461–470 of 552 posts
I like games like NetHack and Baldur's Gate. I was quite disappointed when I bought Pillars of Eternity and its dull story couldn't keep me interested at all.
I would choose a nice story over nice graphics anytime.
And historically, the genre has responded to this by sacrificing some aspect of polish - typically animation, but also often by just telling you about a thing with text.
What Jeff has done by stocking up and reusing generic assets is essentially a way of reducing that load so that the game actually gets produced on his microbudget targets. And what's really lost in that is any sort of "wow" moment where a distinctive scene, magic item or character design can make an impression visually.
However, I do think he could stand to leverage technology better. 3D might not be nostalgic, but it is the overwhelming preference of devs trying to use generic assets, since it gives you so much more utility(take the sword model and reskin it - new sword! same building with different decor - new scene!) and even puts some stock animation within reach, when relying on Mixamo or similar.
Jeff is already using these kinds of stock assets in the new game, it's just that faithfully implementing them into an old-style 2D tile renderer system makes them look worse than they actually are, since it guarantees that they look inconsistent in scale, perspective, lighting etc.
One productive way to respond to his challenge would be to give him an A/B: license his existing work to a small self-funded team, have them remake it aesthetically without changing how it plays. Have it launch on consoles and mobile. Then we'd really know if the assertions match the reality.
Oh man. This thread is really something else. Like...for miles in every direction, all I can see are pitchforks, and here I am standing alone on a small hill thinking to myself "Holy shit. That's the Spiderweb software guy. I've played every single one of his games, EVERY SINGLE ONE, and loved all of them." The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be to make wonderful story-driven RPGs.
> The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be I feel like "exactly as good as they need to be" would actually be quite a bit simpler and, through lack of clutter, easier to use. See, for example, the Caves of Qud art style - https://i.imgur.com/Tul3mn3.png - which is substantially less visually complex than any of the Spiderweb Software games but, IMO, much easier to interpret.
"Exactly as good as they need to be" means "graphics and interface are of a sufficient quality to not significantly hamper interaction with the game, but just barely."
For example, a chess board drawn freestyle in crayon with a bunch of black and white poker chips that have "pawn", "knight", etc written on them in sharpie is "exactly as good as it needs to be," but it sure as heck isn't the same thing as an elegantly minimalist chess board.
Oh man. This thread is really something else. Like...for miles in every direction, all I can see are pitchforks, and here I am standing alone on a small hill thinking to myself "Holy shit. That's the Spiderweb software guy. I've played every single one of his games, EVERY SINGLE ONE, and loved all of them." The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be to make wonderful story-driven RPGs.
I've actually been tempted to buy Avadon the black fortress a few times. It keeps showing up on steam(after reading this I had to double check, for some reason I had a feeling it was one of his games), again i find the graphics to be appealing. I'm just not sure if i want to invest the time into an RPG right now.
It seems like an easy solution would be to allow the tiles in the game to be editable and let people make new ones if they're unhappy with the ones that ship with the game.
Oh man. This thread is really something else. Like...for miles in every direction, all I can see are pitchforks, and here I am standing alone on a small hill thinking to myself "Holy shit. That's the Spiderweb software guy. I've played every single one of his games, EVERY SINGLE ONE, and loved all of them." The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be to make wonderful story-driven RPGs.
I'm with you on the games being excellent examples of a super niche style done well but he's basically writing an article attacking the very concept of art direction as a waste of resources. That comes off a little disrespectful towards people who care. I think there's no point in making their games looking any different than they do (because it's part of their brand, now) but the correct response to a question of wh…
The way I knew I absolutely had to go to bed was when I lost over an hour's worth of progress due to forgetting to save.
I remember reading The Story of the Baby on IronyCentral back in 2002. [0] The Baby is now almost an adult.
The Spiderweb Software forums were my first major forum presence.
I love Jeff Vogel's crappy looking games.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vogel's using the level of graphic quality that work for him, but that doesn't excuse the inconsistent art direction and mixed art styles.
The art style is mixed because he reuses most of his graphics. I think his pot sprite is almost 20 years old now. He just doesn't want to commission new art for every game. New objects and skills need new art, and I'd doubt Philip Foglio is still available to draw them.
Oh man. This thread is really something else. Like...for miles in every direction, all I can see are pitchforks, and here I am standing alone on a small hill thinking to myself "Holy shit. That's the Spiderweb software guy. I've played every single one of his games, EVERY SINGLE ONE, and loved all of them." The graphics in the games are exactly as good as they need to be to make wonderful story-driven RPGs.
It's not my understanding that having a fond nostalgia for somebody's works excuses the article's salty tone that basically tells people they're wrong for thinking the games are ugly, coming up with all manner of excuses but never once embracing that the problem is entirely the developer's own and nobody else's; yes, that point is laid out there but it's given as an excuse, not as a justification. There's a fine line…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect he knew exactly what the reaction would be when he wrote the article.
Yeah, when you write such an abrasive post, literally ending with "haters gonna hate" and basically implying that anyone who doesn't like the art is stupid, I'm not sure what kind of reaction you expect to get.
Something that never seems to come up when one of Jeff's art defense posts come up is that an RPG has a considerably higher asset load than most types of games, not just graphically but all around. And historically, the genre has responded to this by sacrificing some aspect of polish - typically animation, but also often by just telling you about a thing with text. What Jeff has done by stocking up and reusing generi…