That post's the new format basically, and very well written.

And Bal is right as well. In the industry it's not about being able to produce stuff on your own as much as it being able to produce from within a team.

Often training very talented casual developers is more difficult than training complete n00bs because they have their own working methodologies.

In the long run the casual dev will be much better, but there's some teething pains at the start.

Valve has this the opposite way round when hiring from the rest of the industry and calls it the 'beaten wife syndrome'. 

http://123rrnhhgyyt.com 

Very nice visuals, but it is an idea that has been used a lot.

It reminded me of that arcade machine's game, King of Monsters, Mazinger Z or Power Rangers TV series.

About the CVs and portfolios, there is the issue too, that when hiring people, the first selection is usually done by people that doesn't have as much knowledge and experience as you. They have been given a guide that describes the simplest points to consider when making the selection. That person doesn't knows about the programs there are out there, so if he doesn't see Ps/Il/Id in the CV, he will probably pass on to the next CV. In those circumstances, the portfolio won't probably considered as he isn't knowledgeable enough to understand how good it is or not.

The silent is right on that you need to know Illustrator and InDesign too, as there are many things that can't be done without those two, like well done text without Indesign/QuarkXpress, or good compositions without Illustrator, for example.

About the freeware alternatives, i know it isn't the same, but i know of some freelances in graphical/industrial design that switched from Ps/Il/Id to some freeware programs and they are pleased with the results, but none of them could use those programs when working in companies. At companies you mainly get Ps/Il/Id and QuarkXpress, the reasons i heard mainly at those are that they have arguably better compatibility when exchanging archives, and because of the technical assistance they provide, but i could probably add on my own to those fear of the possible instability and ignorance, of the alternatives. 

The contracts from publishers often define which software you can use, up to and including the engine you develop in. 

Tools != Talent.

A talented employee can be taught a software package, the opposite is not true. If you know how to use a graphic design program, you can easily be taught any other one. 

Talking more about teamwork than tools.

Obviously an idiot is always going to come second compared to someone who is talented. 

but, as far as DTP goes, at this very moment you have no other choice but Indesign or QuarkExpress.
And then there's the rest of the suite, and trust me, the smoothness of workflow achieved through Creative Suite is not something that someone working on a tight publishing schedule would happily consider giving up...

Which brings us to the post I quoted above: given its almost monopolistic position, Adobe is trying to have people pay steadily and forever. No bull. 

Hi, hoping this is the right thread..

I�m a Quake mapper interested in commercial (yes commercial!) use of its GPL engine and maybe you can help me;

I�ve read that old Carmack message when ID released the source for free (and many people misinterpreted that !) so.. is it correct to say:

-if I build all my assets(maps, sounds, models, textures,..) on top of this Quake1 source code(modified or not), releasing ONLY this source code for free, I can create a standalone game and charge money for it ? 

The engine is GPL, which means that it itself can be compiled and used however you'd like (commercial or otherwise), on the condition that you also release the source for any changes you may have done to this engine code.

The original Quake assets and game code are not released under that license. So you can't reuse parts of the game code or textures etc in your commercial product.

Any game code, assets, tools, etc you make that are not the engine are of course not subject to this.

You should read the entire license, but the gist of it is that you can do
anything you want with the code, including sell your new version. The catch
is that if you distribute new binary versions, you are required to make the
entire source code available for free to everyone.

read the .txt files
https://github.com/id-Software/Quake 

What if you were to create a kickstarter for a new expansion pack for the original game, but release the actual game for free?
I know Sock was going to do something similar with ITS. 

If this is about your pirates mod, forget it. 

Fifth: I would suspect to distribute any of the original Quake assets along with it, you would need permission from id (likely paying a license fee). I'm a little murky on how the game code side permissions work out here though, but I'm betting doing a commercial mod would be much the same, in that you'd need to pay a licensing fee.

What Sock wanted to do was slightly different if I understood correctly, he wanted distribute the mod with the shareware version of Quake, such that anyone could download the entire package and play. 

is that the kickstarter pays for the development of the mod but the actual release is free. (and if enough money was raised then a licence could be acquired for a boxed version of the mod) 

From a business/IT point of view what Adobe is doing is fantastic but certainly bad for small/indie users. For a company, a monthly cost for software is perfect because it is something that can be put into a budget for a department. If a new person is employed the IT department simply adds the software amount to the relevant budgets and installs the software. This system is also good for a producers who can budget projects better (cost wise).

One major benefit will be having all the latest (OS and features) software available and having access to all of the suite at once. One other thing is work flow, having a suite of software from the same vendor can increase work flow because there is less compatibility issues.

The new Adobe direction is designed for medium/large business and will make sure Adobe has a constant amount money coming in for future upgrades and development.

From a personal point of view I am screwed and will probably have to look for alternative software because I cannot afford to rent software for personal projects. Ironically what Adobe is doing will probably generate more pirated software because most small/indie developers will (most likely) use alternative means.

