>"retro" game has pixel graphics
I can't look at it anymore. I can't look at that 8 bit shit anymore. Why do so many indie devs have to take the easy way out and just fucking do "retro"? It is gross. I don't care how many hours of space invaders you've played. I am so sick of ever other game being a platformer, a point and click game, or some combination of the two using pixel graphics.
Just played an indie game myself, FORCED. It's absolutely brilliant, haven't played a game this fun in a while. If you've got at least 1 steam friend its a blast, no stats or micromanaging, just running around solving puzzles and challenging boss fights. The graphics aren't retro BS either.
Because the vast majority of indie games are the same regurgitated shit. There are quite a few with non "retro" shit, but you don't hear about them usually as a result of marketing or people ignoring them due to the torrent of shitty indie games.
>"We wanted our game to look like a NES game for that retro feel."
>The graphics don't look a damn thing like what you'd see on a NES.
Yeah but only a select few games actually work that way. Usually most games just look like shit and it annoys the fuck out of me. I don't want games to look like NES games I want them to have beautiful art direction and high quality sprites.
I liked NES games for the music and gameplay not for the graphics.
Iji actually has a really interesting style for the sprites. I'm not fond of how it works for human characters (Iji, Dan, etc) but the aliens look really interesting, and I love the way they're animated
It also helps that Iji was interesting to play.
Indies don't just half ass the graphics, a ton of them half ass their gameplay as much as possible too because the nostalgiafag gaming hipsters will fucking handwave these spoiled cunts as much as possible CUZ ITS HARD TO MAKE A GAME YOU GUYS DONT GET IT
Indies have largely become just as fucking soulless and uncreative as the big nasty corporations they were so against.
I'm about to be 26. I'm at that weird age where vidya tech grew up with me, and every couple of years something would blow me the fuck away. Something I never knew was possible, something that I remember as a marked moment in my life. Like the first time I ever saw 3D grayfix (Fury 3 on PC, shit is fucking awesome, look it up), the first time I ever saw online gameplay, (UT99, kinda late to the party), the first time I realized that sometimes vidya can be more than a set of levels you just run through.
That hasn't happened in seven years.
Hero core looks like it could be played on a ti 83 which is super cool. It somehow does completely monochrome art beautifully. But lately I've been sick of pixel graphics when they aren't appropriate, like the style of stick figure pixel art characters in Legend of dungeon and the old art style of delver. That shit really isn't art; I can actually draw better sprites than that (and I'm a terrible pixel artist)
Are you sure
Not trying to be contrarian faggot but I'm an artfag and I hold high regards for codemonkeys a lot, since they're the only ones who can make video games out of nothing. Artfags can't make vidya on their own and the more talented ones are slaving away producing art for browser MMOs
>Anyone can pick up a programming language
Good one. I wish I could find the article I read that basically showed that over 50% of introductory programming students can't even comprehend simple variable assignment.
because it's cheap and easy to create.
Don't ask yourself why indie games utilise a cheap aesthetic - it's part of the scene, and the "1-3 men do everything approach".
What you should be asking yourself is "why aren't AAA publishers taking these now proven mechanics and slathering them with money and polish instead of churning out yet another uninspired FPS?"
Kind of. I can do the code for a game no problem, but I'm not artistic for shit. So going with a simple "retro" art style would probably be my best bet. I can only assume the same is true for a lot of indie devs.
I've never seen that happen.
The thing is, there are a LOT of retro systems, each with their own unique aesthetic. VVVVVV, for example, is heavily reminiscent of the visuals produced by the ZX Spectrum.
Not that I know how to make each objects interact with each other or even make the slideshow move. That was a weak answer.
Enlighten me what "tools" let you make a game without at least knowing how to code, don't say game maker because that still requires you to learn a fucking language since the other guy was claiming you could make a game out of a bunch of drawings.
Worst thing is, the pixel art they do doesn't even match the good shit that was really done back then.
As someone who grew up playing 8 and 16 bit, the retro indie games barely give me any nostalgia because they do not look like the games I used to play, at all.
>requires no coding to make a game
Nope, it still requires you to learn a different language and I said no game maker shit, try again
That's not a language. It's the programming equivalent of fucking Lego, same with Game Maker's D&D system.
I know you want it all to sound like some mystical process, but it's not.
No, there's something very wrong with modern pixel graphics.
Indie devs use MUH RETRO as a justification for producing horrible pixel art that would have never cut it in the 80's and 90's.
>and I said no game maker shit
GUYS I WANT YOU TO ADD 1 AND 1 TOGETHER, BUT YOU CAN'T SAY 2. LOOK IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO ADD 1 AND 1 TOGETHER, TRY AGAIN!!!!
In case you're too dumb to understand, the fact that you already knew you had to exclude something shows that you were wrong to begin with.
On another note, can we all write moot and tell him to pick a different captcha provider, if there is one? I'm tired of taking 10 minutes refreshing capchas just to get one that is actually solvable.
