Oh
come on, who actually thinks it was him that posted that. It just didn't
sound like something a good game developer like him would do. IMO someone
just wanted attention, and was using an impersonation of James to vent, or
maybe just to act stupid.
Now, here's my $.02 on the whole Monty thing.
Keep in mind though, that I'm just basing this off this forum and the AGS
website. I'm not on any game-related email lists. I can see why people
are mad about it. He kept saying it'd be out on such and such a date, and
then he'd keep moving it back. I can see moving it back once or twice, but
hasn't he moved it back more times than that? No wonder some people are
uptight, especially if they paid for the game. At least now he's
explaining why it's taking longer than anticipated.
On the other hand,
James does make a good point in the email that was posted in the other
topic. I never realized it until I read it, but the really high quality
accessible games are in fact less than a sighted person pays for a new
PS2/Xbox/GameCube game. It's just that we want games that are equal in
length to what sighted people are getting. I hang out on gamefaqs.com when
I'm bored and just want to kill some time, and there are always people
whining on there about how a game is too short, or is too "kiddy," or other
stuff like that. The first example of this that jumped out at me is the
GameCube game. the Legend of Zelda: the Wind Waker. It seems like people
never stop complaining about it, but at the same time there are people who
really like it.
As far as how long a game is, I'd say audio games are
about equal to games that came out at the end of the NES's lifespan. Since
those games were released on carts, they were around $60 brand new, or at
least I think it was something like that. Imagine paying $60 for a game
like Monty or MB. These games are around $35, which would probably be a
good deal on a new mainstream game.
Just IMO,
Brian