Minter halts dev blogging

By Tom Bramwell Published 23 November, 2007

Cross at reaction to rant.

Space Giraffe developer Jeff Minter has said he's going to stop writing about game development on his blog after taking a bit of a shoeing for a late-night post earlier in the week where he complained bitterly that the Xbox Live Arcade version of Frogger was outselling his latest game "by more than ten to one".

"Not seeing a lot of reason to continue even trying to make games, at this point, when a remake of Frogger, one of the worst games in the history of old arcade games, can outsell Space Giraffe that we put so much love and effort into, by more than ten to one, in one week," Minter had written. "OK, we get the message. All you want on that channel is remakes of old, shite arcade games and crap you vaguely remember playing on your Amiga. ... We'll shut up trying to do anything new then."

Two days later, Minter, clearly upset by the reaction, wrote: "I'm not going to be writing about game development here any more after this. Yes, I had a bit of a rant the other night because frankly yes, it is a bit disappointing to see a repackaged MAME rom doing much better than original content, but hey, that's how it goes. People are more inclined to buy stuff they remember rather than stuff that's new.

"We're invested in XBLA now, and we need to re-use the [Space Giraffe] framework for a couple of reasonably quick games - I think that's the way to make it work out for us, we just need more games in the pipeline. I'm already halfway through the next one and I just want to get my head down and get on with it."

Seems like a shame to us. We always enjoyed hearing what he was up to. He adds: "from now on this will just be about sheep and plushies and other such non-work-related stuff". Hopefully in time he'll change his mind.

For more on Space Giraffe, check out its gamepage, where you'll find it divided opinion, but ultimately won quite a few of us and you over.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (64) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • asphaltcowboy #1 4 years ago

    Er, no I like new, interesting games on XBLA, it's just that Space Giraffe was a load of tosh!

  • robg #2 4 years ago

    I think Arnie would have something to say to him:

    "Stop whining!"

  • Valis #3 4 years ago

    Agreed, Spaec Giraffe was total poo, no matter how much everyone wanted to like it becasue they all like Minter. I'll be honest, I enjoyed Frogger more. At least I could see what was happening on screen.

  • mkreku #4 4 years ago

    He really would be better off by responding with better games, not words.

  • Weezer #5 4 years ago

    Depends who's buying the games - if it's a bunch of moms buying Frogger for their six-year-olds, he's got less cause for complaint.

    I've never really got on with Minter games - probably because I don't have a spliff on the go while playing them...

  • The-Bodybuilder #6 4 years ago

    Man, his feeling are hurt.
    Quick, somebody call the WAAAAAHHHHHHMBULANCE.

  • Weezer #7 4 years ago

    Space Frogger. Now you're talking...

  • DB2k #8 4 years ago

    Achmed the dead terrorist says "I KILL YOU!"

  • Britesparc Verified Creative, ITV #9 4 years ago

    What's wrong with playing old Amiga games anyway? My A1200 is in my mum's loft so it's kinda hard to dig it out and set it up for a game of Monkey Island. I appreciate new games as much as the next person that doesn't have time for anything beyond Halo 3 and Lego Star Wars at the moment, but bollocks to everything, I just wanna play SWOS!!!

    And the Monkey Island reference was just in case anyone from LucasArts is reading :-)

    I also wanna add, given the negativity in this thread, that I do like Minter, respect what he's done, but SG really ain't my cuppa tea.
    Edited by 1 at 23/11/07 @ 10:57

  • Xerx3s #10 4 years ago

    He is right though. Frogger is shit. Always has been. While Space Giraffe isn't my kind of game, I do reckon that it is one of the better of it's class.

  • OnlyMe #11 4 years ago

    The attack on the Amiga was really unnecessary, since Frogger wasn't even released on the Amiga. He must have mistaken the Atari for the Amiga.

    Although, considering his library on the Amiga, I'm not surprised by his bitterness.

    http://ho l.abime.net/hol_search.php?find...

