The BlackthornProd GameDev Challenge Controversy - My Response
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 фев 2025
- I share my thoughts as to what went wrong in the recent BlackthornProd 'Pass the game' challenge. Featuring Codeer, Ajackstar and myself.
See the game dev challenge video here:
• 4 DEVS Make a GAME wit...
➤ Wishlist My Game Blood And Mead store.steampow...
➤ Join the community - / discord
➤ Buy me a coffee - www.paypal.com...
Other videos and devlogs:
➤ 7 Days of Indie game Dev - • 7 Days of INDIE GAME D...
➤ • I HAD TO DO IT - Blood...
My Game Lost it's G Rating
➤ • My Game Just Lost it's...
Other videos you will like:
No Zero Days - The Path to GameDev Glory
➤ • No Zero Days - The Pa...
#gamedev #indiedev
Official challenge video: ruclips.net/video/20q9E-DHlNI/видео.html
Game I'm working on:
store.steampowered.com/app/1081830/Blood_And_Mead
Come chat on discord:
discord.gg/yeTuU53
When I watched the video, I felt that them rolling back your changes was the fucked up part. The game didn’t evolve in the way they wanted, so they changed it back. Kinda defeats the purpose…
Some devs have too big of a ego.
Your choice made sense. There wasn't an actual game by the time you got it, and no communication means no context/no idea what the previous devs intended
I agree! I would even say that BlackThornProd’s changes were confusing, forced, and uninspired. They removed the 3D guy waking up in a TV set and forced a rollercoaster tycoon game.
He's talking about the controversy on blackthornprod's changes to the game, not his
@@otallono no. Watch the video lmao
Yeah I think until the game play mechanics have been built, there is not really a functional game and everything could still change. These projects work well once a direction has been taken that everyone can see and then run with.
My favourite pass the game moment of all time was “where is my helicopter?” Unexpected changes are the essence of the challenge!
Haha my fav also. I'm still planning to rebirth that helicopter ;)
I agree! looking at the final video it's clear the game could have been better, but the no communication makes it difficult to all work towards the same goal. Still a fun project to work on!
For what it’s worth, I applauded your decision to turn the loose systems you received into an actual game. I have tremendous respect for Blackthorn, but the direction they wanted to take the game was no more valid than yours, and I thought it was very surprising and a shame that they scrapped your work first thing upon getting the project back. To me, what they did this time (trying to force their direction with no regard for the previous dev’s work) goes completely against the spirit of a no communication challenge. Seeing what happened, I’m not too convinced about that future « don’t remove anything » rule either.
Having a meeting beforehand would defeat the purpose of such a challenge too, because chaos is part of the fun, and so is not knowing what direction the game will take.
I don't even care that they started by making it an RTS. Yes, the first dev's idea was very clearly the best one, and the most fitting for motion tracking, but they should've at least made a first person player controller and just ONE small atmospheric scene, to let the next dev know what it was gonna be about.
What did bother me is what you mentioned, the fact that they doubled down on their idea. At that point just make it a game jam, I thought the point of these is having to roll with whatever the previous person decided to do.
Ye also in that sense I think blackthorn REEALLLY wants to get their game idea though in at least one these challagenes 😅😅 they always lose their ideas in the development too
why does this read like some cooperate apology. Say what you actually want to say jesus lol, blackthorn prod were being dick wads, plain and simple and i've lost a tremendous amount of respect for them.
> To me, what they did this time (trying to force their direction with no regard for the previous dev’s work) goes completely against the spirit of a no communication challenge.
But it seems to me Lost Relic Games removed all the RTS parts for his bullet shooter? Is he not at fault for the same thing?
@@SpearSilver There was no real gameplay loop when he received the project, just some loose systems. Blackthorn had a very clear idea for the game, but that idea wasn't apparent at all in the game at that stage. Lost Relic Games couldn't guess where this was going (I don't think anyone could have, honestly), so he kept everything he could (assets and animations) and promptly created a gameplay loop because there was none.
I thought:
-BtP changing it from FPS to Sim was justified due to it being misunderstood as an intro🙂
-You changing it to a Shooter was justified due to there being no core game loop otherwise🙂
-BtP backpedaling it back into a Sim was not justified and felt like a non-collaborative "imposing of the will" 🙃
I don't think they meant to come across so poorly but I think this explains it
yeah that was pretty much it. BtP is most of the time trying to make these sim games and it's starting to get annoying. the first dev's idea was amazing
This was my thought too. Everybody else was too busy just randomly messing with the MOCAP gear. What you did, being the only one out of the original batch of four developments to put any focus on actual gameplay, was necessary. Doesn't matter that a shooter is generic, it was still better than the nothing playing random animations prior to it. The mode shift was necessary to force the other developers to refocus their efforts on the actual gameplay.
You are completely right. And also having watched most of these pass the game challenges. BtP has recently started most of the game challenges pushing HIS ideas on the games not letting the other ppl give their own ideas a spin even tho imo the random devs starting the challenge always lead to something amazing
BTP did that because they thought the audience would get angry if they didn't.
I find it lowkey funny that BlackthornProd seemed to expect people to get angry at you, but almost all the criticism I saw was directed at BlackthornProd instead.
I completely agree take that at the point you got the game there was no discernable direction to the game, and I don't think people can understand what it's like to participate in a Pass the Game challenge without having done one themselves. It's a little annoying that every PTG challenge ends up with comments complaining about the change in direction, but hopefully the new rule will help
@@piotrbojkoff Hmm, that's a valid point, part of the charm of the challenge *is* the risk of doing something like that.
