That’s a really sore point for me. When we did it, the impression we got was that it was a 10 week project. We felt a bit sneaky in that we started building our level editor in our own time 2 weeks before the competition started, but felt justified in that it was entirely our own code whereas other teams were buying in engines to use. These days you hear about students doing their 3rd year project on the basis that they can expand on it in 4th year and then bring it into Dare. For me, it breaks the ethos of the competition. I asked about it at one point and the starting point of work that you bring into the competition is taken on-board when the judging takes place, but I can’t see how a thoroughly polished game that took say 8 weeks of polish isn’t going to win against a game with 10 weeks of hard graft from scratch for example. I’m not a fan of this approach :([/quote:ce78cebbc6]
At the end of the day, its a competition. You play to win! :) If you can bend the rules significantly to give yourself and your team the advantage without breaking the rules, why not? After all within the industry and life it isnt always fair.
But hey i might just be a cheating bastard! 8)
I think the idea of 10 weeks only is too limited. Surely the competition is to find the best people not the guys who can bang something together in 10 weeks of crunch. IMO if your commited to winning the thing and you dedicated 3rd and 4th year projects to bringing it to fruition why not? I think you deserve credit for thinking that long term and more so if your idea has remained true and consistent over that time. Says alot to me, about whether you can finish a project to a specificiation.