Just to clear things up: City of Secrets was written in Inform 6. Inform 6 (and now 7) can compile to one of two virtual machines: the z-machine, which is the format Infocom used, and Glulx. You actually can do graphics in either (through version 6 of the z-machine), but Glulx allows for a lot larger game size and doing graphics in it is tremendously easier.
Both TADS 2 and 3 have the graphics and sound capabilities to do a multi-window approach like City of Secrets.
Ah, thanks. That’s cleared a few things up anyway. I knew that Glulx (or Glulxe as I always seem to spell it) was something to do with Inform, but I was never sure what exactly.
So… the commercial side of things.
Is anyone willing to give it a go? I am, but I’m kind of reluctant to be the only one. Which probably stems from the fact that
a) a group project has a better chance of success than one guy going it alone
b) there’s less pressure on the individual if other people are involved
c) if it all goes nowhere, at least I’m not the only one with egg on my face 
I like the idea of both serial IF (one commercial game released every few months, or as often as can be if not every few months) and I also like the idea of subscription IF (several games per ‘issue’ with the issues coming out pretty much whenever there are enough games to fill one); I think both have a better chance of success than the huge 20+ hour game that was discussed earlier.
Anyone think either are workable ideas?
Serial IF could be part of the subscription IF. The only real different between the two is that in the former, you’d be releasing segments of a game periodically, whereas with the latter you’d be releasing several small (but complete) games in each issue.
I prefer the latter, for several reasons. One, I think I’d rather a write a bite-sized but complete game, as opposed to one chapter of a larger epic. That’s not to say such a segmented game couldn’t span several issues, if somebody wanted to do it. Also, I have different ideas. I’d want to write as many of them as possible, instead of working on parts of the same one issue after issue.
Two, If multiple developers could all provide short games – and I mean maybe not even IFComp sized – there could be a lot of variety and a lot of content for each issue. Plus, it would be easier to meet each deadline. The more I think about it, the more I think that a minimum of 5 games per issue (more, if possible) would really be necessary to sell people on the idea that it’s an issue in a subscription.
Three, back issues can be sold for a little more than the subscription rate. Suppose a one year (four-issue) subscription is $20. Well, that’d be $5 per issue. Sell back issues for $7 each. I’m not saying $20 is the right price – I’m just throwing it out there. That’d be a $1 per game, per issue, per subscriber. I’d rather go for 6 issues a year. Small games are doable in a couple months, and if there were enough authors on board, it wouldn’t necessarily require every single participant to provide a game every single issue.
Four, we could accept submissions from other people, and perhaps either pay outright for the right to publish, or offer a royalty type of agreement. I prefer paying a one-time fee for the right to publish, as it avoids all the paperwork and tracking necessary to track royalties. Well, I guess that would still kind of be necessary just for the people involved in the business, but hopefully not as much. Bad thing about a one-time payment, though, is that somebody has to have the cash to pay it up front, and a new business might not.
Five, if you market a single huge game, it could take months before the business actually has a product to sell. With short games written by mutliple participants, we could be ready… possibly Januray 1st, with content and a “grand opening” issue. By then, there might even be a couple games “in reserve” for the next issue.
Six, if anybody did want to write and sell a single large game, it could still be done through the business. In fact, we should probably plan on doing that within the first year or two, to give the project more credibility and something “big” to show.
I’m all for it, but – and this might be a big but – I have ideas of what works and what doesn’t, from running my online game business all these years. I don’t know if my experiences would conflict with how other people want to run the business – too many chefs and all that. The whole business plan would need to be hashed out and agreed upon. My partner always handles the paperwork for our business, and the tax preparation. Somebody would need to handle that for this business.
Also, I would want to release the games as freeware after a period of time – say, two or three years. Back issues remain on sale until then, and then they’re uploaded to the archive for free distribution. If commercial IF can be successful in the realm of free IF, then I don’t think this would hurt the business much. There would still be two or three years of back issues at any given time to sell, and nobody could say that they’ll “never” be able to play the games. Also, we could release maybe one game per issue for free, as a promo/incentive to new subscribers.
Plus, each issue could include other stuff too. I don’t know exactly “what” kind of other stuff. Maybe walkthroughs for one or more games on prior issues. Maybe editorial content. Maybe sneak peeks of upcoming games. Maybe subscriber mail/feedback. I don’t know. I just think the “subscription” idea has a lot of possibilities, even beyond just releasing several short games on each issue.
I would want high quality. My fear is that after half a dozen issues (if not sooner), the quality would get worse and worse and participants just slap together any piece of crap to meet the needs of the issue. I don’t know what kind of quality assurance would need to be in place, by I would want each and every game on each and every issue to be better than good.