That said, I don't think the rule will change it much, since there's a lot of ways that content can be "deleted" without actually deleting anything, and often not on purpose.
blackthornprod made the rule so no one could change Their content, it should only apply to them to be honest, all the others devs do a great job
@@otallono I don't think so, I doubt they care more about their own contribution than they care about the video doing well without any drama
@@otallono Not always...
@@piotrbojkoff well when people see a video called "4 deva make a game without communicating", the assumption of what to expect is usually something along the lines of "4 deva make something and each devs adds on to what the previous dev made", not "4 devs get each others game and basically turn it into a completely different game", that's one of the reasons why BTP got so much shit for completely changing ajacksters game, well that and A) he literally said to not remove things yet he completely disregarded that, and B) his concept was pretty bad especially compared to the first game and it just made the whole thing worse, he has apparently done this multiple times in the past and people are really annoyed with it because he seems to not even get the point of his own videos. Ajackster and lost relic really need to find some better collaborators for these type of videos :v
For clarity: The controversy is not with my changes, rather those made by Blackthornprod, which came across as hypocritical in the final edit. In response they got pretty beat up in the comments, and the challenge now has 1k+ dislikes after just a couple of days - possibly their most down-voted challenge.
"possibly their most down-voted challenge."
Don worry, the centipede boss fight is sitting at a comfortable 4.8k dislikes.
I go as far as saying a decent part of this controversy stems from a lot of people looking back on that and thinking "oh look they did it again" .
It's the video called "6 DEVS Make a HORROR GAME without COMMUNICATING!" for anyone not familiar (I wasn't, either)
@@hundvd_7 he did it more than once with the centipede theme that's why people are annoyed
Fortunately for you, the issues in this GameDev challenge really helped to highlight some of your game dev strengths and resulted in me adding Blood And Mead to my wishlist.
@@randompolygon8401 this one was so much worse than the centipede bossfight imo. In that, he at least kept core mechanics of the game and overlooked/scrapped the story elements. In this one he basically went "na fuck it" and restarted the whole thing.
Honestly this isn't the first time for BlackthronProd. They do this all the time when they do one of these challenges. Its one of the reasons that its been suggested in the comments quite a lot that there be a rule added that you can only build on another devs work and not remove it. Though thats basically impossible to do or enforce without communication.
Its just really really annoying that challenge after challenge they do this while the other devs try and build off of what came before, for the most part. Maybe instead there is a specific genre and style (like fps horror) said at the start of the project and thats all for the devs.
Blackthornprod and controversy kinda go hand in hand at this point. I haven't even watched the video in question, but I'm gonna guess they took the game in their own direction as usual? I get the feeling these challenges aren't for the noble cause of giving indie devs a moment in the limelight, but simply because it's a concept that nets a lot of views.
I do love seeing the participating devs show off their skills though.
Other developers doing all the job, and they just post the video with minimal editing, what do you expect their actual goal? I haven’t watched it either, but previous videos were basically like this.
Have you guys watched the video yet?
Giving your own input, direction and twist is what all of this is about, right? The worst offender of "Doing what the heck I want" is BTP themselves, 9/10 times turning some cool systems and ideas into another cookie cutter TD game with zombie millipedes. Always the millipedes...
I thought this was an old video because this has happened so many times before. Glad to see that they never change lol
You made the right choice. I was shocked when blackthronprod immediately changed it back when it didn't suit their "intended" proper vision.
After watching the video, I was really excited by the initial horror intro that Ajackster created. I think going from there to a top down perspective was a really weird choice by BlackThornProd.
When you made changes, it made complete sense to me, the game was very directionless when you first got it. Your changes also tied in better with the creepiness of the intro. I wouldn't watch an intro like that and assume to then play a circus management game.
Overall, it very much felt like BlackThornProd had their ideas, and really pushed them too hard. Ajackster really put the crew in a great direction, and that was derailed. Which is fine, that happens. But it really bothered me that the disclaimer got added before yours and not just the whole video.
Yeah! The way BtP edited the video it made it look like Lost Relic did something horrid and unfair, but he literally did nothing wrong
It’s funny that after the disclaimer and your section, blackthorn decided to revert it to their idea instead of the first devs.
Yup. They say “nope my idea is better” and retconned it
Classic blackthorn tbh
The thing you received looked like a test scene for an asset pack. And blackthornprod had the nerve to put the disclaimer before your part like he did't trashed the first devs work. Insane
The initial choice of the brothers made no sense even if you see it as an intro and the second definitely didn't either. It felt really disruptive and as if they chose ahead of this challenge that they were going to make a circus builder and all their work went into just that regardless of what anyone else was doing
This honestly reminded me of that time where initially we were getting a movement shooter like ultrakill, but then a dev scrapped it all and made it just like the game they were developing. There seriously needs to be a "No Delete" rule
I second this very mature response. You're the logical heart of the Indie Game Community my friend. I was actually invited to a BTP episode but our game ended up being too complicated to make into an episode. There's no villain, no bridges burned, sometimes things just don't work out and you have to pivot. Noah and Liam are working really hard creating a community and I say let's just keep supporting that any way we can. It's to the advantage of anyone who cares about the Indie Game Community.
Personally I was a little disappointed when the blackthorn brother made it more of a stationary game and was happy when you changed that.
that's exactly the controversy he's talking about.
