Thread: [Discussion] Thoughts on a Community Project?
View Single Post
  #29    
Old January 18th, 2013, 05:04 AM
FL's Avatar
FL
Pokémon Island Creator
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Gender: Male
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruno View Post
Continuity would be sorted out by people discussing it in the project's thread, as well as the occasional tidy-up volunteer (I said I might volunteer to do that). The allotted time per person could be different, or vary according to what each person asks for (to a limit) - I suggested a week as a starting point, since no one knows what the optimal way of working this kind of idea would be - it hasn't been done before.
Continuity that I'm saying is to understand the code/event variables used. To someone successfully does this, this person needs to virtually browse thought several events and keeps a good eye on changes. Of corse, this can be considerably speeds up if this have a good documentation, but some details will be missed. This also will be hard to get ideas and has other people rotation problems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruno View Post
I honestly doubt a project like this which requires teams and team members will be able to gather them all, let alone retain them. You said this yourself. I don't think there's any advantage to making teams out of people rather than let people make contributions if/when they want. Committed people will work regardless of whether they're called "part of the team" or not.
You're right in this point. There also some ways to incentive contributions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruno View Post
I did notice that you apparently assumed a complete replacement of all the graphics would be required, which is a rather silly thing to assume.
I don't assumed that this is required.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruno View Post
Besides, the point isn't necessarily about speed (not that I think pass-it-around would be appreciably slower than other methods anyway). It's about it being a community project. "Serial" or not, it lets everyone have an equal go at it. Surely that's the point of calling it "communal"? Don't dismiss it just because it's different, because it is different and may well require a different approach to every other fangame.
But speed is a important element. Slow results may make people (and public) to lose interest.

Like I said, your idea is interesting, but, in my vision, I don't think that is the most effective that with leaders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maruno View Post
This isn't a wiki, this is a game. Wikis automatically allow everyone to contribute regardless of the leadership structure. If Wikipedia only let nominated staff edit articles, and asked the rest of the world to discuss and propose changes (which could simply be ignored), then it would be more like what you're proposing. It would also be rubbish, obviously, and definitely couldn't be called a community project.

If there is a team and/or leader (preferably just 1 person, if any), then their job should solely be to make sure things don't get out of hand (this doesn't include preventing the game from turning into something they don't personally like). The less intervention on their part, the better.
It's is only a example that even community projects needs leaders.
__________________
Reply With Quote