    Not to mention how his last Amiga release was in '92, which was a shareware version of Revenge of the Mutant Camels.
    Edited by 1 at 23/11/07 @ 10:11

  • chrisjm #12 4 years ago

    next game to be a throwing toys out of pram simulator called nappy rash

  • Olemak #13 4 years ago

    Huh. So how did people respond to the blog rant anyway? By buying even fewer copies of space giraffe?

  • DanWhitehead #14 4 years ago

    The attack on the Amiga was really unnecessary, since Frogger wasn't even released on the Amiga. He must have mistaken the Atari for the Amiga.

    I think that was more of a reference to Speedball 2, SWOS and the like.

  • penhalion #15 4 years ago

    It's funny that only Minter can't admit that space giraffe is crap. He went overboard with the lighting and busy graphics. As a result anyone who plays the demo is totally put off by it. Dispite what some people say. YOU CAN'T SEE THE ENEMIES!

    I tried liking this but, after the 150th death due to invisible bullets I had to conceed that it's just a very poorly made game. Frankly if this is what minter has left in him then he really should give up game making and go write a book or something.

  • GamesConnoisseur #16 4 years ago

    I purchased and played Space Giraffe on the strength of Minter and my memory of the gaming in 80's.

    Yes the game is a mess, not a total disaster but close enough and best played only when you are so high or drunk and wanna be pushed over the edge!

    As everyone say, the visual information is too much, that the brain get mushed!

  • beastmaster #17 4 years ago

    I bought SG without playing the demo (silly me - won't do that again). I just found it too confusing and hard to see what's going on. Wouldn't mind a version of Gridrunner though. But clean, crisp visuals so that I can see what I've got to shoot.

    It's just not the case of a good game that didn't sell well. It was a mess of a game that not many people got.

  • Steve_Ince #18 4 years ago

    "Frankly if this is what minter has left in him then he really should give up game making and go write a book or something."

    On making games? :)

  • barnard666 #19 4 years ago

    I grabbed SG without even trying the demo, its a shame, it was nearly great, but it falls short of that mark by a long distance. it is better than frogger though, the only other game I purchased without trying!

  • oreillymj #20 4 years ago

    Half way through the next one eh?


    So I'm guessing that involves changing the Giraffes for LLama's.

    Honestly this guy has been churning out the same shite (to anyone who'll give him money) for years. Llama's, goats, sheep with "trippy" graphics.

    Please go away and take Molyneaux with you.
    Edited by 1 at 23/11/07 @ 10:29

  • Salvia #21 4 years ago

    "it was nearly great, but it falls short of that mark by a long distance. "

    So what you mean is " a long way off from great" rather than "nearly"?

  • themerlin13 #22 4 years ago

    Yeah space Giraffe was crap and so is Frogger, but saying that he is totally right!

    XBLA has just become a bitch being pimped out to old crappy remakes, and when a dev does make an original game, reviews seem to miss the point that they are supposed to be £5 worth of fun not tying to be a £50 blockbuster.

    So OI MINTER NO I respect your point of view but stop promising us Giraffes and giving us crap!

  • homerramone #23 4 years ago

    Isnt calling frogger one of the worst games in history effectivley doing exactly what he is moaning about. Berating someone elses game ?

    Games are released all the time that the developers think are great, and no-one else does. Cant think of an industry it doesnt happen in, be it games, movies, music etc.

    Why doesnt he have a coke (or a spliff) and a smile, shut the fuck up and do another one. Maybe this time without all the excess trip-tron type backgrounds and rhytmic music in the background !?

    Infact, time im on me soap box, why doesnt he actually try writing something NEW instead of rehashed versions of games that were ports of an old arcade game that was a bit average in the first place ?
    And if he cant manage that, try updating a game he did that was actually any good - like gridrunner.

  • LOLLERS #24 4 years ago

    "Why doesnt he have a coke (or a spliff) and a smile, shut the fuck up and do another one. Maybe this time without all the excess trip-tron type backgrounds and rhytmic music in the background !? "

    Because there wouldn't be much left? It doesn't seem like a very good idea to spend that long developing an engine that's so inflexible that he's now forced to make 2 more very similar games to recoup some of the money he's invested...