@@otallono I know
I participated in the GameDev Challenge. The biggest disappointment possible because BlackthornProd does what he wants and doesn't care about the people who help him with the videos.
I used to watch the gamedev challenges, but then this exact thing happened so much that I refuse to watch any of their videos now
With the Penguin game, there were so many mini games. Everyone added their own.
The least they could have done was turn your Bullet Hell into a mini game. That way they could have both ideas.
I feel like the biggest miss is having a special factor like you said in terms of these cool mocap suits, then failing to really show them off.
The first dev really tried to show case the suits, but after the view of the game was pulled back so far to be the top down it just looked at all the clowns and kids just had a similar bounciness that could have been a simple animation.
I think a simple change that allows back tracking of ideas but also limits “deletion” would be to have some clearer game themes. It’s left to the first dev to come up with something and often it gets lost in the various challenges. It doesn’t have to be detailed but and example could be just fps,horror, action or top down, sim management.
Really glad to see you participating of the challenge, and HAPPY NEW YEAR! :D
In my opinion, there is no problem changing stuff, sometimes is better to the end game, and as you said, the stage that you got was like a mini-game/experiment, nothing solid.
A lot of gamejams that I participated the game becomes better when I start to think "less is more" and remove stuff.
Maybe in future at least the game genre could be clear and solid to everyone before the challenge begins.
The BlackThor comments are angry about changes in previous episodes too, don't take it personally.
@@ravenburns6600I get your point but is unfair compare a gamejam/challenge game to AAA.
The new rule is ridiculous. Removing stuff is a part of normal game development, let alone something wacky like a no-comms challenge. I get what they're trying to accomplish, but a more direct solution would be to allow the first person to set the genre and provide a short description in the beginning so people are bound to it in later rounds.
Thank you for giving your view and thoughts on the video. I hope a lot of people see this and rethink the way they look at these challenge videos (I certainly will). On a side note, I'm also looking forward to Blood and Mead.
I actually liked more the bullet haven direction you have given it than the management sim, it turns out.
I feel like it's become a stereotype for there to be chaos and early dev visions are scrapped/ignored with BTP's dev mashups. It's a shame because concept is so fun to watch play out, but they've waited far too long to implement the no-removal rule. I'm truly sad nothing happened in the direction of Ajackster's idea. That was a stellar creative hook to start off with. Kind of wish BTP would just host these and stop getting themselves involved, making forced reroutes. I can't believed they had the audacity to boo you for your detour and then turn around and completely scrap your direction. At first I was also thrown off by your decision to scrap things, but I'm glad you were able to point out how there should have been a clear game loop by your turn. Hopefully 2024 yields much more positive mash ups instead of such chaotic and destructive ones.
Your respectfulness and honor is very commendable. I think you made a good choice and the result of this should be BTP reconsidering some things from the irony of it all, but not being hated for their perspective.
Excellent breakdown of the challenges these videos present! It was a pleasure having you on board man🔥Many improvements to come.
I think in general I don't think changes should be seen as a bad thing. HOWEVER I do think changing the whole style of a game in a challenge where you're not communicating with others is a bit odd. I think part of the fun is seeing what you can add onto something. Yeah sometimes removing stuff makes a game better, but this is a jam and a challenge, might as well run with that idea full force since that makes things more fun. At least I'd prefer a more chaotic and interesting jam game vs something I know someone has made before.
I wouldn't say i'm MAD but yeah, it would be nice if future challenges were set up in a way to minimize removing someone's idea. At least for the blind challenges. As someone that keeps up with the challenges it "is" getting a little weird seeing Blackthorn tunneling the games into top-down management sims. It would be fun to see everyone pushed outside of their comfort zone to see what kinda game you guys can make. that's just my take tho, if you're having fun then that's all that really matters.
To be honest I don't really care about drama I personally am not offended or anything like that. But when I saw video and after first dev Blackthornprod just went like "oh cool, here we have intro in which you as a player end in a FPS type of scene... cool, lets make a RTS out of it" I kinda felt like first few minutes of a video was just pointless and I was confused :P. After that it just went downhill and frankly your change wasn't that bad. Mostly BTP changes and way of thinking was confusing, because of shifting project to theyr liking. Most of those "dramas" from this series comes from changes to genre. Maybe every video should have genre theme "FPS" or something like that. That way even if devs will change some things they probably will stay focused on similar goal. Right now it is just pure chaos and sometimes cool things come out of it, but most of the time just confusion and that weird feeling on viewer side is achieved from this series.
Nonethless it is cool series... most of the time at least :)
I think your changes were good and yes, the disclaimer was super ironic, lol.
Thank you for posting this!! I usually watch all of those "pass it on" challenges on BlackthornProd, but somehow missed this particular one. Your video came on my feed before the challenge video itself. I paused your video 1/2 way through to go watch the video in question. I think you did nothing wrong either. And I extra appreciate this video for explaining your thought process and reiterating for the audience that there is no bad blood and everyone seems to know what they're signing up for. I wonder why that disclaimer was added. I wonder if another dev did infact have their feelings hurt..? But as you said the "no communication" is the part that adds some quirkyness and chaos. That should be embraced. But that doesn't mean that every single thing that is added should not be changed/removed. Sometimes the hardest thing to do is edit ourselves.
Great video and great work on the game!
