Unity Pulls an Adobe! No more permanent licenses and 4x the price

[FuriousGamer87]

shihonage What I’m saying is that if a developer decides to use a character model to give you the illusion that you can run from point A to point B, and design a world around it, he better have good art, a.k.a, graphics, to foment player’s immersion. Otherwise, he should stick with pure text and invest heavily in game content, mechanics, etc., thus letting the player immerse himself with his own imagination. Wasting time with bad art that will not help immersion at all is a waste of resources. It's counter-productive.

Just curious, how many text games have you personally play and if you are so kind, please list them and tell us a bit about your opinion of what they did well in their gameplay.

 

[Viata]

Are you guys seriously saying that if the game has shit graphics, the developers should make the game just a text game?
Because what Lurker is saying and what Shihonage said about Fallout are not the same thing.
Lurker: game text or great graphics.
Shihonage: great graphics or graphics that uses text to help it.

 

[Mustawd]

They're saying that bad graphics is more detrimental to the game than no graphics. I think to an extreme, this is correct.

Look at Charles-cgr's first attempt at making his first blobber. He used clip art from all types of sources. It looked godawful, abd even made me, who usually doesn't give a damn about graphics, cringe.

 

[Viata]

Then ignoring Charles-cgr's original blobber, what do you consider bad graphics? Exile series? KotC? Ultima 1~3? Wizardry 1~4?

 

[Mustawd]

Then ignoring Charles-cgr's original blobber, what do you consider bad graphics? Exile series? KotC? Ultima 1~3? Wizardry 1~4?

That's really the crux of the issue because "bad art" is all relative. Which is why I said "to the extreme" the idea makes sense.

But because bad art is all relative, then it means whatever your audience expects of your game. So if you are trying to make a game for the mainstream, something like Copper Dreams is going to look like crap to them. But the argument ignores the fact that a lot of gamers enjoy minimalist graphics. Stuff like FRUA, KoTC, SNES Wizardries, etc.

So unless it's extremely bad graphics, I find it hard to agree with Lurker King's premise.

 

[Lyric Suite]

RIP Unity

And nothing of value was lost.

 

[Lurker King]

It’s becoming clearer to me what I was trying to get across:

(1) Developers should choose between a pure text approach or good graphics.

(2) If you are using graphics, playing a cRPG shouldn’t be considered just a matter of having an opportunity to make choices and kill things, but an immersive visual and auditive experience.

(3) Because of (2), good graphics shouldn’t be considered fluffy, since they are an integral part of the way you experience a game.

That's really the crux of the issue because "bad art" is all relative.

Regarding good or bad graphics, please have in mind that what I'm calling "graphics" is not just how detailed the game looks. The direction of art, atmosphere, the soundtrack, even the background songs count as graphics elements. In that sense, a game such as King of Dragon Pass has better graphics than FO3 - see shihonage's example. Some examples of bad and good graphics, in my own opinion:

(1) Voidspare Tactics and Spiderweb software games have bad graphics.

(2) Age of Decadence has ok graphics.

(3) BGs and FO2 have good graphics.

(4) Battle Brothers and VtmB have great graphics.

(5) Pillars of Eternity, FO:NV and Stasis have awesome graphics.

 

[Lurker King]

Then you run Fallout 3 and talk to some woman who's supposed to be a likeable character, and there it is, her face in all of its horrid glory, staring right at you like some reject from a mannequin factory, and yet IT SPEAKS. Her internal description at Bethesda may have been "plain village peasant", but what you're looking at is some deformed "The Hills Have Eyes" type character, and you're supposed to force yourself to accept what she's MEANT to be like.

That counts as bad graphics in my book. It doesn't matter if you have awesome detailed weapons. The direction of art needs to be consistent across the board.

 

[Mustawd]

(1) Voidspare Tactics and Spiderweb software games have bad graphics.

VT has mediocre/non existent art direction more than anything, but to me it's still very serviceable. I actually liked the Avernum games. The Exile graphics also look good. And SS has a big cult following that are just happy with him making more and more games using the same engine and art style. Count me as one of 'em.

