Yet, this is the type of presentation you can expect from the conference. It’s not eGames. Or Go3. Or Atomic Live. For every Steve Fawkner chatting about casual and hardcore games or Martin Slater giving APIs a bum rap, there’s your not-so-enthralling discussions on inverse kinematics and Z-buffering: The 3rd Dimension.

Having coded the odd program, edited a gaming tech magazine and now a gaming blog, there aren’t many presentations at GCAP I don’t get something out of, either professionally or personally.

But GCAP isn’t the same event it once was. Over the last few years, it’s become harder for me to justify the trip to Melbourne (Brisbane this year). Game Connect was once called AGDC, or the Australian Game Developers Conference. As AGDC, it was run by the Academy of Interactive Entertainment. I can’t say much about the administration of the event, but as a journo and a hobby developer, there was a lot more content to sink my object-orientated fangs in to. The Game Developers Association of Australia is now in control (and has been for a couple of years), and I feel in its attempt to make an honest, for-the-industry event, some important details have been neglected. The debacle with speaker fees is one example.

I believe GCAP is in good hands now, but what the organisers need are suggestions. Ideas. Offers. It’s an event that has to be taken seriously. So what I want to know is: If given the chance, would you attend a developer focused event such as Game Connect? And if so, what would you like to see there?

If you’re after more information about GCAP, be sure to check out Kotaku AU for last year’s coverage and the official website.

Say you’re an experienced dev. You’d like to go to GCAP and share your hints, tips and valuable advice. Heck, the reason people will be coming to the conference is to hear you, and many others, share your knowledge. Then you find out that, in addition to paying for admission to the conference, you have to pay to speak as well.

Pandemic coder (and part-time console performance judge) Tony Albrecht found himself in this situation. Here’s what he had to say:

So, if I want to speak at this conference, I have to pay full conference registration and I have to pay up front part of that registration for the privilege. Now, I understand that this is to prevent people from dropping out after they’ve committed to speaking, but is this really the right way to do it? Threaten us?

If you want good speakers, provide good benefits. Make people want to donate a considerable amount of their own time in order to present a good session. Yes, it means that you won’t get registration fees from those 20 or so speakers, but if so few people are registering that you really need the fees from those people that actually make the show worth attending, then I think you’ve got greater problems than just financial ones.

I agree – GCAP would be largely pointless without speakers. In fact, the sessions are a highlight!

Albrecht doesn’t finish without providing his own ideas as to how the GDAA can get speakers to come without insulting them. He also throws in a few suggestions as to how the event as a whole can be improved to get attendence numbers up.

What? I have to PAY to speak? [Seven Degree Of Freedom]