  • gizmo #25 4 years ago

    "and we need to re-use the [Space Giraffe] framework for a couple of reasonably quick games"


    Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    Can the man not see what is going to happen there?!!!!!!!!!

  • Veldaban #26 4 years ago

    Space Giraffe was actually one of the best games of the year (and I'm saying that without having played a Minter game before in my life). There is some truly excellent design behind the almost impenetrable tutorial and first hour of gameplay. Unfortunately most people can't put up with the game that long (and that is of course the game's fault) but that doesn't mean it wasn't any good.

  • pinchofsalt #27 4 years ago

    "and we need to re-use the [Space Giraffe] framework for a couple of reasonably quick games"

    Oh, the irony.

  • Hypnopedia #28 4 years ago

    "OK, we get the message. All you want on that channel is remakes of old, shite arcade games..."

    Er...so SG isn't really a new version of Tempest then, Jeff??!! Admittedly Tempest was NOT a shite arcade game, but SG's still a remake deep down, no??"

  • MrGilder #29 4 years ago

    Isn't Frogger one of the XBLA games you get with the 'Arcade' pack? If so, that's probably the reason why the sales spiked...

  • Xerx3s #30 4 years ago

    Please go away and take Molyneaux with you.

    So what kind of fantastic games have you made? I'm sorry but these guys have brought tons of new gaming concepts into existence and made many fantastic games. Telling them to fo without having something to add yourself is stupid beyond belief.
    Edited by 1 at 23/11/07 @ 10:51

  • Arganoid #31 4 years ago

    "Er...so SG isn't really a new version of Tempest then, Jeff??!! Admittedly Tempest was NOT a shite arcade game, but SG's still a remake deep down, no??"

    The difference is that SG takes the basic Tempest template and builds on it/alters it to the extent that it plays significantly differently. If SG is a remake of Tempest then Halo 3 is a remake of Doom.

  • Darren #32 4 years ago

    I used to love Jeff Minter's wacky psychedelic games on the Commodore 64 but I thought Space Giraffe was absolutely dreadful, far too confusing to play and get any fun out of. The Xbox 360's Neon Music Visualiser thingie that he wrote was more enjoyable to be honest. And, yes, I did find Frogger to be the better game. Sorry Jeff but if you make a good game then I'll buy and play it. ;)

  • Redeye #33 4 years ago

    Never mind, Jeff, have a bang on this, mate. *blows perfect smoke ring*

  • grandmaster Verified Director, Digital Foundry #34 4 years ago

    I'd be more interested to see how sales of Geometry Wars are holding up against Space Giraffe. Two years older, but the same price and by far the better game.

  • Dodgymat #35 4 years ago

    I've got a lot of respect for the developers of old continuing their passionate work in the modern-day, tripe-saturated, hype-driven world also known as the Video Games Industry. Thing I find wrong with his comments is his failure to acknowledge how his game is not much more than one of these "revamped for the 21st Century" games that he's slagging off.

    Team17 tried it and they were very successful. I imagine (and hope) SWOS will be equally as successful too. The main difference is those games were actually quite good to begin with...

  • oreillymj #36 4 years ago

    Xerx3s

    I don't dispute that these guys may have made some contribution to gaming in the past.

    But they now seem to think that they have a divine right to keep shovelling us the same shite, and we should just lap it up.

    If I'm tired of the trippy graphics with woolly mammals genre that Minter specialises in and chose to spend my money elsewhere, then that's just tough.

    What the XBLA stat's should be telling Minter is that either ....

    A) That game is up and nobody is interested in these games anymore.

    or

    B) The game was shite.

    or

    C) Both

    Minter's whinging will not alter any of these scenarios.

    That is all.


  • DanWhitehead #37 4 years ago

    You can't buy two pints of ale for £3.50 - you can use that money to vote though - for small independant games developers. You also get a title that you may love or hate, but which is a pretty individual addition to any games collection. If people support the likes of Llamasoft, other independants will follow. Your £3.50 is an investment in gaming, not just the game itself.

    While I mostly agree with what you're saying in principle, and wish there were more maverick spirits like Minter still working in the industry, isn't that a rather low form of emotional blackmail? You're making it sound like a charity. Go on, give them a few quid - doesn't really matter if you actually enjoy the game in question, but it might save an independent developer.

