Going straight to the point, I'd like more Pyweeks. :)

Actually, I kind of like having twice a year Pyweeks, my suggestion is a bit different. I don't participate in Ludum Dares very often and others may know better about this (please comment if you do), but I know they have mini-LDs, which are more relaxed, unofficial LDs, in lesser scale, with no theme voting (themes chosen by a person or maybe on a discussion on IRC, I'm not sure, and sometimes they're more experimental) and with fewer entries. Does the thought of mini-Pyweeks interest you? It's just a suggestion to have more Pyweeks; perhaps a mini-Pyweek every one or two months outside the main event. Someone more informed could tell us if mini-LDs work well and what problems they have, if they have any.

They would possibly be separated from the main site (, maybe), because the idea of mini-Pyweeks would be a more relaxed, more experimental and more frequent Pyweek, which probably would mean lesser games not so good as the ones in real Pyweeks, and therefore it would be better to keep the games separate. As with Pyggy, someone else instead of Richard can be in charge of it so he doesn't need to spend much time on it. If there's interest and approval and the only thing we'd need is someone to work on it, I'd be up for it, but I don't mind if someone else wants to work on it.

(log in to comment)


My time is more flexible in the summer, so I like the idea of having more, because hopefully one would fall in July or August. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to participate if there were going to be too few entries, say, fewer than 20. PyWeek seems to be getting pretty big, though, so maybe that's not a big danger.
To me, PyWeek personally feels more epic if its only twice a year. It's also a lot harder to set aside a week than it is a day or weekend (PyDay/LudumDare), so I doubt I'd participate in many, if y'all decide to have them.
Well, I like the idea of a laid-back pyweek, perhaps everyone agrees to only spend, say, 35 hours on their entries, so if they don't time to log 5 hours a day, they can go a little longer, or start a little sooner or something...
The idea being that you don't have to stay up to all hours of the night and burn yourself out, instead you have, say, two weeks to log a total of 35 hours on your entry.
This would keep everyone sane, while also leveling the playing field for those who go to work/school and have different schedules, so everyone gets the same amount of time...
pymike: I agree, which is why in my suggestion the real Pyweek sticks with twice a year. The point, I imagine, of mini-Pyweeks is to be a relaxed, "whoever wants to participate, participate" competition. Lower quality games are expected, and it's not meant to be something to worry about enough to have to set aside a week. It's a "keep living your life, and use your spare time" kind of thing.

RB[0]: I think enforcing a number of hours contrasts the idea of laid back. :) I would like it to have a message that it's meant to be a relaxed, "do it at your own pace" competition, exactly to avoid people having to burn themselves out. I would like to somehow make people not care much about the rules and competition aspect of it, not care how much time they or others spend on it, yet still have a reasonable amount of participants and have the competition aspect of playing and rating. I suppose how to convey this message is the real challenge. I don't know the answer, but maybe something can come out from this discussion.

Well, it's just a suggestion. If it appears that people won't participate, then there's no point in making this happen. It just sounds like it can be fun to have these. Or maybe something like this should be hosted independently. Keep the comments coming.
I think use one week to write a good is very good idea !

I haven't more free hours in one week.
about 20 hours to write a game in pyweek or less.
But I don't free it is not fair.
Because PM is importance of pyweek.
You need to learn use less time to do more.

I actually enjoy Mini Ludum Dares more than the real deal. I tend to not worry quite so much about quality or the amount of time spent -- I can do whatever I feel like doing. Everybody is very forgiving about the quality, because it is a lot less like a competition and more like just a group activity. Who cares if you "lose" on a Mini LD, it's just for fun.

I think that a Mini PyWeek would be great. It would provide structure to help me develop a game library of my own -- something I always want to do but always put off. Also, making a Ludum Dare sized game over the span of a week would be a very relaxing and enjoyable activity. I would love to participate in a few Mini PyWeeks if we do start having them.

The idea might be nice, but the main site should announce the news about when they start and what the theme is. People should be fully aware of its existence. As far as organization is concerned, the less the better, in my opinion. I like how Mini Ludum Dares are -- no theme voting, a few simple quick announcements, minimal effort required by the organizers, no real worry about voting, and late entries are ok. It's not about competing, but instead about having fun together as a group.

Also, with my track record of never completing anything (aside from a Towlr) I feel I need more opportunities refine my expectations of what can realistically be completed withing such short time spans -- I tend to overestimate and only have the time to complete half of what needs to be done.

ArmchairArmada just made a much better job than me of explaining what I'd like to see in a mini-Pyweek. Especially the part "Who cares if you "lose" on a Mini LD, it's just for fun" - that's precisely how I'd like the atmosphere of a mini-Pyweek to be. Thanks. :)

(Speaking of the main site announcing it, I think that it should also announce Pyggy related events.)
I don't get nearly as much time as I'd like to work on the pyweek site code :(