Adventure Gamers - Forums

Jatsie - 29 March 2013 05:36 PM

I can put my hand up to that. I pretty much just heard about the project and went “OMG! A new adventure game, by Tim Schafer; take my money!” If I had had any idea who Nathan Stapley was, or what his art looked like, then maybe I would have paused to reconsider. You can’t blame an adventure game fan for getting caught up in the Tim-mania though.

And I can totally respect that, but if you want to say you believe in the guy, and that you “don’t want publishers mucking things up” because you believe in an artists vision, then you can’t be complaining the first time you see a screenshot.

It seems like whether its publishers or backers, people always think they know better than the game’s creator. They want things to be more commercial, and more like established formulas from the past that already worked. The only difference is that backers can’t pull funding, so you don’t have to listen to them.

Kasper F. Nielsen - 29 March 2013 02:30 PM

The conversation ends and the argument begins when one part is patronizing the other, and that’s how I took your reply - especially since it picked up and “educated” me on something I never brought up in the first place.

I really meant no offense. The post you were replying to mentioned Bill Tiller, and what I said was kind of related to that post and kind of related to yours, so I quoted you in my post. Try not to read too much into it.

Frogacuda - 29 March 2013 07:37 PM

And I can totally respect that, but if you want to say you believe in the guy, and that you “don’t want publishers mucking things up” because you believe in an artists vision, then you can’t be complaining the first time you see a screenshot.

Tim Schafer is one of the game designers I am willing to put my absolute faith in. I consider him an adventure game genius, and I just want to let the genius do his thing.

Frogacuda - 29 March 2013 07:37 PM

Jatsie - 29 March 2013 05:36 PM

I can put my hand up to that. I pretty much just heard about the project and went “OMG! A new adventure game, by Tim Schafer; take my money!” If I had had any idea who Nathan Stapley was, or what his art looked like, then maybe I would have paused to reconsider. You can’t blame an adventure game fan for getting caught up in the Tim-mania though.

And I can totally respect that, but if you want to say you believe in the guy, and that you “don’t want publishers mucking things up” because you believe in an artists vision, then you can’t be complaining the first time you see a screenshot.

It seems like whether its publishers or backers, people always think they know better than the game’s creator. They want things to be more commercial, and more like established formulas from the past that already worked. The only difference is that backers can’t pull funding, so you don’t have to listen to them.

I feel as though you’re attempting to make a more general point rather than specifically addressing that to me, even though it appears more like the latter.

People do frequently make that argument about publishers, but I for one am not. I’ve consistently disliked every piece of artwork by Nathan Stapley that I’ve since seen, beyond merely the scope of this game. I do not have the blind faith in Tim Schafer which some appear to. Finally, I do love to complain, about everything; beneath this youthful shell I am but a crotchety old man at heart, with impossible expectations, and that will never change.

Jatsie - 28 March 2013 06:43 PM

Ark7 - 28 March 2013 03:00 PM

tom - 26 March 2013 01:39 PM

I backed this and I didn’t like the artstyle from the beginning. Most people said that hipster lumberjack was just the concept art, but it did not change much since then. They should have hired Bill Tiller instead.

I agree.

I wanted them to use Peter Chan. I saw his stuff in the documentary and I was just thinking “that’s amazing, use this guy!” The thought of all his wonderful concept art being ruined by turning it into “bagel-style” just fills me with immense sadness.

I agree too, with Chan it would be probably even better. And sadly, with almost anybody it would be better than how it looks now. 

Ark7 - 30 March 2013 05:12 AM

I agree too, with Chan it would be probably even better. And sadly, with almost anybody it would be better than how it looks now. 

I am interested to know what exactly it is about the art that you don’t like. I think it’s…. interesting and fun to look at. Don’t know how else to say it.

Is it that it doesn’t look like what you’re used to? Or is that you prefer more realism? More detail? Prefer more of a surrealist style or exaggerated style?

If people don’t like Bagel’s style, or the style of Broken Age, that’s fine. Everyone’s entitled to an opinion. I personally think one of the best things about DFA is that it doesn’t have to be so “commercial,” to cater to whatever is going to be most popular, but can try something more experimental instead. But that necessarily means some people are going to be disappointed.