The more the idea of serial IF is mentioned, the more appealing it seems. And the more doable. Of course, a lot of things seem doable in theory. It’s only in practice that you find out whether it really is going to work or not.
The obvious problems that occur to me right now:
1) Finding not only enough people to write the games to fill each other, but the kind of people who can a) write games of a decent enough quality to be sold (even for a very small amount) and b) can write games of that quality regularly. One thing I’ve noticed from several years of observing the IF scene is that the majority of people don’t tend to write a lot of games. Most write one a year. Some of the more prolific ones might write two. Quite a few write a game every other year. Serial IF would require a couple of games a year from most of the people participating. Possible, but I’m not sure how likely it would be to happen.
Of course, when you’ve got an incentive to finish a game, writing one becomes easier. I’ve heard quite a few people say they only ever find the incentive to finish a game when they have a deadline like a comp to aim for. This might give them a similar incentive. The fact that there’s a (hopefully) guaranteed sale at the end would perhaps give them an even larger incentive. Nothing motivates someone to put pen to paper (so to speak) as cash at the end of it. 
2) Ensuring the games are of a high enough quality to be included. I can imagine this might lead to a few arguments along the way if A writes a game and submits it to the serial, B says it’s not good enough and asks for A to either rewrite it or just plain scrap it, and A throws a fit and storms off. Bad press like that could kill the project. Saying that, including a bad game so as not to hurt someone’s feelings would kill it even quicker.
So whoever (maybe a group of people, like a voting panel) is in charge of the decision of what stays and what goes would need to be firm. Approach it like the business deal it is. If you’re the boss and a worker submits a substandard piece of work, politely inform him it’s not good enough and ask him to improve on it.
3) Meeting the deadline. Probably the biggest problem. Getting together five IF games of decent enough quality to be sold, not just once, but four or more times a year, isn’t going to be easy. I’d guess that the first issue would either be the easiest (due to the fact that it’s a new idea and lots of people would be enthusiast enough to give it a try) or the hardest (due to the fact that it’s a new, and untested, idea and while people might be enthusiast enough to give it a try, they might also be a little reluctant to write a game that is going to be put under such scrutiny).
Keeping the standards high would be difficult over a number of issues. As you say, it might be the case that, after a few issues have been done, quality begins to slide so as to ensure that deadlines are met.
I think as far as actual problems, those are the main ones that occur to me right now. Of course, you’d also have to weed out the enthusiast types who can’t write to save themselves and the ones willing to promise you five games an issue… but who mysteriously go quiet the moment they’re asked to deliver the goods.
As far as making the games free after X amount of time, I wouldn’t have a problem with that. If the serial idea takes off in such a way that it’s still running after two years, and the games are popular enough that people want to play them, then I’d be quite happy to let old issues go for free.
If this idea goes ahead, some private place would be needed for all the people involved to work out ideas and sort things out. A separate section of the forum perhaps only accessible by people who are part of the project?
I’d love to help, but I’m afraid that at the moment at least I’m anywhere near good enough to write a commercial game. (And then there’s that teensy little problem I have with actually finishing games…)
But at the very least I could help out with beta testing, and maybe I could provide some of that ‘editorial content’ Merk was talking about. And I think David’s suggestion of a seperate part of the forum is a good idea.
I really hope it goes somewhere…even if the whole thing doesn’t turn out to be commercially viable, I’ve seen so many discussions where everyone just talks and talks and then nothing is ever done that even the prospect of trying is enough to get me excited.
EDIT: Damn you italics! shakes fist
I’d be willing to give it a shot - collaborating with someone to create a commercial game or two or three…
As far as everyone writing a game by their own, you’d end up waiting ages for mine to show up. But if I have someone to work with on the game, who knows his writing and design better than I do, it’s chances for getting out would be quite good. 
One other problem that just occurred to me is the fact that we’re not all using the same system, meaning a joint effort to produce a game has another hurdle to overcome. I use Adrift, as does Lumin, Merk uses Hugo. I’m not too sure about the others but I’m guessing a mixture between Tads and Inform. This isn’t an insurmountable hurdle because while I don’t know a thing about programming in Hugo (or Tads or Inform for that matter), I can still test games written in those languages, and vice versa.
Turning to the idea of the games themselves, what size are we talking about in terms of time to finish them? IFComp size (2 hours or so)? Bigger? Smaller? Should there be a rating for the games based on content*? Should they be rated in terms of difficulty**? Should a decision be made at the beginning about the genre for games in a specific issue to ensure we don’t end up with five horror games or five comedies?