    Surely the onus is on the developer, as a business, to create games that people will enjoy and want to buy? I fully support people like Minter who choose to create games from a place of uniquely personal inspiration, but that shouldn't automatically mean that gamers should feel obliged to buy their products, regardless of how cheap it may be.

    Games like Katamari, LocoRoco and even Portal all show that original ideas can still flourish and succeed. You just have to come up with a concept that appeals to people.

  • haowan #38 4 years ago

    hear hear.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #39 4 years ago

    Mm, Dan's right there. I absolutely love Space Giraffe, but Jeff is his own worst enemy, and if people did want to "donate" money to a small independent developer on principle, I doubt it'd be one who's, well, such a *cock*.

  • Machiavel #40 4 years ago

    I think the price of spouting whatever's on your mind is the ability to take criticism and not hold it personally.

  • repairmanjack #41 4 years ago

    Space Giraffe is great.

  • neuroniky #42 4 years ago

    Space Giraffe is one of the best, if not the best, game on XBLA, and one of the best game of th year... and no, it's not a Tempest clone, it just looks similar, but it plays in a completely different way (twitch shooter should stick to Tempest, SG is more like a thinking-man shooter, it's almost strategic at times).

    That said, I think Jeff is wrong in his outburst of rage against the old classic. Frogger may not be a good game, but people are entitled to buy whatever they like. If Jeff is in for the money, then he should try to make more commercial games... if he is in to do whatever he wants and actually sell it to fans that love it (which is more than the majority of people/developer can do in these time of corporations and majors), he should stick to that and actually enjoy the fact that there are thousand of people out there that are praising his game as one of the best ever made.

  • kangarootoo #43 4 years ago

    @Xerx3s

    Every single time someone says something negative about PM, you hove into view telling them they aren't allowed an opinion because they haven't made any games themselves.

    Utter rubbish. A gamer does NOT have to be a dev in order to express their opinion AS A GAMER. If a gamer finds a game to be lacking in fun, they need no qualification in order to say so.


    "one of the worst games in the history of old arcade games, can outsell Space Giraffe that we put so much love and effort into"

    I'm not sure that "love and effort" is really a commodity that means anything to the average gamer. I'm a gamer too and I would much rather spent my money on a really fun game that was born of a souless code mill than a !fun game that was the result of sacks of misdirected passion. We as gamers might say that passion and originality is important, but its games that are fun to play that actually get our cash above all else most of the time.


    I don't know how many times I have said that originality is overated. Implementation is where the fun lives or dies. Every. Single. Time.

    An original title that is well implemented is the ultimate goal. But an original idea badly realised will almost always be bobbins, whereas a wholly unoriginal idea that results in a well put together game will almost always be fun.

  • DanWhitehead #44 4 years ago

    The masses will judge each title in and of itself, nonetheless a bigger picture remains and we'll see more Locorocos if devs get the money to experiment, which will happen if people buy the games which 'test the water' as SG has done.

    LocoRoco is a bad example of your point though, since the money for that experiment came from Sony. Tsutomu Kouno came up with an original idea, but one that also had clear appeal.

    Regardless of what hoops must be jumped through in order to get a game on Live Arcade, the beauty of that system is that it absolutely allows "the masses" to judge each title for themselves. Space Giraffe received a lot more coverage and attention than most XBLA titles, and anyone who was interested was free to try the game at no cost, using a demo that Llamasoft put together to showcase what they had made. If it's not selling as well as other titles, that's because more people want the other titles.

    If independent devs want more money to experiment, they should make sure that their experiments will appeal to enough people to justify their expenses. That doesn't mean "selling out" or making derivative tat, it just means considering the actual audience rather than the audience you wish still existed. If Minter, or anyone, really wants to produce games to satisfy their own personal mindspace then they either need to accept that many people won't "get it" and take the financial hit accordingly, or go back to the truly democratic way of distributing fresh ideas, make them shareware or freeware and get a day job to pay the bills.