@Fifth, I was thinking of doing a Kickstarter for my ITS project, the money would pay for my time not the final assets and work with custom engines. It might have worked but there is one fatal flaw, there is only about 50 active people who play quake anymore! :) 

Ironically what Adobe is doing will probably generate more pirated software because most small/indie developers will (most likely) use alternative means.

I'm not sure that is what'll happen, but it's what I'm expecting will.

Also, Gimp/Inkscape etc are nice, but they really are no match for the stuff in Creative Suite. GIMP doesn't even have propper CMYK support out of the box, that alone makes it totally useless from a DTP pov. Adobe also has a pretty tight grip on the educational system. Winner takes all. While you can have various objections to that, from a workflow point of view it is enormously helpful to have an entire industry using the same set of tools. That's why if you're serious about getting into a certain industry it's simply more useful to learn the industry standard apps. Unless the open source apps get vastly more development resources at their disposal it's just idealist to think they'll be able to compete in the marketplace. I wish it were different, but I just don't see that happening any time soon. 

-q1 gpl source does include the .exe files ?!?(winquake.exe,glquake.exe,..)

-And do you know if after ID's acquisition by Zenimax Quake licensing model has changed ??

-Carmack himself stated that many people don't realize that if they do "true" total conversions they could create standalone commercial games off the source !
..that's why so few attempts were made (Malice,Shrak,Xmen,Steelstorm,..) 

There are more graphics tools than GIMP and Inkscape. Please do not talk bad about free alternatives until you know what is available. Krita for example is pretty fucking damn amazing and has many of the features some people miss in GIMP. MyPaint is great for painting I hear. I have not tried Karbon yet but if Krita is any indication then it's gotta be good as well (I like Inkscape but it has some quirks). And for photographers of course there are RawTherapee and darktable. I wish people would stop recommending GIMP as "the" tool.

I understand that the Adobe suite has good exchange (both in-between its products and thanks to their quasi monopoly to other people) but honestly, it sucks if you are forced to use software because its file formats are proprietary and closed. 

-for commercial use of q1 source what if I leave references/calls to Quake copyrighted assets(model frames,buffer sounds,ai.qc,..) in my game ?!?

..this gnu/gpl thingy putting me to the test so hard that giving up would be wise :( 

on the mac, Pixelmator is plenty good, they're tearing it up nowadays.
http://www.pixelmator.com/

For a hobbyist, I'd definitely recommend it over Photoshop. It only costs $15 and has a lot of features that casuals will love, and a really slick, fully featured interface.

Of course if you're thinking of doing anything professional, especially if you'll have to work with other designers, Photoshop/Illustrator/Indesign is still the only option.

I think the subscription model is reasonable, but it still irks me not to actually own software I've paid for. Oh well, that's the way things are going it seems. 

I think the subscription model is reasonable, but it still irks me not to actually own software I've paid for. Oh well, that's the way things are going it seems.

I feel the same, it seems subscription models are increasingly becoming the way of the future.

(random idea)
Something that would be cool would be an image editor where the layer system is swapped for a node based system. That way it wouldn't be a one way street. I often get into weird and redundant layer configurations where I wish I could just tell Photoshop "use this layer R channel as input for this layer's mask". Would be slower but could save a lot of memory and hasstle at times. Another thing that irks me is the layer style system not being modular.
Some more modularity between the subsystems would be cool also, the brush system can be made to stroke vector paths, but it would be nice if this was dynamic rather than just stamping on the pixels. Hmmm, maybe I should write my own image editor :P 

How about making the kickstarter price really low? Like $10... just see how much cash you generate in a months time. Even if all you make is $10 you will still be making money for a project that you are going to already be doing...
At least this way you can gauge the interest properly (remember, you don't generate interest *before* the kickstarter, you generate interest *while* kickstarting)...
I'd certainly pay $10 for a whole new expansion pack if it was done properly. :) 

Your map is getting big when it takes you 30 secs to zoom in the 2D views in Worldcraft just so you can use it smoothly after loading it.

Your map is getting big when you can't see what you're doing in the 2D views anymore.

Your map is getting big when you get lost in your own map. 

Use the "Group" function to combine finished rooms brushes and the use the "Hide Selected" function to hide selected groups. You can still compile hidden groups, it just helps to unclutter the 2d and 3d windows and it speeds up rendering times in the editor. 

respect, Qmaster (my reviews are in the works).

I found it a milestone when WC/Hammer told me "too many objects in view" and would no longer display anything unless I selected it. Of course, there's the visgroup solution to it. Heh. Just surprised me. 

all good points and ideas. Along the same lines, I think some more ability to use variables would be nice. I.e. LESS/SASS style color definitions, so I could change one "@accent-color: #ff0000" and it'd change shape layers, shadows, text with that color to whatever I choose.

The text styles thing they've got going on seems a bit weak but is going the right direction though.

I feel like the node idea might have been adopted already if it wasn't such a one horse race.