I actually think it's very hypocritical of Blackthornprod. He's the one that kept changing it to an RTS style game. It was clearly supposed to be first person, he made it RTS. You made it a game, he immediately made it RTS again. The controversy should be with them.
I could kind of understand him misunderstanding that the original dev wanted a first person game, and him making it a 3rd person game instead. But yeah, the og dev DID NOT invite the game to be a top-down simulation game direction-wise. If I got that, my first thought would be some kind of action or horror game, not a simulation game. he def was being a hypocrit when it came to that aspect.
The thing about these collabs is that it could really boost your carreer and give you popularity, or do the opposite.
I've seen multiple devs get hate due to their decisions, usually these dev decisions are "removing prev devs work" like that one dev in another video that removed an entire level and art of a previous dev.
But at the same time, many youtubers had their channels bolstered and had a massive view count and subscriver coutn change after the collab
YOU were the only one that made that good. You made great choices and quality content. Then your choices got lost, granted no communication it’s fair to assume no fault, but the complete overhaul they did to what you added was just bad decisions from BTP his work was soulless and felt like a corporate cash grab style game. We want BTP to make something else rather than whatever he did .
I thought you did great! In the challenge you exaggerated how controversial your decision would be. I thought you didn't really get rid of much. You used all the pieces and turned it into a game!
I'm impressed with how communicative you guys are being with the audience and, for what it's worth, I applauded your decision when I first watch the video because there genuinely wasn't a game before you stepped in but I also understood why BTP would want to revert the change.
I appreciate you guys putting these videos out, I really enjoy them (and the twists). These videos are also great people coming up through CS degrees (like me) to experience some of your methods and creative thought process.
As someone who has participated in a pass the game challenge, I feel can weigh in as well. Unfortunately, their audience has been desiring something other than Pass the Game for a while now, but they don't seem to know it. As you said, the idea and intrigue of a challenge like this is meant to be born from the lack of communication, and from the miscommunications or new ideas which emerge from that lack thereof. During the one I participated in, people began demanding a "no changes rule," which runs directly counter to what we know as good and iterative game development-- if something is unfinished or needs changing, it should be changed. If someone misunderstands that need: There's drama, and a human element, which should be interesting viewing. Sometimes those ideas fall short, or don't crystallize in time, but people getting upset at any of the developers for trying to make their mark on a project, misunderstanding the intention of something, and changing a direction, does not support this style of content. The fault is not in you or Noa, but yes, in part due to the conceit of the challenge, and also in the audience for misidentifying the issue they have with the videos. They are not upset with the change in direction but instead asking for something new. Perhaps their new decision to add a no changes rule will lead to content the audience prefers, but I also believe that it may lead to even more bizarre and non-functional projects. Time will tell. Regardless, I agree with you about the journey being the most important (and for me, interesting) part. I had so much fun participating in mine and I hope the audience reaction to the last two projects doesn't hamper others' enjoyment of participation. I worry that all the negative and loud reactions will lead to very safe and less compelling development.
Sorry for the rant. It was very frustrating seeing everyone clamor for the "no changes" rule in the 1st 100 Devs video and then to see a similar sentiment in the course correction from Blackthorn and echoed continually by the audience has irked me a bit. I thought your response was well-measured and your Pass the Game video was a fun watch.
@@OrionhartI think you misunderstood what people want. The "no changes rule" is more like an "improve, don't delete" rule.
First of all we want entertainment, that's why we watching these videos. There's always good ideas, that are fun to watch how they evolve and becoming actual games. But sometimes good ideas got completely deleted. And that's frustrating. Emotions are facts, you cannot question them. And that's what we, the viewers feel sometimes, when some developers delete someone's work of hours just in seconds. Of corse we will think, that something new is not so good, as the earlier thing that we really liked and were curious to see what would happen whit it.
It's so sad, when at the end of the video when the developers review the finished game, one of them just say "oh, so someone just completely deleted my idea 😐"
There were good examples in previous videos, when someone respected others work.
Back to the improve, don't delete rule. You say, that if something is unfinished or needs changing, it should be changed. That's two different thing. Something is unfinished? Finish it! Something needs changing? Change it! But with improvement. Completely deleting things can be an improvement, but we doesn't have seen that much yet.
Maybe the audience is wrong whit the idea of the improve, don't delete rule, but something must be done. My opinion is that this won't affect the challenges much, because apart from a few videos, there were no such problems.
@@domjantt6 at the end of the day you're right I don't deny the emotions and reactions of the other viewers being valid. I just disagree with a rule like this being applied being the solution. If it ends up making the challenges better, I'm happy to eat crow, it just doesn't mesh with my own assessment of what makes the series entertaining to me.
I think there is a difference between "no change" and "no remove".
You can change the purpose of things without removing them. it's a building management game? great, but now it's also a top down shooter every time an attack happens!
Think of that one early game about penguins in space, and how it started as a weird rhythm game, which by the end was just a mini game in the greater project.
Or even look at triple AAA games like nier automata mixing together 10 different genres....
I want to think that the no remove rule makes it so the games become more "experimental", but only time will tell.
"During the one I participated in, people began demanding a "no changes rule," which runs directly counter to what we know as good and iterative game development"
But... that's the entire point of these videos. If we want good and iterative game development, we just buy and play a polished and released game from a traditional development studio. You're supposed to run counter to traditional wisdom. That's the ONLY reason why I click on the video in the first place. If I want realistic development process, I go watch a tutorial on how to balance your dev budget for the Q3 2024, and how to file the taxes to minimize payments. True and useful, but boring AF.
