I need opinions (Yes, yours!)

yes i do like 'Lost Legends', but my fear with that is that it is too generic...

i dunno, maybe i'm worrying too much.


on a seperate note, Alex, regarding the copyright of the Dizzy games, i have a couple of questions:

1. would tiles such as the 'ground' and 'bush' tiles that i used a lot in TLoD be covered by copyright? in other words would i have to re-draw them?

2. is the DizzyAGE logo covered by that copyright, as it has an image of Dizzy in it. and if i just used the 'text' DizzyAGE logo, would the 'Dizzy' part of DizzyAGE come under copyright protection?

dizzyage the title wouldn't be a problem but the image would be.. spin round and you'll get Dizzy.. you can't copyright a word, you can't copyright most names either just the characters.

[quote data-userid="55" data-postid="66155"]

dizzyage the title wouldn’t be a problem but the image would be.. spin round and you’ll get Dizzy.. you can’t copyright a word, you can’t copyright most names either just the characters.

[/quote]

yeah i thought that would be how it is. still not sure about the 'ground' and 'bush' tiles tho...

it would be easy to tweak the logo to avoid having the image..
But the tiles. . i have no idea.. many games used the same tiles so you might get away with it.. lol

DizzyAGE name shouldn't be a problem... it's like the age of dizziness (how I feel right now from something I ate yesterday).

I imagine the Dizzy character in the DizzyAGE logo could be a problem. We can come up with a special logo for this kind of games.
All tiles "ripped" from original Dizzy games (or any other games for that mater) are a posible copyright issue. So it's best not to use them without some (even little) adjustments.

Also take care from where you get the music and sound effects from.

Alex

oh i've adjusted the colour on the two tiles i currently use :tongue: do you think that'll be enough? somehow i don't think so....

as for music, that's not a problem. FX i don't think will be a problem either, as the FX i use has pretty much all been messed around with/stretched/compressed/cut/ etc etc.

How about another option... You don't sell the game, you give it away for free, but say to fans they can give a donation of £2-£3 if they wish? Then the Yolkfolk history could still be involved. After all, this site accepts donations and it is quite obviously built around Dizzy, so maybe that's a way around it?
I have started the first game and I bloody love it, so much work has gone into it, the speech is great; voice reminds me of Salad Fingers. "It's some blood!" Great stuff.

If you removed Dizzy references from the game, I would simply lose interest in it. I'm getting drawn in because of the Dizzy link.

Just like those Gibby or Gobby or Gribby or whatever the heck they're called. I have no interested in playing them whatsoever because I know it's not Dizzy... {dizzy}:huh:

ok, i don't understand that.

at the moment, it is as much a 'Dizzy' game as TLoD is. the character tile is still the same as in TLoD, etc etc.

What you are saying is that at the moment, you would play it. however as soon as i change the character tile, and remove about 3 words from the story, you would then not play it. Despite the rest of the game being exactly the same as previously.

I'm sorry but i really don't see the logic there. Sure, with Gibby and Dibby and Flibby and Wibbly etc etc, i see your point, because they aren't Dizzy games at all, but what you're effectively saying is that if i took, for example, Fantasy World Dizzy, and changed the character tile, you would stop playing it. And i really don't understand that.

  {yolkfolk}:scratch:

That's just my opinion is all :smile:

I'm simply saying that it's the fact it's related to Dizzy that draws me in, in the first place... And the work you've put in and what you've achieved with DizzyAGE is fantastic and I would be more than happy to pay for it. But when it becomes something else and the Dizzy connection is lost and any story pertaining to the history of the Yolkfolk is altered, I'm not sure that I'd be interested in paying for it then.

And your assumptions about Fantasy World are more-or-less correct, and I disagree, I think that does make sense and it is understandable.
I bought Fantasy World Dizzy because it was a Dizzy game. I bought it yes, because I knew the type of gameplay to expect but because that gameplay was tied in with the characters and the series that I love.
If the game had been, say, Seymour goes to Fantasy World instead of Fantasy World Dizzy, than no - I wouldn't have bought it and I wouldn't have played it.

I also love James Bond movies, but if they made a Bond movie but had a different set of characters with a different lead and a different history and plot, but the other quintessential Bond elements were there (a bond 'inspired' basically) would I pay to go and see it at the cinema? No.

Are you honestly telling me that if Dizzy Down the Rapids of Dizzy Panic would have had no connection to Dizzy you'd have been drawn to play them? If Dizzy Panic would have just been called Panic and you were randomly shoving shaped blocks down a hole I wouldn't have bought it.
The Dizzy name sold it to me.