People who wanted it to look like Day of The Tentacle, or say they should have got Bill Tiller to do the art, do give me the impression of being pretty close-minded about how adventure games “should” look. (I won’t say “no offense”; be offended if you like!) And if that’s what they expected, they were plainly delusional. Brütal Legend doesn’t look like Psychonauts doesn’t look like Grim Fandango doesn’t look like Full Throttle doesn’t look like Day of the Tentacle, so why would anyone assume that a new game from Tim would be in one of these styles in particular?

As for preferring Peter Chan… What “look” are you talking about, specifically? I’ve gone through the art updates, looked up his credits and so on, and as far as I can tell he mainly does environmental concept art. His pencil sketches don’t really indicate how it should be rendered in the final game (on Grim Fandango, for example, all his sketches were turned into 3D renders), so I don’t really have a sense of how a finished piece by him in his own style would look. And I think I can see a lot of his ideas in some of the environments shown in the last 2PP update video (some parts of the space ship, for example). What more would he provide, and what do you base the speculations about how that would look on?

Quest1 - 30 March 2013 05:22 AM

Ark7 - 30 March 2013 05:12 AM

I agree too, with Chan it would be probably even better. And sadly, with almost anybody it would be better than how it looks now. 

I am interested to know what exactly it is about the art that you don’t like. I think it’s…. interesting and fun to look at. Don’t know how else to say it.

Is it that it doesn’t look like what you’re used to? Or is that you prefer more realism? More detail? Prefer more of a surrealist style or exaggerated style?

I prefer more (and in the adventure games MUCH more) detail and a surrealist style.

Ark7 - 30 March 2013 06:07 AM

I prefer more (and in the adventure games MUCH more) detail and a surrealist style.

I think there’s quite a lot of surrealism, actually, based on what I’ve seen. Look at the mountain with the face, or the cloud colony. There’s also a lot of detail, for that matter.

Jatsie - 30 March 2013 12:35 AM

I feel as though you’re attempting to make a more general point rather than specifically addressing that to me, even though it appears more like the latter.

You would be correct. I’m just reacting to all the people out there that backed for Tim, but now tell him he’s wrong for what is a very deliberate style choice on his part. I don’t think the issue is execution, but rather people that just don’t agree with the executive decision to go with this weird, surreal painterly style instead of something more familiar, which is exactly the kind of shit we always cry about publishers doing.

Also, I’m not sure ‘blind faith’ is an appropriate term when taking into consideration the fact that people tend to be basing their hopes on Schafer’s entire back catalogue and track record. It’s an informed, educated assumption if anything.

If you don’t like Bagel’s art style, fair enough. It’s a matter of personal preference though - the game’s not just being made for you.

TimovieMan - 31 March 2013 08:30 AM

Say about Tim Schafer what you will, but he’s definitely not picking the safe route. And there’s NOTHING wrong with that…

I am happy to say I have complete faith in Tim Schafer. The man has more than deserved it.

You are so right about him not taking the safe route, and I love him for it.

This kind of game is so much harder to pull of than a cheaply and emotionally exploitative interactive movie-style zombie title, IMO.

I backed DFA to support an exceptional studio in doing their own thing, on their own terms, and to see the process documented. (In my understanding, this is what they originally proposed with their campaign.) Whatever comes out of it will have been worth my money, as my money will have bought them creative freedom—a currency that is hard to come by in professional game development.

I never had that much interest in the game or Double Fine in general, but I thought the whole documentary thing was too interesting to pass up - and I was right. I’ve definitely gotten my moneys worth with that.

When it comes to complaints about art direction, I’m always reminded of an old story about the ancient Greek sculptor Polykleitos, who, having spent his life attempting to define and reproduce perfect human proportions, polled a crowd as to what they’d like to see in their ideal sculpture.  After taking their suggestions, he made two pieces—one which included everything they had said, and another according to his own design.  When he unveiled the pieces, the crowds adored one of them, but laughed at the other.  Pleased with this response, Polykleitos said, “ah, but sculpture you revile is the one you have made; the one you adore is the one I have made.”

Moral of the story?  The uneducated masses don’t know shit about good art.

Lambonius - 31 March 2013 11:36 PM

Moral of the story?  The uneducated masses don’t know shit about good art.

So if someone doesn’t care for a particular style, it’s because they aren’t educated enough, and they should just be quiet and listen to what their betters tell them to like? Seems kind of elitist.