It's like making a video of a Minecraft challenge, like survive playing only in the desert. And then the first you do is leave the desert, to go to a different biome with more resources. And the justification given is that it's not the most optimal way to play the game in the desert, it runs directly counter to what we know are the best strats. Like, duh, of course it does, but that's where the fun, originality and creativity comes from.
The problem with doing this "no communication challenge" while being allowed to delete anything to any extent, is that it completely subverts the premise entirely. You don't need to communicate if you just start from scratch. The fun part is seeing devs stuck between a rock and a hard place. Tried and true development strategies only produce one result: convergence towards genres and game mechanics that have been done 1000 times over.
That being said, please don't take this the wrong way. I appreciate the huge effort to produce all this in the first place. And I do not condone any viewer hate towards the teams. Just keep it civil guys.
I personally subscribed to your channel immediately after seeing you make such a bold decision in the video.
I completely supported and congratulated your choice. Just putting myself in your position, I could not see a viable way of expanding upon the project you were given.
MY frustration and disappointment came with the fact that BTP decided to completely remove the contribution of two game developers (one of which was you) work just because the game wasn't turning out to be yet another top-down management game. BTP decided to not welcome a fun plot-twist to the video that would have ultimately made a game that would be much more fun and embraced by everyone watching (nobody wants to see yet another top-down management game), which made a lot of people mad.
Switching to a top-down-ish game to show off mocap suit technology may not have been the best decision.
It seems like most of the comments I've seen are berating BlackThornProd for their changes, not yours. You did your best and it would have probably been a better game for it. It's interesting that they left the disclaimer in when editing even though they're the ones that made the most drastic change. How do you watch the intro scene that was initially set-up and think "strategy game"? Anyway, happy new year and looking forward to seeing your progress on your game! Good luck!
Personally i like the no removal rule because it was clearly placed to prevent another centipede incident where someone spends their entire turn on something cool then has it immediately scrapped and replaced with a lesser equivalent 1 or 2 turns later, like the art hand or the cold map in the magic game
This was an interesting backfire. BTP really went out of their way to cushion the blow of your 'radical changes', but as a viewer it was very clear that you were given a mess and HAD to make an executive decision to give it purpose. They may have just misjudged how viewers would react, but since they're the ones with the power of review, it ultimately came across like they were projecting because they were bitter about the game not taking the direction they had in mind.
On the rule change, I think it'd just create way too much restriction as a hard rule. Devs need to iterate and prototype, and removing parts that break cohesion is just part of the process. It could be a fun experiment, but it does mean departing from the game dev experience that I think most viewers are interested in. It should just be a matter of mindfulness.
hey Bro, not even gonna watch the video but I'm liking it because you don't gotta make any sort of official statement. Dev1 started with something weird, Dev 2 and 3 scrapped it and made something wack with no clear game loop. And rather than scrapping it, you repurposed their assets and made something with a good tangible game loop. Then BlackThorn did a big baby move and actually reversed everything you did. You don't gotta apologize or do shit homie, as far as I see you're completely in the right
I have watched all the Blackthorn gamedev challenges and have enjoyed most until now. But his overtaking the project into the top down game that he is strong in developing, it just loses the actual intriguing aspect of the videos. He does this every time and this video just stood out so much because it was heading one direction and just lost it's soul as soon as it reached him.
I will continue to watch his videos and I hope he doesn't just defend himself in this occurance but actually listens to the complaints and realises what he has been doing maybe even without him recognising his habit
I’m glad someone got triggered cause now we have more Lost Relic content. Always enjoy your uploads man.
I really enjoyed the challenge video and your contributions to it, the BTP guys do a great job running them.
For what it's worth I agree that the changed rule may not be for the best. Game design is all about iteration and so much dev time goes into things that never see the light of day in normal games, not just challenges, but I'm sure they'll continue to evolve the rules over time to get the best result. You hit the nail on the head though, at the end of the day the goal of these challenges is really the video itself rather than the game, for better or worse.
Could be fun to have a file you pass along with the project that's like a limit of 20 words for devs to communicate to the following devs.
I liked your direction tbh. While a top down shooter isn't the most unique thing, you gave the devs coming next a chance to build on top of an actual game.
BTP just made a menu system using other people's assets.
Honestly, the first time I saw a "game" in this challenge was when you did that. What was it before that? I didn't get it
I'm not opposed to the "don't remove" rule at all. I think it's a good idea if implemented correct... it does say "don't remove" but it doesn't say "don't change"... I really think these challenges are best approach with an improvisation mindset and using the idea of "yes, and..." to build one on top of another... If you ever seen or heard an improv group you can see that the settings and conversations can completely change 180° despite they never remove or block each other, they always build on top of each other... the rule essentially encompasses the idea of "take what you were given and add information on top of it" ... That doesn't mean you can't take a really simple effect and flesh it out, quote the opposite... you should often take the essence of what was already done by others, and add to it, improve it, re-imagine it... but never remove it completely... Obviously as the game evolves there will be some vestigials that are no longer in use... Obviously you will have to rewrite code, remake some assets, redefine rules and the old ones will have to get removed just to keep the project managable, but it wouldn't be like "well, I don't want it to be 2D, so I remake it in 3D"... it should be more like "ok, it's in 2D, let's spruce it up, lean into it, or add a twist in 3D to it...". Because ultimately limitation breeds creativity, and if the devs in the challenges just drop half the mechanics and introduce a set of their own mechanics, then they were never challenged to be creative with what they were given...