>game look worse than early NES games
> core 2 quad
> 2 gb of ram
>nvidia 7800 gtx
that's because it actually started out as an NES game and adheres very closely to the rules for creating a game on that system.
Those usually aren't totally realistic requirements.
But, to be fair, those games are usually significantly more inefficient than their retro forebears. I mean, for starters most of them run in Windows. Which means you're rendering in 16, 24 or 32bit color, at a ridiculously high resolution.
That would increase the size of the game exponentially.
Fun fact: The emulator required to emulate Space Invaders is several hundred times the size of it's ROMs.
>Game is pixel art that emulates a certain console.
>It pulls it off extremely accurately, and flawlessly, as if it were a port from that original console.
>game is then remade with even better graphics that don't emulate any console whatsoever, they just look fucking god-tier and have greater atmosphere.
But guys, our game provides the best 8-bit™ and 16-bit™ retro experience! This game is basically taken out of a SNES with some modernized* mechanics. We're pouring love** into this amazing spritework!
Please back our kickstarter! We only need $600,000 to allow you a true re-experience the best retro gaming has to offer!
How long until low poly starts replacing pixel art as the go to easy to make "retro" look
it's easy as fuck to learn enough blender or maya to make models like this in a day or two, and i personally like the look but predict it will be overused as fuck after it catches on. the catch is having shaders that make it look good while still being able to maintain a good framerate on any machine.
You have a point then, however I'm gonna test the water to the very drop.
Since the other anon further implied that its become piss easy to make games that even lazy asinines who didn't learn the trade would be able to churn out one. Wasn't that the purpose of 8 bit trackers? Devs couldn't afford to hire bands or play music themselves back then.
What are you even talking about?
carmack is working on oculus VR, recently abrash joined the company. Two legends in programming 3d environments.. combined. I'm absolutely sure this shit will blow me away when the time comes
Actually fuck, I should jump on the bandwagon and spend little over a year making a "retro" game then never have to work again. Even if I only snatch $200,000 off the project, I'd have a huge jump in quality of live with some careful investments.
>Wasn't that the purpose of 8 bit trackers?
no, the purpose of trackers was to simplify and standardise the format of music, moving from the 8-bit to 16-bit platformers.
They were so useful they wound up being backported to 8-bit systems.
What was the last biggest thing you saw?
It's funny, I haven't seen a single indie game that limited itself to the NES's actual graphical limitations. Not one. It's kind of bizarre - the NES has an extremely distinct visual style due to the limited but unique color palette, as well as the rigid 8-palettes-of-3-colors-plus-a-background-color rule.
Yet none of them can stick to it.
I just don't understand.
This is a 2009 game. It came on a genuine NES cart.
What is inherently wrong with pixel art and retro styled games?
And no the fact that so many indie devs do it is not a legitimate complaint. It's like complaining that all AAA developers use 3D models.
Sure, shit on games with bad pixel graphics all you want. But Shovel Knight is getting dragged through the mud by /v/ for no real reason other than it emulates and older style. The game is great. It's extremely well made. And the amount of attention put into keeping it so accurate to the NES style is impressive.
This just feels like another one of those things where the meaning behind the problem is lost and /v/ just starts parroting shit without knowing why.
>What is inherently wrong with pixel art and retro styled games?
There is nothing wrong with it at all.
It's all about how it's handled.
Some games make really nice art for 2D games.
Others do not even try and use retro graphics as a way to cut corners and make games that look like nothing that was ever released.
Personally I wouldn't even mind that very much if they played good.
Can you explain >>250274858 and back up >>250269436
Because my original argument was that artists alone can't code, therefore are ultimately worth less than programmers because they can't make games from scratch.
As for the one about music tracker, the first time it was brought into the market it WAS meant for video game dev only, and was a big flop at that. What it had relevance to artists being able to use some lego-tier game dev kit is because they both served as crutch and the other anon was trying to tie in how some baby first program will become the doom of video game.
I think it's less about cutting corners and more about not having the skill period. Pixel graphics take longer but they take less knowledge. You don't have to really learn anything at all.
You mention how Shovel Knight is trying to look like an NES game. I can't post pics right now, but
I'm looking at the screenshots at the bottom of the page, and I notice the backgrounds in particular use way too many colors to be an NES game. It's more like a SNES game with subpar graphics in its current state.
>devs advertise SNES-like retro graphics
>the game is 600MB
La-mulana was $15 and it's my favorite game of all time.
Apparently Shovel Knight "Deluxe" version is $25, normal version $15. Does it have the same amount of content/quality as La-mulana to make it worth it?
You know how colors work in 8bit games right?
I only count 5 colors in the background.
Same on all the sprites.
This is exactly what my point was. /v/ has no idea what they're talking about but will still try to argue and shitpost.
I'm not really following your comment on 8-bit trackers. Are you talking about modern ones, like FamiTracker, used in modern games? Or trackers used in actual games for 8-bit systems of the past?