    Maybe one of the problems of having such a small and independent outfit is that perspective is lost. I can't believe that anyone involved could look at the finished product and believe that Space Giraffe was going to have broad appeal. Its "love it or hate it" nature is apparent almost immediately. Complaining that something like Frogger is outselling it is like complaining that more people are buying Only Fools And Horses on DVD than are buying Chris Morris' Blue Jam. It's the nature of the beast, and I'm surprised that Minter hasn't made peace with that yet. Maybe he needs to follow Mel Croucher's example and point his creative energies in another direction.

  • monkie_king #45 4 years ago

    I agree with Dan, he wasn't exactly aiming for the mainstream with SG.

    To be honest, he should go the cynical route, and blat out a few of his 8-bit classics onto XBLA. If people really do just want old stuff they remember playing, he may as well make some cash out of it, and use it to fund his next proper venture.

    It seems a very long time since Jeff did anything other than Tempest-a-likes and updates of classics (yeah, I know SG isn't really Tempest etc.). He used to come out with such a varied bunch of stuff, not all overburdened with trippy visuals that turn off mainstream players. Back in the C64 days, Llamasoft were a pretty mainstream software house, not wilfully out on the fringe (possibly because technical constraints in those days meant that Jeff's games didn't look too different to everyone else's).

    I just wish someone would rein him in a bit, 'cos I'm sure he could come up with some cracking stuff that would sell well, if he would concede to a few constraints in the name of commercial appeal. Everybody needs an editor, after all.

  • crazyhorse174 #46 4 years ago

    Half way through the next one eh?

    So I'm guessing that involves changing the Giraffes for LLama's.

    Honestly this guy has been churning out the same shite (to anyone who'll give him money) for years. Llama's, goats, sheep with "trippy" graphics.

    Please go away and take Molyneaux with you.

    +1

    Exactly what I was thinking. I've played a few of his games and haven't enjoyed any of them. I think a few people have rose tinted spectacles when it comes to Minter.

    I imagine him laughing to himself at home when he's thinking up his next game; "Ha ha ha! What do you think of this one dear? A mutant swimming orangutan, which shoots lighting bolts out of its arse at equally mutant ...things...! All in trippy graphics of course! Genius!"

    And whats with all the animal references anyway? Is he a closet bestiality freak?

  • escapedape #47 4 years ago

    Players did try out Space Giraffe though, right? There's a free demo, which I assume lots of people tried. If the game didn't grab them from that, where does the blame lie?

    Saying that it's a marmite game kind of proves the point that some people really won't get on with it.

    Even the players that say they like it clearly aren't playing it very much any more - a recent jaunt on Space Giraffe saw me getting a stupidly high rank by getting through just one or two levels (stupidly high being ranked for that week within the Top 50), and by my own admission i'm really not very good at the game at all.

    I like it well enough, but I don't actually play it any more - I speculated, not really sure if I accumulated though. I get so annoyed with the levels that i'm on due to not being able to see what's going on. Am I playing it wrong, according to the SG fans? Probably yes. Do I want to spend more time learning how to play it 'right'? Absolutely not - I just don't like it enough to give it that time investment.

    I really tried and really wanted to like it though.

  • Monkey_Puncher #48 4 years ago

    He releases an incredibly niche title and then complains that it didn't sell better?

    I'm sorry Mr Minter, but your games go way over the head of most.....me included. XBLA has shown that original games can sell very well, just look at the success of Geometry Wars.

    I tried to like Space Giraffe, but I just couldn't get into it. It doesn't look appealing, and it also doesn't make much sense. I'm sure there's a game in there somewhere, but I didn't care enough to stick around and find out.

  • T4RG4 #49 4 years ago

    He makes a crap game and complains about Frogger outselling it? Riiight.

    SG is something new developers should be shown whilst somebody stands beside them shouting "DON'T MAKE PAP LIKE THIS".

  • monkie_king #50 4 years ago

    @crazyhorse: depends how far back you go -- he used to make really solid, straightforward shooters, which just happened to have the occasional camel or sheep instead of generic space-invader sprites. Lazer Zone, Attack of the Mutant Camels, and GridRunner for example.