BtP has to make sure to not implement the "don't remove" rule carefully, so it doesn't hinder the creative and project management experience. The definition of the rule should be more than 2 words... in fact I'd change it to "don't subtract" rather than "don't remove" to start off... Just disallowing anyone from removing anything will likely collide hard with the intention of the challenge :/
It feels like they have one single idea and every pass-the-game challenge is them trying to shoehorn in that idea even if all the other devs go in another direction. This isn't even the first or the worst offense, it's a consistent pattern of ruining a video that otherwise has lots of potential.
edit: actually, blackthornpod has only two ideas, not one: sim/management, and boss fight. They shoehorn that in every video
I thought that what you did was appropriate and made the game fun.
On blood and mead,you add a dimension were you fight version of yourself and after you get a companion with few skills to aid you,etc
Most people dont mind the change or remove content when it means to make the game better. I think people were mad when someone comes in says "not what i make , so im gonna change the entire thing" that messes us up.
I honestly gave up watching these types of videos from them because BtP have a habit of just scrapping all the design and work in the last phase and doing their own thing. This is at least the 3rd time they've done it. Why even have other people participate if you're just going to do something completely different at the end?
When you got the project, it felt like a tech demo with a bunch of fun animations.
You wrestled in a gameplay loop rather forcibly, this is what makes the pass the game challenge FUN! If there was a meeting to discuss vision ahead of time, then you wouldn't end up with the totally unique games and loose some interest as a video concept. I too hope they don't impose the no changes rule, though it may be fun for a few videos, to see how people grasp the work of the devs before them and make it their own.
If someone in the challenge wants to make a specific type of game, they should implement those features first, and worry about other pieces after.
In short, I think the pass the game challenge is a super fun idea, I think no one did anything wrong, and I am sorry that you even felt the need to make this video. I hope you get to do another, and that you do whatever you want to do with it! (Another follow up video like this would be fun regardless!)
In John's defense, this isn't the first time a dev scrapped large parts of the existing game in the BTP challenge. I wanna say it was the pig one in which an entire dev's work on art assets was nullified by a later dev. Either way, I think the final synthesis between both loops worked out well enough and if this prompted Noah to impose a new "No Removals" policy going forward, then that will make future projects that much better for all.
Would also be interested in seeing how people go about planning and recording their process for these challenges, since a large part isn't just them contribuing to building the game, but showing it off to the public and all the edits that go into the final video. Something like that would be valuable for anyone doing similar challenge runs in the future.
I knew this type of video would eventually happen, especially with that last video.. I do hope it improves and I can only see that no remove feature being a last ditch effort to restructure the chaotic format that's been created
GREAT TAKE!
but in all seriousness.. how much did they pay you to say this?
I'm just kidding around
..unless
Btp backpeddling Back to their idea/concept after your changes feel like a "no we wanted it that way we gonna do it that way". Really hollow in my opinion
Having some sort of chaos and drastic changes should be part of the challenge and it's totally fine but the issue is that BTP always changes the games into a management sort of game. I really liked the first dev's idea, would've loved to see a first-person horror game building upon that start.
BTP got his feelings hurt and ruined everything. He should only host the challenge as we are quite bored by his ideas and style. Cmon, a first-person horror game into a top down shitty clown management idea...
The game became an actual game only after you had your first turn.
To be honest, I liked your changes to the game better than anything else, it wasn’t even a game before you made your changes
Your change was ok, their change was ok, but returning it to TOP DOWN AS EVERY SINGLE F***** EPISODE OF THEM, that was "this is our way or no way".
This is a no communication, obviously it will be removed some parts, missunderstands will happen, but, that looked like that episode a dev just deleted everything and started almost anew.
Their challenge was very cool when it started, but, I hope more copies will come from this, because their games are, with some exceptions, top down and that imposing of their own view was horrible, it's disrespectful to the dev who made the changes (you) and US because we are the viewers, that looks like cheating their own challenge, maybe because they are not good in the development of other styles.
In a loose translation from what we say in my country, "If you don't know how to play by the rules, don't come to the playground".
I understand your stance and for the most part I agree with you! However the second set of changes the blackthorn brothers made seemed to undermine the hard work you and others had done before and that was the part that rubbed me the wrong way. It seemed like a dodgy move and if it had been me working with them, I'd have been furious. Im glad you seem to be unphased but this particular behaviour doesn’t bode well for future projects of theirs. If collaborative works aren't their strong suit then they should shift to a different form of content for their own benefit. Even with no conversation between the working parties involved, there is still an unspoken agreement that this project is a team built effort, it seems to me that everyone respects that but the blackthorn brothers. Just because it is their channel and their idea does not indicate they should have any leeway in making executive decisions for everyone else when it comes to, again, WORKING IN A TEAM. It's reads to me as childish and very self-interested.
Totally agree with your first call.
Tarodev was wrecked in their comments to take a jumbled and turn it into something actually playable and fun, even though he had to remove a few things to do that.
tbh I think the hilarity of this sometimes tug of war between devolpers is part of the fun watching these kind of challenges and it's okay if sometimes the endresult is just an entertaining to watch mess.
Just watched the challenge video; no shade towards BlackthornProd, it's all in good fun at the end and you were able to advertise your channel as well as Blood And Mead which was cool. However, I really get the impression that his disclaimer was 100% because he didn't like what you did. Game dev viewers are generally some of the most chill and wholesome around; no one was going to get on your case for your changes, that's kind of the whole point and fun of a no communication challenge.
