Bradford Networks has a SuSE Linux-based system of network policy enforcement. We use it at Bloomsburg University and it's pretty well eliminated our ResNet virus problem.

Ah, yet another Slashdot discussion about breaking into the gaming industry. As is typical, seekers are deluged by pessimism. This takes the form of:

1. The market is saturated and thus companies are desperately unstable. They won't make risky jumps.
2. There are too many would-be game creators and too few opportunities.
3. "The difficult part of creating games is creating the technology behind the game play on time and budget." Elsewhere, Greg Costik has described an exponential, endless growth of technology and a linear, plateauing growth of the gaming population. (There are people who don't want to play games? Freaks. ::-)
4. Everyone has great game ideas/concepts.
5. It's the process of design and creation that matters more. Communication and teamwork are critical and often inadequate.

I don't know about #1, 2, and 3. But I take issue with #4.

I don't believe there is a surplus of great game ideas. Perhaps there's a surplus of marketable game ideas, but I'm skeptical of that, too. And marketable is not the same as quality, if we're genuinely interested in growing gaming as art, fantasy, experimentation, etc.

I'll concede that there are many systemic reasons why great ideas might remain undeveloped or under-developed. And starting with a great idea doesn't guarantee a great game. But I refuse to believe that all these talented designers, programmers, artists, and other creators are systematically turning great ideas into bad games. Most commercially published games are mediocre or downright awful. Deconstruct these games and you'll see that most of the ideas are clearly bad. The good ideas are usually "borrowed" from an earlier game or from outside gaming (e.g. literature, film). That's OK, but it shows the paucity of great ideas in gaming.

To be clear, I don't blame developers. I just don't see enough great games to believe that everyone has great ideas. In my experience in several other fields of creativity, great ideas are scarce and precious. Processes only enhance or tarnish ideas. For example, Kohan, at its heart, has some great ideas about reinventing real-time strategy gaming. Unfortunately for the sales department, it's sprite-based with an isometric camera, and the RTS market wants 3D with a flying camera. (Kohan 2 will be 3D.) But the great ideas are still there, hidden (if you will) behind gamers' prejudices about eye candy and precursors.

At the cutting edge, games are evolving from an individual creator to a collaboration. Just as in theater and architecture, game developers need to realize that great ideas are scarce. Instead, focus on #5 (above). It is more than enough to be a brilliant level designer or evocative sound artist. The joke in Hollywood is that everyone has a "great" screenplay yet to be discovered, but few in the movie industry believe that a caterer could take over for a director tomorrow. It may not be as glamorous, but it's ludicrous to believe every game developer is a Will Shakespeare or a Will Wright.