    It then gradually started to get more trippy and, I suppose, self-indulgent -- until eventually we arrive at SG.

    I'd really like to see what would happen if someone sat him down, and said "here's some cash to make a game -- but drop the trippy visuals, furry animals, and general hippy affectations". But then I guess it wouldn't be a Minter game -- it'd be a bit like asking Mark E Smith to make a Europop album. I don't suppose The Fall get upset when they're outsold 10-1 by girl groups doing 80s covers, though.

  • NegativeZero #51 4 years ago

    Space Giraffe is not Tempest. Tempest was a lot more fun, and I could actually tell what the fuck was going on without giant particle explosions and annoying acid-trip backgrounds deliberately trying to obscure things from me.

    If Space Giraffe had been Tempest 2007, I'd have been very happy.

    Instead he'll probably make a remake of Defender again, make it stupidly frustrating to play, and then have another whine when no one likes it.

  • Madder-Max #52 4 years ago

    What a whiny twat

  • spongebob #53 4 years ago

    Rez is how you do a shooter with trippy graphics. Space Giraffe is how you don't do it. And thank god Rez is coming to XBLA.

  • Xiaokiraa #54 4 years ago

    My mums favourite game was frogger...

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #55 4 years ago

    Rez doesn't have "trippy" graphics. They're abstract and minimalist, arguably the total opposite of "trippy". (It also isn't half the game SG is, but that's by the by.)

  • smelly #56 4 years ago

    ""OK, we get the message. All you want on that channel is remakes of old, shite arcade games and crap you vaguely remember playing on your Amiga."


    .. Like tempest?

    (which is pretty much all space giraffe is!)

  • m0thr4 #57 4 years ago

    "Rez is how you do a shooter with trippy graphics. Space Giraffe is how you don't do it. And thank god Rez is coming to XBLA."

    +1 to that.

    I read all about Space Giraffe's development in the column Jeff Minter wrote for Edge and it seemed like a weak concept back then.

    The problem with Jeff is that his mind is stuck back in the early 90's rave scene. He doesn't understand the word 'subtle'. That's why the Xbox 360 gets a vomit-inducing music 'visualizer' for the Xbox 360 that's only really suitable for playing stuff by Prodigy, Acen, Altern8, SL2 etc.. In this regard, the PS3's visualizer is infinitely superior.

    And another problem is that he can't take criticism, as demonstrated in his recent blog entry. I wonder if anyone tried to talk him out of any aspects to Space Giraffe at any point during its development? I wonder if anyone said, "look Jeff, it might be great, but could you tone down the visuals a bit?", only to be given short shrift?

    I tried out the XBLA demo of Space Giraffe but the graphics just hurt my head. I couldn't see what was going on and I couldn't even tell if I was doing well or getting creamed. That wasn't fun. The music was pretty awful too. I can only really see it appealing to stoners... but, if I remember correctly, any old crap is entertainment when you're stoned.

  • smelly #58 4 years ago

    "Jeff: 'Believe it or not, I'm into double figures. Everyone of them a Dolly' "

    Erm. You do know he's not into girls dont you?

  • crazyhorse174 #59 4 years ago

    "Jeff: 'Believe it or not, I'm into double figures. Everyone of them a Dolly' "

    Erm. You do know he's not into girls dont you?

    Yeah - its animals he's into...

  • FortysixterUK #60 4 years ago

    I have to say his unique style of games were never that good.

    I was always un-moved by the stuff he released on the C64, but could appreciate even then in my much younger days, that he was an originality pusher.

    Good luck to him. But he shouldn't take it all so personally, if I were him I'd go the other way and make the blog even more of a Rant-athon.

  • BadBoyBonner #61 4 years ago

    I supported Jeff - I bought SG due to the 400 points price which I thought would be fantastic value. It was not fantastic value - but I am not that bothered, at about £3.50 I felt happy to have a punt and support a very open developer – perhaps as a direct thank you for his EDGE column. Once again thanks for that Jeff, loved it.