Don't get me wrong, I think the stuff you produce with DizzyAGE is phenomenal. I've only just started using the editor properly and I can fully appreciate the work that goes into map-building, scripting etc... I think all of your games are of a high enough quality to be paid for and I would be happy to donate for each download that I have just as I have been happy to buy Official Dizzy games over the last two decades. I think what you've done with the 'Legends' game is really good work, and a lot of work, I'm just trying to say it does NOT have the same appeal to me as it would if it was tied in with Dizzy.

What I'm saying is no different to what Meph suggested in his post on this page

hmmm ok, that kinda makes more sense to me now.

i still think what i thought in the reply to mephs thread, which is that i think TLoD series only has a tenuous connection with Dizzy anyway, but i'll take it on board.

anyway i wouldn't worry too much yet anyway, i've still got quite a bit to go with it. I guess i'll decide closer to the time what route to definitely take with it.

How about you give the 'Dizzy' version away FREE as a bonus when you buy the next Lost Legends game? What's the legalities of that?
I'm trying to think of suggestions because
a) I really want this to be a Dizzy game (or at least one based in the Yolkfolk history, plus the main character looks great as he is now) and
b) I think the quality of work is good enough to get paid for.

Sorry if you feel like I'm getting on your case or you think I seem ungrateful - both of those things are not true. I just really want this to be Dizzy, but at the same time I don't want you to have to be in a situation where you can't charge for a game that deserves a donation to play.

yes, to be fair, i have been grappling with the same dilemma. I would like to earn a bit of money from it, but at the same time i do want to keep on-board everyone that played and enjoyed TLoD.

I doubt the legality of giving away a Dizzu version free with the paid version, as you're still having to pay to get it.

the rough idea at the moment is that i'd do CoTM as a paid game, and also convert TLoD to 'Lost Legends' (make it scrolling, change character etc), but keep Lost Legends: TLoD as a free game. The original Dizzy version of TLoD would still be able to be downloaded from the DizzyAGE site.

the real question for me is, if i made them all Free, with a voluntary donation, what level of donations would I get? The other side of the coin is, if CoTM is paid for, what level of downloads would i get?

Further to this, if i kept it as a 'Dizzy' game, i wouldn't keep the massively long title. It would probably just be Dizzy Legends Chapter 2: CoTM. And if i didn't have to re-work TLoD as 'Lost Legends', would people still want the original TLoD converted to scrolling? (that may be a question best answered after people have played the scrolling CoTM)

gahhhh decisions decisions

I sympathise with you Delta, I know exactly what you mean it is a predicament. If I may be so bold as to say I'm sure most people here would be happy to willingly donate for the Dizzy version, but then most people here would also be happy to willingly buy the non-Dizzy version... So what to do?
What about if you stick up a poll, .e.g
a) paid for non-Dizzy,
b) voluntary donation Dizzy version,
c) don't mind, will get it either way
d) doesn't matter not my type of game?

Don't forget though that these are only my opinions, and with your DizzyAGE history I'm certain the games will do well either way, both in downloads and critical reception. So ultimately I would just do whatever you think feels like the right thing to do.

The game related to dizzy would indeed be ideal.. but the game play has very little too do with the dizzy series and its not even 'Arcade Dizzy' style either.

So having it completely un-dizzy related isn't necessary a bad thing either.

I must admit the idea of "writing" ancient Yolkfolk history is exciting.

In fact it's so ancient that it has no connections with the known Yolkfolk, except that Jamie said so. The main character may look like an egg, but so does Humpty Dumpty and he's not going to fall down because of a licence :smile:

My point is that Jamie's game has not much to worry about legal issues and if he claims here in the forums that it's "Yolkfolk history", he doesn't have to mention it in the readme file. We believe him :smile:

Alex

Excellent points. So what you're saying is, Jamie could get away with releasing the game pretty much as it is and not even change the main character sprite? And he could still sell it? Score!

I'll say one thing. I'm not going to leave myself open to legal ambiguities.

I'll say one thing. I'm not going to leave myself open to legal ambiguities. That's probably a good call; I do think you could get away with the character design though. After all, the gameplay is so different and Codemasters can't own copyright of egg-shaped characters. Plus you see him from the top down...

other wise Humpty would be taking codemasters to the bank,
or Chickens will demand royalties.
Hell the easter bunny would be out of businesses..

you can't claim ownership of a shape, or an egg. Unless its your egg.. that you laid or your chicken.

I guess someone could come up with a plain egg character, and call it 'Egg' and then we might be in trouble.


***

:egg: Its name is egg.. a new character i invented and i i own the rights to its design and name. hahahaha

right, I'm currently working on something that I should have ready to show off by the end of the weekend. :wink:

It'll also show y'all what I've decided to do regarding having to pay for CoTM. :smile: