SHADOWTEXT'S PROFILE

author=kentona link=topic=3269.msg65191#msg65191 date=1236296924
hey I had a point. People need to lighten up a little. You're all way too serious.

Yeah, but considering how bad the pun was of having a fireman and saying "lighten up," you were just inviting flames. ::)

author=Rei- link=topic=3261.msg64883#msg64883 date=1236210636
I think what F-G means by calling them cute, is something you could be related to chibi, which I would personally call a type of design that highlight physical features of a person that makes him/her appear similar to small child or a baby and hence, could be called cute.

Pretty much any sprite that you use is going to be chibi--chibi, or "super deformed" proportions generally refer to adult characters that are between two and three heads tall. Most sprites that you would be using in RPG Maker are going to fall into that range easily. For proper proportions in a sprite that's only 32 pixels tall, you couldn't really have a head more than 4 pixels tall, and you'd have to use the entire 32 pixels. Super-deformed proportions are basically necessary to have a character that actually looks like a character rather than just a "unit" in games that work at these sizes.

The only real difference I've noticed with VX sprites is that they're wider than the usual sprites in those sorts of sizes.

Now, you want to go with high res characters, then by all means go with different proportions. I am very much in favor of seeing some Guilty Gear-size sprites in an RPG.

author=Karsuman link=topic=3261.msg64712#msg64712 date=1236127997
tidbits

Your face is a tidbit!

author=MayorAnime link=topic=3251.msg64439#msg64439 date=1236025770
any of the Xanth Series by Piers Anthony

Please no. The first five books are fine, but after that he just started phoning it in and basically letting the fans write the books themselves. And they totally lose all wit when he starts just explaining the puns rather than letting them speak for themselves.

You want quality role models as far as puns go, you want to look at the Marx Brothers. Or Shakespeare. But Shakespeare's work a lot better if you know Victorian slang, and realize how practically everything any character says is some sort of reference to the genitals, or sex. "Country matters" indeed.

In both cases I think a big part of their ability to make puns bearable is the sheer speed at which they fire them off. They go by so fast that you don't have time to groan at the groaners and the sheer volume of puns-per-second makes it hard not to laugh, even if none of them are individually amazing.

Timing is everything in humor and wit. It can be hard to achieve that with prose, and the best humorist writers tend to be the ones with a clear cadence even in their written word--Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett being excellent examples. As is Dave Barry, for all he plays off all of his humor as "booger jokes."

I find it way easier to take a game with chibi graphics seriously than one that uses rips from other games.

Honestly, either use original graphics or write off graphics as a selling point of your game, because even using public domain images isn't really enough to get past the point that your game looks like every other game the community has seen, and even most of the people outside of the community in a lot of cases.

Anyway, why should you have any pride about your game looking good if you didn't make the graphics, or at least commission them in the first place? You haven't done anything to earn that pride. So yeah. Maybe a good rule of thumb would just be "Shut up about your graphics unless you're making them yourself."

I know this might sound a little harsh, but it's just the reality of the situation. If you're not putting in the effort, or don't have the talent, to make your own graphics, then you shouldn't be surprised that your graphics aren't very good for your project.

If your story is too important and serious to be made with the RTP, then nothing less than original graphics is acceptable. Otherwise you're just making a token effort towards making the game's look fit with its tone.

Also:

author=Fallen-Griever link=topic=3261.msg64467#msg64467 date=1236033578
Avatar is about as serious in nature as Pokémon. In fact, at risk of offending fans of either, the two are extremely similar (go to different towns/cities/places, solve minor conflicts between citizens of said place, something to do with elements or an elemental master/gym leader, a nefarious group of comedic villains chasing the protagonists along the way, rinse and repeat). I'm sorry, I fail to see how anything to do with Avatar is serious in nature. Serious to a ten-year-old still learning "life lessons", maybe, the same way I thought Boy Meets World was serious when I was ten.

I don't think you watched more than two episodes of Avatar. It's got plenty of similarities to Pokemon, but only the most superficial readings would treat them as identical, or say that there was no serious story taking place there. It's got plenty of problems, but the only American animated program to have anywhere near the degree of level of narrative maturity and polish are the Venture Brothers and Gargoyles.

Since I get the impression this is where you're coming from on "Serious" vs. whatever it is you think isn't as good, let me end with a quote from Ursula K. LeGuin:

...we say that children's books must be included in serious discussion of literature, and one reason we give is that many of the great works of imaginative fiction can be understood and appreciated by a child as well as by an adult--and vice versa. The understanding and appreciation may be different in kind, but its quality is the same, and deserves critical consideration. To throw a book out of serious consideration either because it was written for children, or because it is read by children, is in fact a monstrous act of anti-intellectualism. But it happens daily in academia.