Again, it makes a big difference based on personal preference. Let me give you an even better example: Minecraft...I hate the way it looks. I absolutely hate it. Just my personal opinion, but it's an incredibly popular game. How are you supposed to apply your theory or fundamental principle if "good graphics" are a moving target?

It’s becoming clearer to me what I was trying to get across:

(1) Developers should choose between a pure text approach or good graphics.

(2) If you are using graphics, playing a cRPG shouldn’t be considered just a matter of having an opportunity to make choices and kill things, but an immersive visual and auditive experience.

I guess we just have to disagree then. Avernum has zero soundtrack, and I still enjoyed it quite a bit.

(3) Because of (2), good graphics shouldn’t be considered fluffy, since they are an integral part of the way you experience a game.

What do you mean by this?

 

[Beastro]

Na'Tosha Bard

Spoiler

All that came to mind was a klingon working there with a name like that.

 

[Davaris]

Are you guys seriously saying that if the game has shit graphics, the developers should make the game just a text game?

I think what they're talking about is good art direction. A game could mimic 1980s tech and if the art direction is good those who dig retro styling will love it.

To me this looks great:

 

[Mustawd]

I think what they're talking about is good art direction.

(1) Voidspare Tactics and Spiderweb software games have bad graphics.

Lurker King seems to be talking about graphic fidelity though.

 

[FuriousGamer87]

So Lurker King have never play any text based games .....

 

[Lurker King]

VT has mediocre/non existent art direction more than anything, but to me it's still very serviceable. I actually liked the Avernum games. The Exile graphics also look good. And SS has a big cult following that are just happy with him making more and more games using the same engine and art style. Count me as one of 'em.

Again, it makes a big difference based on personal preference. Let me give you an even better example: Minecraft...I hate the way it looks. I absolutely hate it. Just my personal opinion, but it's an incredibly popular game. How are you supposed to apply your theory or fundamental principle if "good graphics" are a moving target?

I thought that was an established fact that people enjoy all kinds of retarded shit for all kinds of nonsensical reasons, including hype, herd mentality, etc. Britney Spears, mongoloid novels, feminazi beliefs, bad action movies and a bunch of other shit are incredible popular, but that doesn’t make them any good, does it? People’s preferences shouldn’t count for something in this debate unless they are able to provide reasons to justify their tastes. I understand that is very easy to succumb to aesthetical relativism, especially considering the complex nature of the topic, but aesthetical relativism is nonsense. cRPGs have some distinctive characteristics and fictional purpose that should be properly understood so that we can evaluate and appreciate them properly. There is a kind of proper aesthetic and critical attitude to appreciate wine and movies. The same thing applies to cRPGs. Just because there is no consensus doesn’t mean that every point of view is equally good.

(3) Because of (2), good graphics shouldn’t be considered fluffy, since they are an integral part of the way you experience a game.

What do you mean by this?

My point is that a cRPG with graphics is not trying to provide (and should not be judged as trying to provide) just the same things of a pure text cRPG. They attempt to immerse you and provide you with some kind of fictional experiential knowledge in a fictional world. Wizandry graphics must be great for its time, but it is not anymore. When someone say that the game has good graphics is just his nostalgia speaking, or his deference to the pedigree. I think that the fact that the explosion of graphic fidelity is culturally associated with pseudo-popamole-cRPGs didn’t help us understand the importance of graphics.

Lurker King seems to be talking about graphic fidelity though.

Yes, but how much fidelity is necessary in order to have good graphics?

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

That answer depends on personal experience. Someone who has enjoyed awesome games that had primitive graphics that piqued the imagination will answer differently than someone who grew up with a PS3 most of the time.

I love Angband and variants in ANSI without a tile set, likely because:

- I have been trained by early tech to use my imagination
- I have learned that clean graphics are enough

That said I do love good 2d art in games.

 

[Viata]

I think you are trying to come with terms that you are a graphic whore, but still trying to have a good reason for this. If the dev can't have good art, who fucking cares if the game is good? Are you telling people should give up in doing what they want(a rpg game that is not just text) because its art doesn't pleases you? Because that is what you said here: "he better have good art, a.k.a, graphics, to foment player’s immersion. Otherwise, he should stick with pure text". I can't remember a single game that it would be better/worse if they changed the art.

