[Icehouse] IGDC - Question

[David Artman]

II believe the point was that a print-published game is "finished," and the
IGDC is for "refining" games. Thus, a game "locked" into a print format
(err, a non-POD print format; warehoused books) can't be revised, so it
would not benefit from IGDC participation. Or, rather, the benefits accrued
would never reach the already-printed books, creating errata. That, and such
games tend to have an unfair advantage, having enjoyed more attention
(print) and playtesting (prep to print).

As this comes up every comp, perhaps that rule should be reworded to read
something like "games never in print" or "any game not available in a print
publication" or some-such.

I, personally, think it should just become "any game whose design was
completed since the conclusion of the previous IGDC"--new games. We've had
two open-design and one design-restricted comp--anyone with an older game
who hasn't submitted by now either (a) isn't going to or (b) isn't paying
attention to IHG.org or this list. That phrasing closes off "done" older
games, but leaves open games that are languishing in development to be
finalized and sent forth for judging. But it prevents (for instance) Zendo
from competing (which is the extreme case of what the "previously published"
thing was trying to avoid, as I mention above).

David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.looneylabs.com/pipermail/icehouse/attachments/20080313/6aa9e7a7/attachment.htm