I'm making a game and visually it looks like... junk. Luckily there are a lot of junky looking games that are fun. I'm wondering, have any of you gotten into a game that looks like trash but is loads of fun? If so, what was it about the game?, or the way it was marketed?, or.... whatever that intrigued you enough to commit time to it?
Poor Visuals, but great game...
The most critical question: Why are you making the game?
While it is nice to dream, it is unrealistic to treat a hobby project done for fun on evenings and weekends in the same category as a AAA game costing a hundred million dollars with a thousand or more workers, or the same as a game costing a few million dollars with a dozen workers.
If you're building the small project and are expecting it to compete against AAA titles with millions of sales, that is unrealistic and the goals need to be reconsidered.
If you're making it for your own fun and learning, or to show off to your friends, then it doesn't matter.
If you are releasing it to a broader audience, sometimes a "poor visuals" art style is done intentionally, other times it is a step on the process to build the next round.
If you are making it for other reasons, those reasons need to guide what follows after.
Games that are great fun to play but look bad are the kind where you build a core fandom and kickstarter better graphics for the next version.
a game that looks like trash but is loads of fun?
Dwarf fortress, the graphics burn your eyes however the game is just amazing.
The graphics work for the game because it leaves a lot open for interpretation. When you have a vampire hiding amongst your dwarfs, attacked by dragons, haunted by poltergeist; your imagination fills in the missing details.
Both fortress and adventure mode is great, it's the kind of game that you dust off every few months.
Found the game by word of mouth, it's a well known game.
Avernum, a old game however will always be one of my favorite games. It was released just as Indie development was reaching new heights and even for it's time the graphics was bad. What makes the game great is the way it feels, the menus, icons and story all work together with the story. Classic RPG.
Found a demo, back when demos was still a thing.
Papers please, the graphics don't really work with the game, pixelated text is hard to read fast. The colors works with the game. Great game although I only managed short burst, it's a straining game.
Although these days I brows for Indie games, I didn't want to play this one at first it was only while I was looking for a review on This war of mine that I found Yahtzee's review and he mentioned Papers please on the end so I tried it.
Important:
I really don't want to bash any developer nor artists here :unsure: . These are just my opinions based on screenshots/videos or formed after trying the following games. I'm not a good artist, only a hobbyist, so these are not proper professional reviews.
An example from AAA would be League of Legends. Back in 2009 when it went online it looked like utter crap, for real. Warcraft 3 from 2002 had a similar art style and although having significantly lower polycount still looked better. Following it's success the game was visually enhanced a lot though, but back in 2009 when I jumped on board, the main selling point was the tried and true DOTA gameplay and the rapidly growing community.
From indie I would mention Undertale. Did not try it, but heard/read about it multiple times. As I know it is really really famous for being a unique take on the JRPG genre, but only by looking at the screenshots, you can tell, that literaly 0 effort went into the graphics of the game. I really don't want to bash anyone, but it is not stylized nor consistent looking, it is "just" programmer art thrown together. I guess due to this it is a prime example of graphics really does not matter if the gameplay/story is awesome.
Another one is Terraria. Never really got into it, but I can tell, the graphics quality was never a big concern for the developer. It looks OK, but the sprite work was pretty basic, though haven't played with later versions/expansions, so it may be different by now + I remember it was "rushed" to market. The hook is obviously the well executed mining/building + RPG layer combination and being pretty much the first at this.
And the king: Minecraft. Even the color choices are pretty meh, but at least it looks consistent. I think I don't have to tell anything about the gameplay, or why it is a big hook for many.
by looking at the screenshots, you can tell, that literaly 0 effort went into the graphics of the game
I feel like this a projection of your tastes and expectations onto these games, rather than fair criticism. A particular aesthetic doesn't need to be brilliant and over the top to be effective or polished. There was a time when I looked down a bit on "pixel art" as "easy", but that's not really true at all. The art in those games accomplishes what it needs to do, at a level of polish that's comparable to the other components of the game.
There was a time when I looked down a bit on "pixel art" as "easy", but that's not really true at all. The art in those games accomplishes what it needs to do, at a level of polish that's comparable to the other components of the game.
I hoped it does not come off like I'm literally thinking about it as if it is crap or "pixel art" as a whole is crap for that matter, but seem like it did not work out well :( :unsure:
My opinions/review were given relative to other games with similar aesthetics or games within the same genre, not as nitpicking against some specific games or category which I dislike.
My previously released games (all graphics drawn by me):
Memorynth
Operation KREEP
Or the one I'm working on right now:
I am overburdened
+ my favorite looking games are retro and/or pixel art.
I know exactly how much work goes into them, but I was trying to point out, that Undertale is a prime example where no care/effort went into making it pretty. Care went into the story / gameplay instead (only? :mellow:), but "regardless" its looks the game was well received. Like the op asked.
It is extremely hard to compare the graphics quality level of games especially when looking at different kind of games or games from different categories/production levels, but another addition to my post would be about League. Heroes of Newerth came out around the same time and looked fabulous on release compared to it.
Sorry for sounding ambiguous about the topic :unsure:
An important thing to keep in mind is the difference between graphics in a specific visual style and bad graphics. Retro pixel art is not bad art because it is pixel art. Pixel art done badly is bad art.
A game can keep a clean and simple visual style, along the lines of Mini Metro, and still be polished to a very high level for a clean look and feel.
Thimbleweed Park is a nice example of retro style that is exceedingly polished and also fairly advanced. The level of work that goes into the amount and detail of animation is not a trivial task.
is an interesting video on pixel art and "8 Bit-ish" graphics that is well worth the watch.
What is the point of your game? Why is it fun? What audio and visual information do you need to achieve that fun and engage the user?
Undertale is a prime example where no care/effort went into making it pretty. [...] Sorry for sounding ambiguous about the topic :unsure:
I don't think you were ambiguous, I just disagree with you. I think Undertale has a very intentional visual aesthetic, and I don't doubt that a lot of work went into it. Just sounds like you don't particularly like the result, which is fine, you don't have to, but that's not any indication of the level of effort or care that went into it. It's a game that screenshots do not do justice to.
Edit:
It's also important to keep in mind that "being pretty" is not always the goal of art.
I know exactly how much work goes into them, but I was trying to point out, that Undertale is a prime example where no care/effort went into making it pretty. Care went into the story / gameplay instead (only? :mellow:), but "regardless" its looks the game was well received. Like the op asked.
I don't know, there are definitely some jarring style changes in Undertale, mostly I think for deliberate effect, but if you look past that it's pretty obvious that a tremendous amount of effort went into making each of the characters have their own personality and expressions despite being black-and-white pixel art (except, again, where it conspicuously violates this). It's distinctive and memorable and definitely more, well, just interesting than most "pixel art" I see these days, and I think that's because of, not despite, its stylistic idiosyncrasy.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