Ironically, the comments of the video were tearing apart BlackthornProd for turning the FPS horror into a sim game. I don't agree with this criticism, but I think people were responding to his hypocrisy of scrapping your work immediately after suggesting that scrapping the work of other devs was a bad thing. I honestly think there would be no controversy had everyone done exactly the same thing, but without any disclaimer or rule change.
They wanted to create a clown circus sim, but the only way anyone would know that is if they were told it directly. Creating something extremely vague in a no communication challenge is so strange. I really get your change of direction, it shows how pragmatic of a dev you are and I think that's a great quality.
Ik this is somewhat of a hot-take, however I believe the changes YOU made should have been kept and would have bettered the game. TBH i am SICK of the same types of games being made in these challenges, these being, the click, build, and create troops to fight. I respect btp, but I think the games he makes for these challenges specifically feel VERY same-y. I applaud your efforts to make the game something interesting, and I find it unfortunate that it has turned into this entire situation.
keep it up man
To be fair, the unique twist lends to a lot more than people probably realise, even at its simplest face value it adds a layer to the later stages where by if the children can be whacked or re-kidnapped by the enemies you then have to juggle the amount of children you are in the process of rescuing. Do you try to go for a big dump and get as many in one journey as you can, or do you make lots of light and fast runs like a guerrilla ninja
I was more bothered by the fact that Noa undid your changes instead of going with the flow, I know they had a vision in mind but it did feel like they undermined your work, centipede boss style. Still loved the video.
My favorite of these challenges was the one where every single dev completely changed the game, or joked about doing so, as soon as they got their hands on it. I honestly thought it was an agreed upon theme for the video. Sadly I can't remember which one that was...
I enjoyed your first set of changes and appreciated the way you were clearly attempting to keep as much of the "content" from the previous devs as possible, whilst leaving it in a coherent state. As you say, I think twists and turns are the nature of a "no communication" challenge - if people don't like the radical changes in direction, then it's the "no communication" bit that should be dropped, not some unenforceable/unworkable "no removing" rule. Some of my all time favourite videos in this series are precisely the ones where there were dramatic changes in theme - your helicopter getting turned into a superhero being a standout one for me (though I don't know if you've gotten over that one still!!)
most people weren't mad at lost relics for changing the direction of a non-funtioning game. Most people were mad at Blackthorn for taking the game into a direction that didn't make sense/turning it into a generic top-down mangment game like he almost always does. As well as being mad that he acted like Lost Relics was in the wrong for changing the direction of his game while he has done so too many times with other developers in the past. and unlike in this case, where Lost relic made a non-funtioning game into a functioning one whilst still trying to keep some stuff from the previous devs, Blackthorn would change a functioning game into a non-funtioning one and straight up delete any and all progress. So most people aren't even upset with Lost Relics, but with Blackthorn for being a hypocrite.
My opinion is that people want the "Don't Delete" rule is because they get to see the progression of the game throughout the video. Like how you get annoyed at a gameshow when someone gets the question, that you know the answer to, wrong. You're frustrated because you know the answer, but they don't.
With no communcation, a short timeframe, and no idea how the game used to be, you try to make the changes you think would help the game or that you know how to do. I was a developer in one of the recent videos (Pigs VS Demons, my changes were in one of his examples of why the rule is being added 😅) and although in hindsight I think I removed too much, at the time I was doing what I thought would make the game more cohesive and easier for the developers after me. If I had known what the previous developers intended, I wouldn't have done what I did, but that in essence is the nature of the challenge and is very subjective. Someone makes a change because they think it'll be good, someone else doesn't like it and removes/replaces it with what they think will be good.
At the end of the day I think it's just coming down to people getting a little tired of the chaotic format. I don't think a "don't delete" rule will give the audience their intended result, but will be interesting to see what comes out of it
blackthornprod still ruined it like he usally does the games are alawsys top down simulation games bruhh
For some reason I had skipped that BtP video, but I didn't think there was any problem with your work. It was justified, well meaning and within the spirit of the challenge. There have been other devs in the past who didn't live up to that so well. Anyhow, at least to me, questioning dev decisions as a viewer is part of the entertainment.
Don't take it personally. One of the previous challenges had huuuuuge switches in direction and the comment section went rightfully ablaze. So I actually do believe it's more of a reaction to previous blowbacks that they decided to add that disclaimer and generally changed their direction for these projects for 2024 alltogether. Sure, your change seemed more obvious (and I didn't like it initially tbh), but they also didn't catch the irony that they already changed a lot and a "no changes" rule needs to be refined to make sense anyway. You'd probably want to iron out bugs or update textures later, so at a minimum these need to change and it already renders the new rule unusable without major details attached.
The entire point of no communication is that there will be mistakes and miscommunication. Sometimes it will go well, sometimes not. Personally I'm all for juat having a 7 devs make a game WITH communication as a series as well.
Clearly a lot of really difficult obstacles across this event (not just technical code but quickly adapting to unexpected circumstances) and you ran at them head on throughout this challenge!
anyone knows how that suit is called to make animation? and what software should be used with it?
it's called a mocap (or motion capture) suit, unsure about the software though
@@fiona9891 Thank you!
It’s all for fun, why are people upset?
