There are two threads that orbit around the same topic: the public impression of the 3DGS name. In both cases, the request was for ways to strike anything 3DGS-ish from the application so that a user would not know right up front which game engine is was made with. In both cases, the post's authors state that they have lost business when their client found out the game was made with 3DGS.

As I tackle non-traditional money sources to fund my game, my experiences in pure game development publishing is very limited. For my investors, the game engine is irrelevant... results are what matter. I personally feel this is the same way in the game publishing world but HeelX and Jetpack Monkey's stories make me think maybe not.

So here is what I'm asking:

IF you have presented a game to an investor, publisher, or client
AND it was rejected...
AND the reason given was that the game was based on 3DGS...
what is the reason they stated for dismissing your project or what did they say about 3DGS that made them want to pass up your game?

Just my $0.02 -- I can't imagine a publisher or investor rejecting one of our titles based on the 3D Gamestudio name. I don't think it's significant to them. However, when I mention the name to colleagues and (especially) people outside the industry, they will often assume it's a hobbyist engine.

Which it is!

But by the same token, you could argue that both hobbyists and professionals use acrylics too, and that it's mostly a matter of what you do with it that counts. :) I do respond to any questioning glances with the fact that we've published three successful games using 3DGS.

Maybe we'll try our next title in GameMaker.

I talked with several publishers during the last two years, a lot of them asked the question how my game was done.
From the reactions of most of them, i would say, they dont expect that anything sell-able can be done with it.

It's not that they said they wouldn't consider publishing a game made with 3dgs but you could clearly feel, they are sceptic about it. However, i think it will be the same with another name - because of conitecs marketing strategies, quote: 'make games without programming' and such... This will attract a lot of people thinking it is true. They click together 1 or 2 template games, and send it to friends, put it on websites or even send it to publishers. "Look i made a game, it plays like Half-Life!"

Now think you are a publisher or purchaser agent from one of the portal sites or a traditional publisher. They get huge ammounts of submissions each day. Bigfishgames has 1 new quality game everyday and i read somewhere those sites do get like 100 submissions a week. Most of the developers wait weeks after they submitted a game to them just to get an answer - and believe me most of those games are pretty good.
Don't you think once they reviewed 5 bad submissions where they could clearly tell it's made with 3dgs they are a bit biased against the 6th submission, even if it's a good game?

Or just from reading http://www.developia.de/developia/ wich is a german hobby developer site where you can show your works. Just from reading the comments you can feel that most think about 3dgs as a click together thingy, where nothing good comes out of it and everything coming out looks the same.
Just browse the showcase1 to see that this is probably halfway true.

So i think it's a good idea for pro users to cloak what its made with in the first place when approaching a publisher. Prejudices are part of human nature and with the ability to hide with what its made, you don't have to worry about your game beeing put in the same bin as those template shooters.

Don't get me wrong i think 3dgs is a wonderful engine and i would even show that my game is made with it, but when it comes to approaching possible partners, i can fully understand heelx and jetpackmonkey thoughts.

Still the reputation is not made frome the name. You can call your kid Ulf but it does not make a bad reputation in the beginning.

The reputation comes from projects, demos, games. There will be tons of bad games because of the customers almost being kids. To compensate this you simply need a very good project, a modern looking game or a really good demo, showcasing quality graphics, effects, shaders, sound and a little game-play.

Unity3d and Quest3d are only sexy because of their great demos.
C4-engine has very modern rendering features but only a bad looking demo. That is a reason why some people are suspicious. They say to themselves: When even the developer is not able to make something really good - then I cannot reach something better.

We dont have to care about this. It is not our glass of beer. But there are side-effects. If Conitec has better artworks, better demo and better reputation they will have more customers and more money to hire more skilled employees.
When they make their own modern demo then they will see the problems in workflow, problems that occur when you want to use models with more than one submesh / texture / uv plus shader. They will realize that a second uv-set is missing in mdl-format and they will better justify about scene-management.

I think that making a good demo or little game is just the solution for many problems.

I totally agree with you Frank, reputation comes from the demos/projects no matter what the name is.