** Assuming it’s even possible to judge the difficulty a game in such a way.
For genre, I don’t think it would matter. If there are two or three of the same kind of game, we just theme it “the horror issue” and make a point not to write more of them for a while.
I’d say, if we could do an issue every couple of months, then five games smaller than IFComp size would be best. Maybe an hour long, or a little longer. Even with 5 games every 3 months, that’s 20 games in a year. People would be getting 20 hours of entertainment, the same as if they bought one 20-hour game, but there would be a lot more variety and a lot more flexibility to it. Plus, with added content (walkthroughs, previews, whatever), it could be worth it.
As for the different systems, I thought about that. I’d suggest we work a deal with Tor, if he’s agreeable, to distribute Gargoyle as part of the package. The free license may already allow for it, I don’t know. It would give a standard and consistent look to all games. People could always run them with other interpreters, but for customers not already familiar with the workings of IF, it would probably give the whole package a cleaner, consistent feel.
Yeah, I wouldn’t want to be involved with AIF. Nothing against in personally (never played), but for a commercial project I’d like to introduce to a wider audience, you’d either want to do all AIF, or none.
Smaller games would be easier to write and polish, but I still think a larger game now and then would be a good selling point. (Maybe once a year?) There’s plenty of great, tiny games out there for free, but since even this year’s Spring Thing had mostly short games it seems like longer, more involved ones are getting rarer and rarer.
I can’t be the only one who gets a little tired of nothing but ‘snack-sized’ games, and if paying is the only way to get something different, then people might be more willing to do it.
Maybe so, but I think we would need to establish a market first. I would hate to spend twelve months hard at work on a large game, only to find that poor sales made the entire effort a waste. Selling issues of multiple smaller games seems like something more manageable for a small start-up company, especially if there will be multiple participants. It means the business could get off the ground sooner, test the waters, maybe make some connections and build a customer base, all leading up to something larger later.
I admit that it would become harder to write a long game then. If we’re working on small content for each issue, somebody would have to step away from that to get a large game done. That’s time not spent working on the one- or two-hour games for the next issue…
I get tired of small games myself. Sometimes you just feel the need for something a little more substantive.
I can see the advantage of smaller games in that they don’t require a huge amount of your time to finish, they’re generally easier, less likely to be buggy (the smaller the game, the easier it is to test), and can be every bit as good as the larger games. Saying that, I’ve played more than a few really good short games that I felt would have been so much better if they’d just been larger. My favourite game of the last few years - Luminous Horizon - was an amazing game in itself, yet I finished it in less than two hours, had seen pretty much all it had to offer, and haven’t touched it since. A larger game of the same quality, with different paths through it allowing for replay value, would have had me going back to it time and again. I replayed my favourite Adrift game - The PK Girl - at least a dozen times trying to see what else it had to offer. Four years after it first came out and I still feel the urge to play it from time to time.
Which is all a long and somewhat rambling way of saying that yes, larger games would be a good idea in the IF serial.
True, but there’s nothing to stop you, assuming the serial goes belly up after the first issue, just finishing the large game and entering it in the Spring Thing or another competition.
Well, I’ve decided to go ahead and write a short game for the project. If it goes well, I’ll consider a larger game for a future issue.
I probably won’t get a chance until… hmm… maybe November, after the IFComp games are released and I’ve played and reviewed them all. I could have a short game done by the end of December, probably, if January 1st for the “grand opening” sounds like a good target.
There are several things that need done. One is deciding on a name (I don’t want to post the new domain(s) I registered publicly, but it’s an option – whatever is decided would need to work with an available .com, I think). Two is deciding who all will participate at the ground level. Three is figuring out a business plan, distribution plan (purely online, by mail, etc). Four is deciding on a price per issue, or per subscription period. Five would be deciding on content (how many games, what extras will be included, etc). Six is… I don’t know. Just lots of things. We really do need a private area to discuss such matters, after #2 is established (or during the process).
I think the first thing to do is get enough games together to make the initial issue. After all, all the planning in the world won’t do any good if no one gets any games written.
pokes David Are you finished yet?
How about now? 
Oi, stop pokin’ me!
I haven’t even started yet. I’m just at the moment kicking around ideas. A few possibles here and there. As well, I could do with a break from my biggie WIP so this might be just what I need.
Telltale Games are doing the serial snack-sized game (4-5 hours) idea,
but for graphical adventure games. I don’t know if they’re successful or
not, but when I read about it, it was a definite “d’uh!” moment. Of course
that’s how you want to do it
If it helps, I am willing to help out with my multi-terps Gargoyle and
Spatterlight for any project you cook up.