DirectX-based desktop games being sluggish and crashy means exceptionally mediocre programming, nothing wrong about DirectX at all.

Anyways, there's definitely a market for desktop games provided they're fun and look pretty like PopCap's. Don't worry about loading times. Turns out most people who favor these games are normally unaware of the amount of resources wasted by shitty OS's and modern applications in general therefore don't give half a damn as long as they get to click on something before their coffee goes cold.

One particular desktop game from the "fast and efficient" era that I still play regularly is called "Cub Rummy 1.1.24". Worth checking out.

I say go for it if you've done your homework, otherwise don't bother.

'Casual' games are huge right now.... Angry Birds is probably bigger than the Beatles. Not as much on PCs maybe, as you pointed out, but there's always room for them.

on the other hand, people are still going to demand flashy graphics. Just look at the stuff that's on smartphones and tablet PCs everywhere - hell, even the most basic user interface components are hardware-accelerated because they have to bounce, grow, shrink, blend and animate all the time. Wouldn't surprise me if plain GUI navigation costs more cpu power these days than five early '90s demoscene productions running simultaneously.

When I read "Desktop Games" I couldn't help but think about Desktop Toys, from Piranha

Desktop Toys Volume One (1995, obscure one (and best one imo))
Revenge of the Toys (1996, often mistaken for being the first one)
Dilbert's Desktop Games (1998, of course the licensed, popularest well known one)

Desktop Dungeons is apparently quite popular.

Nethack and Dwarf Fortress probably qualify as well.

That market has really shifted to mobile phones / apps. But for the desktop? This has been replaced with flash based games IMO.

I think maybe I should base whether I sell such a game or not on how long it takes to make. If it only takes me a couple months (not impossible, I intend to use VisualBASIC) then I should offer it for free to help spur interest in my various other projects, but if it turns out it takes six months of effort or more then it would clearly have enough content that people may be willing to pay a small amount for it.

Since I keep banner ads off of my site pretty much entirely, (unless you count the new GOG link I designed to blend in), I always make it a point to mention to people who are interested in what I do that, "The best way to support me is to buy my games and watch my show."

...besides, the only graphics I'm good at are solid-colour vectors and low-pixel-count stuff. :P

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

That market has really shifted to mobile phones / apps. But for the desktop? This has been replaced with flash based games IMO.

Yeah I think most people would just pick up their phone for a quick simple game or load up a similar web based flash for free like the ones on this website.
http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/

Gemini000 wrote:

I think maybe I should base whether I sell such a game or not on how long it takes to make. If it only takes me a couple months (not impossible, I intend to use VisualBASIC) then I should offer it for free to help spur interest in my various other projects, but if it turns out it takes six months of effort or more then it would clearly have enough content that people may be willing to pay a small amount for it.

Unless it's something really unique and catchy (VVVVVV comes to mind) I kind of doubt a payware title will go anywhere, especially if it's major selling point is "It's made in VisualBASIC and runs harmlessly on your desktop".

Just look at what's been up for offer in PC Gamer's weekly column. Or take http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-pc-games.htm .

I think it's important to note I'm not trying to make anything special or worthy of awards, but rather something people can load up and play without even having to think about it, without it interrupting whatever it is they're doing, and without it being full of sounds and music that would potentially disturb other people around them.

I haven't said exactly what the game is going to be about because it is actually kind of unique. I've only played three games in my entire life that had the same gameplay concept going on... that said, all three of those games were freeware, only one was Windows native, the other two DOS, and none of them had any real depth to them and were actually pretty confusing instead of straightforwards and easy to play.

My best skill when it comes to making games is making them addictive; a trait I sort of lost when I decided to start making pay-quality games, so this side project of mine is more so to help recover this lost trait I had and to reassure myself that I can still make games at all.

...but it's looking less and less like I'll be able to sell it for any money...

...oh well. I still want to make it anyways. ;)

In that case you should seriously get into coding mobile phone apps. You never know, you could make the next "angry birds".

Minecraft!!11!1!1oneoneone 😁

I don't think that Minecraft or Dwarf Fortress really qualify. They're both actually quite resource intensive, despite their simple graphics.

There's also Indiana Jones and his Desktop Adventures, a very fun little game I used to play when I was little.
Revenge of the Toys brings so many memories too, that karate office guy will always remain in my memory. Whatta! oohhh! 😀

F2bnp wrote:

There's also Indiana Jones and his Desktop Adventures, a very fun little game I used to play when I was little.

You mention that but not Yoda Stories, which improves on it muchly?

Angry Birds.

Jorpho wrote:

You mention that but not Yoda Stories, which improves on it muchly?

Never played that so I can't comment on it.