However if the publishers are fed up with templateshooters and get a good game submission with acknex.dll in it, it's more likely, that the submission gets a warm place in the recycle bin next to the 10 other template games - without beeing noticed at all. Shure thats the publishers fault then, but prejudices is as i said part of human nature.

Making a good demo for the engine would be a very nice idea, this could raise the reputation and show what the engine can be used for! Just look at the old car demo wich is still at the downloadpage and looks so outdated.

Quote:

---

When they make their own modern demo then they will see the problems in workflow, problems that occur when you want to use models with more than one submesh / texture / uv plus shader. They will realize that a second uv-set is missing in mdl-format and they will better justify about scene-management.

---

Exactly, this couldn't be more true. And Conitec cannot make it out of WED blocks, it has to be from a complex scene in one of the leading programs(Max, Maya, Lightwave, ect.). I hope the new scene importer will bring such a complex scene into WED easily. But usually the only way to really figure out how to make a proper importer is to actually be making a level alongside it.

I've come up on this so called problem a few times. A few years ago I was at AGDC with a demo, people were asking what engine it was and I wouldn't say 3DGS, it does terriable. I'd always call it Acknex 6 (or 7 now) or A7. This is the engine, and then one person from a uni wanted to know more about it and I replied saying that the engine comes with a package titled '3D GameStudio'. Really, 3D GameStudio is the package and A7 the engine and only people in the indie industry are going to connect the two so it is a fairly decent get-around.
Just my two cents on it

As a sidenote, having re-read what I wrote, I didn't mean to imply that nobody else would run into such a problem -- more that if you do, you can probably bop 'em in the head and say, "Hey, we have a great game here -- do you want it, or should we take it elsewhere?" :)

So, count me in agreement with y'all.

All I can say is I've had a producer from a well known company try to talk me into switching to Torque, if their company were to produce it, even after seeing and being impressed with my demo made in 3DGS. It's illogical but the bias is that strong.

I had a very important job interview suddenly run into a weird awkward silence when the words "Gamestudio" were spoken. They were inially very enthusiastic about what they saw in my demo video, they actually really loved it, but when they asked about the engine, I skirted it originally and said "ah I used a middleware engine, sort of like Torque". They wanted more info, and when I finally got around to saying "Gamestudio" the interviewer went
"....
....

oh..

..."

And all that enthusiasm about how impressed they were sort of dropped like a stone. "So you used a game maker program" me: "well no, it's more powerful than that." Now, i can't blame gamestudio for not getting the job, because it is more complicated than that, but it put one heck of a bump in the interview and certainly didn't have them impressed.

It's bizarre-- they were really excited about the demo one moment, and then the word "gamestudio" completely shattered that. I can't explain why. It just went from "WOW your demo is great!" to "..... oh...."

This is why I can't really agree with the people who say "make a great game and it will be okay!" and "producers don't care!".


It's truly amazing how the word can just knock an initial good impression to pieces, because the assumption is "well, you didn't really make this" or "hm this person is using a game maker, they're an amateur" EVEN IF THE DEMO LOOKS GREAT.

DavidLancaster's Axys Adventures is brilliant, professional and made by a talented and dedicated team. But I found one review of the game which surprised me, by mentioning in the first paragraph "This game was made with gamestudio, but it's pretty good in spite of that." (paraphrased) And although this is somewhat positive, it also reflects the bias against the engine, if they have to write "although it's pretty good in spite of (the engine). I wouldn't want to see that in a review of my game (if I finish the thing). Would you?

That's why Pro users should have this option, in the full expression, rather than just not being required to show the splash screen. With the startup window reading "3D Gamestudio", it doesn't really make much of a difference anyway, not having to show the splash screen doesn't cut it, let alone the task bar, or acknex.wdf and acknex.exe in the task manager. Sorry, that's the way it goes.

Quote:

---

They wanted more info, and when I finally got around to saying "Gamestudio" the interviewer went
"....
....

oh..

..."

---

From what you tell, the problem remains even when you don't _see_ that it is made with GameStudio, because they will _ask_ you...