I think the key is that there should only be additions OR IMPROVEMENTS, which may comprise replacements or even minor removals, because the foundation of it is remaining faithful to existing premises and making something out of it by thinking outside the box. (And your changes were definitely okay because the game was just an animation showcase lol.) Blackthorn's series is one of those that I want to like but he just can't seem to get right, so I'm hoping the nuance isn't lost on him. The change itself could be a net benefit, but the way he finally added it, by ignoring the request for months until it suits him in the moment, comes across as disingenuous and egotistical. I'm not saying that was his intent, but that's how it was perceived, and the impression I got before I decided to examine the situation closer since I'm good at understanding intent, but the general audience won't bother.
I think you're missing the point of why most people are upset.
Your change was not the problem. It was the second team who turned it to a top-down thing that made the problem. Then, the brothers try to turn it into a strategy build. Then you tried to fix it.
You're the least person Anyone is mad/disappointed. And if it was a sponsored video by roko for body animation and you think the first part was a cut scene/ intro into.......I don't what, seems silly and almost like the people didn't even try to understand.
And I understand you even said I thought it was a cut scene.... but really think it's basically a game jam. The way that it jumps to a first-person cool animation to a top-down is just ubsurd.
I think you're thinking it's about you(intro to the video), but I not being a jerk it's not about you, I know it's easy to be self-centered, everyone, no one is immuned.
In all this hole challenge got fumbled HARD.
youtube developer community when a game development challange with no communication ends up with most of the plans getting missinterpreted or scrapped by the next dev because they cant communicate and tell eachother what something is supposed to be
I'm really happy about The upcoming "No deletes" rule. I like these videos but seeing devs make big pivots while others will spend their time polishing other devs content. But it is a "Broken telephone" game 😂
Hi, I found your change a good direction because before you there was only an assets bank no game,you create a game with it.
And BlackthornProd got a passive of ruining "every" game in the "pass the game challenge no com" (adding big monster boss everytimes) so its very annoying on the long run to see them always fall from the same mistakes... And in every recent video they sell a course why should we trust them if they cant change their style of "top down", "2D", "art style of noah" to adapt to situations, to add things the website of the product check all the red flags of scam products xD.
The turn of their channel made me cringe. They're not indie devs anymore, they're youtuber + product sellers.
I Like the fact that they promote a lot of indie devs youtubers but that stop there.
Watch your channel since sometimes now, love your content.
I think the changes you made were actually really solid, my only real problem was them reverting it back and treating it like a "war" of ideas.
But despite liking your change, I still think the "no remove" rule will be great. you could still bring out new vision, you would just need to find work arounds instead of removing stuff.
As an example, you know how you removed the bare bone management game and made it into a bullet hell? (which again, I liked)
what if instead the option of putting down the builds was still there, but you controlled the main guy to go fight enemies. Think war craft 3 (idk if 1 and 2 do this too or not I only played 3), and how it's manage buildings, but also move around with your hero to fight enemies.
A bit ambitious for the limited time? sure maybe, but I think it would make for way more unique final products. Like, already a lot of these game challenges are ending with very similar games being made by the end.
But again, don't worry, I don't think anyone was mad at you. the criticism was nowhere near as bad as the centi boss thing that happened some time back and the vast majority of it was directed at blackthornprod discarding your changes, not you making the changes to begin with.
Have you seen the 3 months ago video by Andrew Cunningham?
On related issues with BTP
After watching the challenge, I'll be honest, I understand why they course-corrected. That series has an infamous history of "let's start over and make it generic" that they're desperately trying to get away from. They can't afford another project to turn into yet another wave based survival shooter.
When I initially watched it I was annoyed that you seemed to entirely switch up the game idea, like you had an idea of what to build before you even got the project and shoehorned it in that direction. And then I remembered something rather important, *I knew what the other devs had done and were thinking*, you didn't. The whole point of the challenge is not knowing, and that will naturally lead to occasional sharp turns in development.
tbh, i'm less bothered with what Lost relics did, and more with what Blackthorn did. when he started working on it, he completely seemed to ignore the first dev's work and just went into what he wanted to make, the beginning cutscene does not fit the game he started making. Also, the game he started making was generally premisless, which was the problem the final game had: it was boring. Lost relics tried to make the game exciting, tried to make it make sense. I think he whould have kept more of the other dev's idea's in there, but I don't blame him for scrapping a concept that was doomed to fail.
@@flamestormthecat2833 Yeah Blackthorn isn't innocent here, I'm cutting him a slight break since he was #2 and most of dev 1's work was an intro cut scene and then slapped on a first person environment at the end. It would have been nice to keep it but defininetely missed what dev 1 was going for.
what kind of contraversy can there be at a gamejam?
Ничего не понимаю.
I'm a simple man, I see gamedev youtubers finally have some drama, I click
Why is this even a controversy in the first place?
Honestly man your part in the project was creating some I was getting more behind on. I’m not in any way trying to offend, but blackthornprod is very stuck sometime in creating a game under the same art style and this “top down simulation/rts” genre.
I honestly felt your decisions throughout the contest had been the most reasonable.
Ajax made the base and it was a proper settup... this whole top down in general wasn't the move. Keep it first person. IMO should have been a horror circus game in first person. But that's where I stopped caring. The top down shit is getting old. Love the video, way to take feedback and explain In a mature and easy way to understand. Keep up the good work!
It's a cool concept to have no communication. But there could still be a rough goal that everyone shares. That way everyone is at least rowing in the same direction.
Did you get to keep the suit?
yes