I agree with CBuilder.

There are many books about making commerical games that are written by people that have not published a game. The books are still valuable in there content and guidelines.

Dan's book will be a valuable addition to the 3DGS community and if he gives some good common sense direction to get a game published thats pretty darn good.

There is no sure fire way to get your game published. Some recommended guidelines is all that is needed.

On the Physics issue, I agree with Newton you should cover both. You said it yourself the Newton Physics is well documented. Why do it again. The 3DGS version of physics could use a book authors help in getting the information out to us users. I would buy the book just for a good description of using 3DGS physics.

Just some grist for the mill.

Ken

You know C, I started to agree with you on the basis that I didn't consider a Buisness Plan to be on par with Technical Knowledge, but then I read you post more carefully and I'm confused. If in fact...

Quote:

---

In my opinion, real world experience is NOT a requirement to write an excellent technical book.

---

because...

Quote:

---

First, the writer MUST be able to explain thoughts and concepts in clear understandable terms. Second, the writer must understand the topic he/she is covering thoroughly

---

..then how is that writer supposed to attain said understand if not with experience???? I'm confused cause you say I'm confused, but this is my point exactly...

On this I agree 100%

Quote:

---

Since I have read literally hundreds of technical books, I can tell you many "experts" could not write a lucid technical book to save their lives. Being a "real world expert" and being a "teacher" via a book are two very different skills.

---

...but even a teacher must accumulate real world experience before they can speak eloquently and cohesively about a topic, which was again my original point.

Hi Nard, didn't see your post there sorry

Quote:

---

There are many books about making commerical games that are written by people that have not published a game.

---

Names please. I would like to research books written about publishing a game by people who have never published a game.

Quote:

---

Dan's book will be a valuable addition to the 3DGS community and if he gives some good common sense direction to get a game published thats pretty darn good.

---

Dan has experience out the ying yang and you said it best, he can give directions. I don't think Dan would ever say that he knows how to get a game published and on the market just through his readings. I would bet his advice is based on real life expireience on the topics he's addressing

Quote:

---

There is no sure fire way to get your game published

---

Which is why saying that you know exactly how to get a game published and out to market is a mis-statement.

Quote:

---

On the Physics issue, I agree with Newton you should cover both. You said it yourself the Newton Physics is well documented. Why do it again. The 3DGS version of physics could use a book authors help in getting the information out to us users. I would buy the book just for a good description of using 3DGS physics.

---

I agree with you in principle since NGD is a viable alternative to 3DGS PE, but looking at the TOC, it doesn't seem that plug-ins are getting separate attention and thus, it would probobly be best to focus on the 3DGS PE only, if at all. Only saying this cause it would then admit into Red Armys todo list a network plugin alternative to 3DGS Networking, a particle effect plugin, etc.
If Red Army has the time he would do well to give all plug in their dues. But looking at the TOC, it would seem lopsided to include a plugin for one 3DGS system and not others.

Hi Fastlane,

Andrew Rolling is a guy I know for a fact has not made a commerical game, yet he has many books on the topic.

I had to fix a project he had screwed up for a client.

I have published over 50 titles and I would not have the nuts to write a book on how to get a game published. Each deal is uniqe, a good design document, good art, and a cool demo usally gets the door open, the rest is salesmenship.

Ken

Quote:

---

Andrew Rolling is a guy I know for a fact has not made a commerical game, yet he has many books on the topic.

---

Quote from "Game Architecture and Design" (which is an AWESOME book....everyone here should have a copy)

"Andrew Rollings holds a BS (Hons) is Physics from Imperial College, London and Bristol University and has worked as a technical consultant spanning the games industry an the financial industry since 1995. With Dave (Dave Morris, co author-F69), he operates a consultancy covering all aspects of game design from concept to full-technical planning"

If that ain't experience, I don't know what is.

Yea thats an awesome list of games he's made is'nt it.

Dan, please keep making your book. Focus on how to make a great game with 3DGS and you will have a winner of a book.

Ken

Quote:

---

Yea thats an awesome list of games he's made is'nt it.

---

That's right.
And in his book he never mentions anything about how to publish or market a game, so he is in fact only talking to his experience. Even his latest "Andrew Rollings and Earnest Adams on Game Design" has no mention of publishing or marketing that I can see in teh TOC.

Andrew Rolings talks about Game Design and not publishing nor marketing and thus is not an example of a:

Quote:

---

books written about publishing a game by people who have never published a game

---

Hi Fastlane,

Are we agreeing or disagreeing?

Just wondering if this is a Pissing contest or not.

Ken

I'm pretty sure we are dis-agreeing.
We'll take it by numbers:


1) I forward the idea that IMO a person needs to have experience in publishing nor marketing in order to make the claim that they know how to successfully publish.
2) you present Andrew Rollings as an example of a person who writes about publishing without publishing himself.
3) I say he has the experience to write the books he does
4) you counter by saying he hasn't published any games
5) to which I agreed because he writes about game design and not publishing nor marketing; Hence he isn't an example of a person who is writing about something without having RL experience in it themselves.

So here we are, me repeating myself and you pissing on you leg

I am biased on Mr Rollings because I saved a project he screwed up. So I know for a fact he should not be writing about designing or even making games.

I may have not understood your position about publishing a succesful game. I agree that Dan's lack of experience in that area makes his claim lame. A book about the technical nitty gritty of making a game, and some ideas on how to approach a publsiher are good.

Sorry I see the good in the whole of the book, but I agree that the section on publishing should be rethought.

When I worked at Macromedia the guys that wrote the Authorware book had no clue in how to make an application with Authorware. Yet they were able to ask people that had done it and had access to the developers like me and the book turned out pretty good.

Dan may have some novel approach to get noticed by publishers, like hooker phone numbers, black mail materials, and mafia connections.

I say let him write about it and lets critique it once he is done.


Ken