression of 3DGS through some really outstanding projects. If such projects aren´t possible, 3DGS is just what it seems to be to people without really knowing it (just probably not as easy as they think). This is what I thought when reading this topic 
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: JeyKey II]
#180322
01/28/08 20:35
01/28/08 20:35
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 9,859
FBL
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 9,859
|
Quote:
Meinst Du mich oder HeelX ?
generell, allgemein.
|
|
|
Re: removing all "acknex" labels and stuff
[Re: JetpackMonkey]
#180324
01/28/08 21:20
01/28/08 21:20
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
fastlane69
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,377
USofA
|
Ummmm Heel and Jetpack... Even if you remove every iota of 3DGS syntax from the game, won't it STILL be 3D Game Studio and recognizable as such?  Honestly, I don't think that will solve the problem because no matter what you do to the verbal semantics of the game, it IS still 3DGS and everyone will know it anyways! You can change "acknex.dll" to "doug.dll" and everyone will STILL know that doug.dll = 3DGS, right? And furthermore, if someone IS saavy eough to care about the game engine won't they... a) Ask. b) Ask again? ...and thus make this suggestion moot? I'm all behind the core of your idea: if I personally want to remove all references to the game engine I use, perhaps it is a good option to allow it. I don't think there is any tangible benefit to it, but perhaps there is and I'm not seeing it. As a player, the game engine is beyond irrelevant and hence won't affect my decision to buy or not... and publishers know this. The only customer base that does care about engines is the Hardcore crowd and I will argue that this is the WORST demographic for any 3DGS product to go after (for exactly the reasons we are talking about). A (good) producer will know this, will know (or you will tell them) the demographic your game will work under, and make a decision accordingly. So if you are trying to make "Wow" or "GTA" with 3DGS, then yeah, a publisher will raise their eyebrow at you attemptint a AAA game for a hardcore audience with a AA game engine. If on the other hand you make casual games, then a publisher will look at you more kindly for that is a better demographic for our engine. And I mean this in as nice a way as possible but if you are so ashamed of the engine you develop in, why not develop in others? If you answer is that it's not I that is ashamed but other (like publishers), then aren't you reinforcing that attitude by trying to hide the name? It's like saying "I know that my game was built with a crap engine; I just don't want YOU to know that it was made with a crap engine" and thus admitting to the publisher that it is a crap engine. It all just sounds counterintuitive to me. None of the 3 clients that Jetpack lost nor any business that you lost Heel would have been any different had you been able to remove the Acknex IMO. If I had to guess, they rejected not your game but your development company. They didn't think you could do it and given 3DGS's "vaporware" rate, had good backup. In fact, it's not the game engine that we have to change but the community. Of course, changing a file name is easier than changing a community but there you have it: as long as the community makes poor games, the engine will be viewed as a poor engine. Which is actually a benefit for anyone that makes a good game for then they can say "Look how much I did with so little" (when of course we know that it wasn't too little to begain with) Like I said in jetpacks thread: if a game is fun and it doesn't crash, the game engine is irrelevant. Hence we should see failures with investors and publishers as not failures of the game engine, but as personal failures for not making the game so fun that the game engine became irrelevant.
|
|
|
|
