• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Top Games
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Daily Deals
  • Forums

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

apignarb

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Retro game fad: Opinions? 

Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

@ozzie the reason it took so much time to develop was not that it was that difficult as a game.of course any game takes time to implement and the graphics depend on the artist’s work speed and quality of work and the designer who has to approve them.but the reasons behind resonance are:
for one the team is not in one place.everyone is scattered.they are not working full time on the game ,everyone has their jobs.and probably some of them will be like Vince Twelve with wife and kids.I read somewhere(Vince’s own words) that during those 5-6 years Vince had been working for 2-4 hours a day because he had work for most of the day then he had to come back to his kids and be with them till 11 or 1 when they went to sleep and only then could he begin to work on Resonance.imagine this being the case for more people on the team and you can understand how it took so long.also most of the work was Vince Twelve’s since he was the designer,he worked on AGS and the puzzles.at the end he was still tweaking puzzles and things on the story.

i think this only depends on the studio/team/company and their individual restrictions.
i.e. check out daedalic.they’re shooting games like crazy.games that take about 1 year to make(probably more,i suspect they make the design documents in parallel with the production of another game and then begin implementing it after the previous is released).
on the other hand they are working on them full time and everyone is in the same place so communication is much easier.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1350

Joined 2009-04-28

PM

I do not understand the comments along the lines of pixel art = no effort. Bad drawings are bad drawings whatever the medium chosen. Sure there are “retro” looking games that look terrible, particularly in the indie scene, but there are also games that look great - have a look at some of the games in production on the AGS website.

A lot of indie “retro” adventure games are made by one guy in his bedroom, or maybe a small team of 5 or so (think Dave Gilbert or Vince Xii), most of whom are doing it in their spare time. I’m sure most if not all of them would love it to look like Crysis or Dear Esther but the reality is it’s impossible in terms of time and cash.

I can understand if there are people who don’t like “retro” looking art but to say it is simply a lack of effort on the part of the makers of the game does them a huge disservice.

Anyone here who has ever tried to make a game will know that it takes a huge amount of effort even to make a short poor quality adventure game that looks rubbish.

     

3.5 time winner of the “Really Annoying Caption Contest Saboteur” Award!

Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

if there was a Thumbs Up button in this forum i’d click on it on the above post

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 278

Joined 2008-07-11

PM

I’m making an adventure game with a 16-bit retro aesthetic and let me tell you—good pixel art requires a lot of effort. It’s extremely time-consuming and requires real patience and skill.

I understand there are games out there that use 8-bit graphics because it’s quick and simple, but I don’t think we see much of that in the adventure gaming space.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 974

Joined 2007-02-23

PM

Intense Degree - 03 August 2012 06:08 AM

I do not understand the comments along the lines of pixel art = no effort.

Don’t know if that was directed at me - perhaps my post could be misunderstood. Just to clarify, whether or not it was directed at me, while I do think it’s easier to make good-looking pixel art than pitch-perfect top of the line 3D art, I by no means think it’s an easy or quick process that just any joe schmoe can do. Making great pixel graphics requires talent and time just like regular 2D or 3D art, even if it’s the easiest of the three to look its best (in my experience anyway)  Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1350

Joined 2009-04-28

PM

Wasn’t directed at you and I don’t want to make it personal against anyone, it’s the idea that I don’t like and not the good people in this thread! Smile

     

3.5 time winner of the “Really Annoying Caption Contest Saboteur” Award!

Avatar

Total Posts: 3933

Joined 2011-03-14

PM

Intense Degree - 03 August 2012 06:08 AM

I do not understand the comments along the lines of pixel art = no effort.

Well it could also be aimed at me, as i think i use the word “effort”. Smile (however not quite in that context)
All i really meant was that i takes a bigger budget to make games with graphics like Daedalic.

I do apreciate that it takes both talent and an effort to make good pixel art, in fact it probadly takes more talent to make good looking pixel art than higher resolution art.

     

You have to play the game, to find out why you are playing the game! - eXistenZ

Avatar

Total Posts: 4011

Joined 2011-04-01

PM

Mister Ed - 02 August 2012 07:39 PM

I prefer the lower screen here:

You’re nuts! Confused

I find the MI Special Edition graphics soulless and ugly. Having more pixels is irrelevant if this is the brilliant result:


     

Total Posts: 247

Joined 2012-05-21

PM

Oscar - 03 August 2012 10:10 PM
Mister Ed - 02 August 2012 07:39 PM

I prefer the lower screen here:

You’re nuts! :S

I find the MI Special Edition graphics soulless and ugly. Having more pixels is irrelevant if this is the brilliant result:


There’s a reason I picked an example where the art style stayed the same. In my example, pretty much the only difference is a higher resolution. I would agree that in YOUR example, the top one is preferable. (Though I think there could be a happy medium between the two, since I actually prefer the cartoony look for MI over a more realistic look. Curse of Monkey Island is by FAR my favorite MI game, visually.)

My point was, all other things being equal, I prefer more polished graphics. So your example where all other things AREN’T equal is kind of irrelevant to my point…

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 4011

Joined 2011-04-01

PM

Mister Ed - 03 August 2012 10:28 PM

There’s a reason I picked an example where the art style stayed the same. In my example, pretty much the only difference is a higher resolution.

I wouldn’t say the styles are the same anywhere. The styles of the two games are the same in the same way as a painting of a scene by a renaissance painter and an impressionist painter are the same.

Mister Ed - 03 August 2012 10:28 PM

My point was, all other things being equal, I prefer more polished graphics. So your example where all other things AREN’T equal is kind of irrelevant to my point…

That’s true, everything is irrelevant when it comes to taste. You can view my post as saying I like the original better, but it has nothing to do with it being ‘retro’ Smile

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 15

Joined 2012-08-05

PM

Sometimes Retro games, just don’t need a remake. Old games make you remember how when you were a kid with old friends at home playing BattleTank or Donkeykong.

     

Everyone takes a road less traveled, not knowing all will lead to the path

Kindly visit if you have time. Click Me!

Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

i think that’s the definition of nostalgia Tongue

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 990

Joined 2009-05-08

PM

I’ll always advocate for the highest resolution possible. However, that doesn’t compensate for poor artistry like that god awful special edition of Monkey Island.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 514

Joined 2010-08-03

PM

for me i just have to like it….no matter what it is.i might grumble at some point because i can’t see sth but i won’t use it as a negative if the overall result is satisfying or more.

     

Total Posts: 247

Joined 2012-05-21

PM

thejobloshow - 06 August 2012 04:30 AM

I’ll always advocate for the highest resolution possible. However, that doesn’t compensate for poor artistry like that god awful special edition of Monkey Island.

I used that image as an example solely because it was the only side-by-side comparison I could find that showed pretty much the exact same image in lower and higher resolution. It’s not intended as a blanket approval of the MI Special Edition. In that PARTICULAR image, though, I think the higher resolution looks better.

I will say, however, that even in the original version I was bothered by the incongruity of the close-up shots, like Oscar showed, where Guybrush and Elaine look like regular, live-action humans. For the vast majority of the game the characters visually are treated as cartoons, with popping eyes, comically dropped jaws, that sort of thing, yet somehow whenever we see them close-up they look like normal people? Jarring, in my opinion. That’s why I’ve always felt that Curse of Monkey Island had by FAR the best visual style for the MI games.

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!

Back to the top