    The game is simply too hard to see what is happening. As for concern about Frogger outselling it, it obviously will as it benefits from years of awareness. In addition most XBLA titles are seen as being easy to play - very few are a genuine test of twitch skills.

    The real question for me is not how SG stacks up in sales against Frogger, but how many people are converting from playing the demo to buying the game? That is the biggest indicator of the games acceptance but even that will be distorted by people like me who simply supported Jeff.
    While it might feel like a stake through his heart - I feel sure there are many fans (myself included) that would appreciate a patch to allow a little more clarity, so we could fully appreciate the core gameplay.

    ANY game that starts to leave more to luck than judgement to progress is clearly flawed. In future, the best thing Jeff could do is to get some people to play his game that do not think of him as a gaming god and that are not his friends.

    I can forgive Jeff for being so close to, the almost one man project, that he could not see the wood for the tree’s. While he should take the brunt of the feelings as obviously it is his creation – lets not forget:-

    Anyone who played SG and did not give a critical opinion, on the visual overload which undermines gameplay, has done him a great disservice and should apologise to him for any of the backlash they have helped to foster.

    I feel sure that many of the people who write on here would be happy to take the time out for Jeff, visit any new game he’s created and offer constructive feedback – for nothing more than price of some petrol. Obviously to sort the wheat from the chaff he could read through people’s past comments and forum activity and make an informed choice.

    Whatever he chooses to do, more objective rather than subjective feedback needs to be introduced into the development stage.

    On a side note, I would never pay to download Frogger. Last time I “paid” for Frogger I think it was on an old table top CGL "Frogger" (VFD Gakken). To be honest – I always preferred Horrace Goes Skiing on the Spectrum. As for really old arcade games that would be worth a download if they made it onto live - Bomb Jack, original StarWars and 1942 would be my top 3 picks.


    Edited by 1 at 24/11/07 @ 13:50

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #62 4 years ago

    "In future, the best thing Jeff could do is to get some people to play his game that do not think of him as a gaming god and that are not his friends."

    This is unquestionably correct. Unfortunately, Jeff is so hostile and petulant towards criticism that this won't happen. Indeed, if you look at what he says on the blog, he's actually planning to go in the opposite direction.

  • canIdoyabombsforya #63 4 years ago

    After reading Rev Stuart's comment about him being his own worst enemy, I couldn't help feel that his followers are largely responsible. They have wrongly put him up on a pedestal as a gaming legend. He has gone along on that wave and perhaps that's why he can't take criticism. He really hasn't done anything special certainly not of late, Unity didn't get aywhere, Neon isn't what it was cracked up to be, and now probably his biggest effort is oin to be a total flop.

    Definitely his game should have been tested on a different demographic and ripped to pieces at that stage, the main ingredients are there but even the name space giraffe is so un cool to go on a system like Xbox, which was only a dare from one of his followers apparently. Most of his 8-bit games were ignored for the same reasons space giraffe has flopped but wasn't a big deal as he didn't put in the same investment in those days. He needs to take a new path, I know his health has suffered, no job is worth doing yourself in for Jeff.
    If he wants to go with fluffy animals, then there's a Nintendo Wii development channel on its way ideally suited, may I suggest a frogger game with sheep? ;) .
    I really enjoyed reading his history of Llamasoft, any veteran gamer who hasn't, check it out, perhaps he should have a break and write a book, good luck to him whatever path he takes.
    Edited by 1 at 25/11/07 @ 02:38

  • Stoatboy #64 4 years ago

    @Kirly_Wombat:

    Fuck Off. It says nothing of the sort. There's a lot of work in getting the framework and game engine in place for an XBLA game. Re-using that is obviously quicker than trying a different approach entirely.

    @ BadBoyBonner:

    "ANY game that starts to leave more to luck than judgement to progress is clearly flawed."

    You made some good points, but that one's rubbish tbh. I'm not too shabby at SG, but my best score is about 150 million. The top score is over 2 billion. I'd love to think that the small matter of 1.9 BILLION points is a discrepancy I could attribute to luck, but I really don't think it is. If someone can score that much more massively than me I'm prepared to believe that a large part of the reason is that they're actually just better at it than me.