STANDARDS

post=124900
thoughts on aesthetics/visual first impressions, y'all?

not trying to be catty but i dunno if 'aesthetics' is even the right word in the context of rpg maker games, since to me the word suggests a consistent and deliberate design style chosen to enhance some aspect of the game and really I don't think many of them get beyond throwing meaningless layers of detail around. Most of the RM games that've been praised for their graphics I find incredibly ugly and disjointed, and I think it's because rather than put thought into the overall impression of the screen and composition etc it's easier to just throw detailed rips everywhere and obey some three tile rule and lump in a bunch of lighting effects and overlays (which incidentally usually looks pretty ridiculous for blocky pixellated snes-era games, but whatever). There's honestly been a bunch of times I've quite liked a thumbnail image and then hated the full one, because the thumbnail was more about the overall impression and mood than detail whereas the full screen just drops extremely detailed rips everywhere, losing the overall effect in meaningless distraction and visual noise.

Leaving aside the whole debate about overusage etc this is why I find the 2k3 RTP a lot more interesting visually than a lot of ripped stuff: because of the cartoonish 'light' lack of detail that makes it easier to get drawn in. Obviously I'm not saying that all detail etc is bad and that everyone should just stick to cartoonish stuff but I do think theres kind of a dickwaving attitude to maps etc here that misses the point a lot. It's like a game where everyone just tries to cram the most detail into the smallest space in the name of 'realism' etc and end up with a kind of visually unreadable mess that entirely loses the overall mood or impact.
Like this was posted to the GW screenshot thread recently as an example of MAP IMPROVEMENT:



The first one is kind of boring but the second is hideous. heh three tile rule bich *throws in a bunch of meaningless shit dumps some awful overlay on top*. It's grotesque and if I was smarter or had the energy I might start talking about you know how visual immersion is aided by losing meaningless detail (perfect example: those photorealist comics which completely lose the visual flow and always seem very stiff and false, precisely because of the very detail and realism of them) but I don't think I'm qualified.

i actually like what sanosuke does with textures etc. but this is not one of the better examples. at all.

I cannot think of a single overlay photoshop 3-tile rule shitfest that was any good.

I'm not sure if this is a coincidence or if the maker's priorities are in the wrong place.

Three tile rule: Don't have the same tile appear more than three times in a row or something ridiculous like that

I know most people say Gameplay=Story/Characters/Writing=Graphics...but I honestly can't say I agree with that. When it comes to video games, I think gameplay should come first and foremost.

Stop thinking everything separately and maybe you'll agree a little more.

post=124935

I know most people say Gameplay=Story/Characters/Writing=Graphics...but I honestly can't say I agree with that. When it comes to video games, I think gameplay should come first and foremost.

Stop thinking everything separately and maybe you'll agree a little more.

When people review games, they tend to think otherwise. That's why I don't really like how reviews are done, but it's the standard so w/e.

post=124928
I cannot think of a single overlay photoshop 3-tile rule shitfest that was any good.

I'm not sure if this is a coincidence or if the maker's priorities are in the wrong place.

Wasn't Ara Fell one of those games that had tile vomit all over the place?

post=124946

post=124928
I cannot think of a single overlay photoshop 3-tile rule shitfest that was any good.

I'm not sure if this is a coincidence or if the maker's priorities are in the wrong place.

Wasn't Ara Fell one of those games that had tile vomit all over the place?

Rise of the Third Power is a much better game, and part of this is due to actually being able to navigate the maps - and well there's a whole lot of other things that are better about Rise of the Third Power, but the improved map design certainly was a contributor to my increased enjoyment.

As for Ara Fell, it is one of those few games that I'd argue works better in its parts than it does as a full game. The maps were pretty and added to the game's atmosphere but were a real chore to navigate, especially since BadLuck was not the most studious or consistent of bug testers. The same goes for its writing (which was acceptable but had pacing and plot issues) and the battles (which had cool mechanics but was really not fun at all).

Anyway, yeah.

Stress
Maybe people need to focus more on finishing projects, getting feedback and then going back and tweaking them into a completed form. This is truly the advantage of working in a community like this as opposed to if you were a professional developer and worked in a vacuum.

I think the mindset is that people go and hide for a few months to make their game and when they deem it to be perfect and complete they release it and that's the end of the story. I don't see any reason a lot of the games on this site that have received 3 or 2 score review's couldn't go back and rework things and release v2.0.

I think there is a lot of pressure to get it absolutely right the first go and it doesn't have to be that way. Perhaps after going through this back and forth process a few times people would be less afraid of finishing projects, less afraid of getting it wrong, and more motivated to actually create a "finished" project.

I think this is probably the most important thing anyone has said in this thread so far, and possibly ever.

Well, the good thing about games (as well as the hard thing about gamemaking) is, since they encompass so much (graphics, characters, story, gameplay), you can make a good game excelling in one single element. A game with bad story but addictive gameplay (like FFTA) is a good game. A game with ordinary gameplay but great story will also be a good game.

As far as standards go, I think a game really needs to STAND OUT in AT LEAST one aspect.
I mean...
Average graphics + average story + average gameplay + average characters = terrible game.
Average graphics + crappy story + awesome gameplay + crappy characters = awesome game.

Well, I can accept crappy story and crappy characters, but not crappy graphics or gameplay. I mean... you can have a simple straightforward gameplay using default systems, but something strange and unbalanced. I'm also kinda picky when it comes to graphics.

So... yeah, when looking for a game I don't expect it to be good at everything, but I expect it to be great at one aspect, and receive at least a decent amount of care in all others.