 

[Lurker King]

That answer depends on personal experience. Someone who has enjoyed awesome games that had primitive graphics that piqued the imagination will answer differently than someone who grew up with a PS3 most of the time.

I love Angband and variants in ANSI without a tile set, likely because:

- I have been trained by early tech to use my imagination
- I have learned that clean graphics are enough

That said I do love good 2d art in games.

Ok, but I think that most players that have this experience have a reasoning that is like “I grow up watching black and white silent films, so I don’t think that the lack of color and sounds affects anything. If you think that sound and color are relevant to the way you experience the film, is because you are a newbie”. Do you think that Psicosis would be cool without it’s theme song? Of course not. These things have more importance than we are willing to admit.

I think you are trying to come with terms that you are a graphic whore, but still trying to have a good reason for this. If the dev can't have good art, who fucking cares if the game is good? Are you telling people should give up in doing what they want(a rpg game that is not just text) because its art doesn't pleases you? Because that is what you said here: "he better have good art, a.k.a, graphics, to foment player’s immersion. Otherwise, he should stick with pure text". I can't remember a single game that it would be better/worse if they changed the art.

You are saying that the firsts FOs, BGs, Stasis, MotB and VtM:B would be exactly the same without the same direction of art, atmosphere and soundtrack? Is this the approach you want to take? That is impossible to defend. Do you even read the part where I said that by graphics I mean more than graphic fidelity and that KoDP has better graphics than FO3?

 

[Mustawd]

Lurker King , if you argument is that "graphics can improve overall gameplay experience due to the increased immersion" then I can agree with you on that.

However, the whole concept that a game should just be text if the graphics don't hit some predefined fidelity is kind of nonsense. As I stated before, this only works in extreme situations where the entire art situation is completely fucked.

Are you really implying that games with the graphics of, say, SNES's Wizardry 1-3 should not be made today? What about the FRUA modules?

 

[Lurker King]

Mustawd I’m not saying that they can improve gameplay, I’m saying that they are an integral part of gameplay. cRPGs are not just about smashing buttons and killing things, but they aim to provide an immersive experience. Moreover, I’m not only suggesting, I’m outright saying that games with the graphics of Wizardry 1-3 should not be made today, whether you agree with me about the importance of good art or not. If games can have bad graphics because art doesn’t matter, they shouldn’t have graphics at all, it’s a waste of resources.

 

[Mustawd]

I’m outright saying that games with the graphics of Wizardry 1-3 should not be made today

Wow...ok then. I guess we completely see things differently.

 

[Space Insect]

Graphics should serve the game and the art style. If a developer has just enough money to make really good gameplay, then they can let graphics go by the wayside and I would play it. I'm not interested in blatant tech demo games like The Order 1866 and other games that were meant to show off the hardware but go no deeper than that.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Mustawd I’m not saying that they can improve gameplay, I’m saying that they are an integral part of gameplay. cRPGs are not just about smashing buttons and killing things, but they aim to provide an immersive experience. Moreover, I’m not only suggesting, I’m outright saying that games with the graphics of Wizardry 1-3 should not be made today, whether you agree with me about the importance of good art or not. If games can have bad graphics because art doesn’t matter, they shouldn’t have graphics at all, it’s a waste of resources.

By that logic, should books be abandoned for audiobooks? You may not this analogy but why not?

 

[Severian Silk]

For e-ink tablets maybe. (Not yet. They're still too fiddly.)

 

[Davaris]

Lurker King seems to be talking about graphic fidelity though.

He is talking about bad art, which I agree with. Due to low budget, if you can't make your game world look anything but a horrible mess, IMO you should keep lowering the graphic fidelity of the game world representation, until you can make it look coherent and only then spend your meager art budget on a nice interface. Essentially that is what he is saying to do with text.

He keeps mentioning text which reminded me of Cypher. The game is just text, yet the art surrounding the text makes it look good. I can't see why similar could be done with a Wizardry engine that displays its world in wireframe. Some out of the box thinking, a brilliant artist and it would look great.

 

[Viata]

The art in this kind of game is not necessary, as the whole genre motivates you to use your imagination.