Nobody claimed it would. Quit moving the goalposts faggot.
They're trying to emulate the look and feel of an 8bit game.
They accomplished that and unlike many indie devs actually stuck to the rules and limitations that came with traditional 8bit gaming.
>NES inspired games
>Yellow is used in the color palette
Also, what do you mean by
>rigid 8-palettes-of-3-colors-plus-a-background-color rule
Like, you have a palette of 8 colors, can only use three, with a background? Or...?
You should. Y'know, since it actually imposes the hardware limitations of that style on it.
This picture comes from the 8bit console PC Engine.
I do know how color works in 8-bit games, probably better than you as I've dabbled in homebrew.
5 colors is more than, say, the NES could handle. For example, those trees overlapping the clouds? Wouldn't work on an NES. You'd have to eliminate one color.
As for the sprites, the limit is 3 colors plus alpha, but I'll give it a pass since overlapping sprites were often used to give the illusion of more colors. Although if that plant is a sprite, you've probably met/exceeded the palette limit.
NES actual limitations are four sets of 4 colors for the background, and one of those four colors is the same for all the 4 sets, and you can only change those sets on every 16x16 pixel block (you can 8x8 with the MMC5 mapper, but well, very few games actually use it).
And sprites get their individual 4 sets of 3 colors.
Also the colors can only be one of the 64 of this palette on the picture (with only 52 being not black).
As a programfag Construct 2 is actually really frustrating for me to use specifically because of its building blocks style "programming."
While it makes some things pretty easy overall it's pretty slow to work with and dealing with things like arrays takes so many needless steps.
>Making your game look shit on purpose is an achievement
when will indieshits learn?
You are aware that 8 bit systems didn't have much in the way of sample playback, right? They mostly just generated music using hardware wave generators modulated via code. This was also a good way to save space when 32 kilobytes was considered a lot for an entire game.
Yes, but like all NES games, and despite using every hack possible for maximum fidelity, it only displays so many colors.
That's the problem with indie '8-bit.' It doesn't look 8-bit, but like really early shovelware 16-bit.
Mostly lying, using the 16bit video registers as an excuse to say that the video is 16bit, but the NES also got two 16 bit video registers, so.
The component that actually decide the "bit count" of the console that is the CPU is an 8 bit CPU that is pretty much the same from the NES.
But ironically the CPU is the strongest component on the console because it is clocked at 7 Mhz.
The 6502 line of CPUs are VERY FUCKING GOOD at raw IPC even if compared to the 68000 on the genesis, and at 7 Mhz this put the 8bit thing on par with the neo geo 12 Mhz 68k.
Genesis only beats it if you need to perform more complex trigonometric shit like multiply that is not used on 2D games anyway.
If you want to make a game that isn't buggy, you have to code it or spend lots of time tweaking the tool you use for your own purposes. there isn't a "silver bullet" tool that makes a perfect game every time, even stuff like unity that has been developed for years has its own problems.
I like to dabble with VIDEOGAMES in /vg/agdg
I certainly couldn't see myself making great SNES-level pixel art myself, but I at least stick to a palette for some consistency (even if I use color blending and shaders later)
I mean, that's not sooo bad, right? I'm at least aware that what I'm doing isn't "LOL SO RETRO", I'm just choosing these as a style choice, but I'm not claiming it to be something it isn't.
Pixel art can indeed look neat and offer things that 3D can't do well.
But if you can't pixel art at the SNK level, you should just fuck off.
I don't get it, you guys shit on any game with pixel art even if it looks good, but when Hotline Miami comes out and has the worst pixel-art that an indie game has ever had, nobody says a thing.
Does that imply that tracker had steep learning curve and clunky GUI back then or does that mean what.
I'll try not to goat everything into supporting my point but that sounds like it belongs in a different argument.
A single, solid color is set as the bottom "layer". There are 8 palettes, split so that the background tilemap gets 4 palettes and sprites get 4 palettes. The graphic data is always indexed, meaning each pixel actually just points to a color in the palette, of which there are three software-defined colors plus alpha (transparency). Which of the four palettes the sprite/tile uses is also defined by the software and can be easily changed. This is how they do flashing effects, such as when Mario has an invincibility star.
>introduce friend to steam
s he does is buy shit indies that are barely worth pirating or console ports
I've still never managed to wrap my head around 8 bit graphics.
I can generally understand the idea of sprites needing to be 3 colors plus transparency. And that cases like Mega Man are possible where you layer them.
But the backgrounds always throw me off.
And where do outlines come in? How do the black outlines not count as a color? Because stuff like >>250277173 the body has light blue, dark blue, peach, white and black outline.
Explain NES palettes to a retard pls.
This game is perfect to explain.
Every 16x16 pixel block can choose one of the four color palettes.
And each of those color palettes can have 3 independent colors and a color that is shared by all the four palettes.
In the case of SMB1, you can see that the tiles fit perfectly those 16x16 slots i'm talking about, and they all share the blue sky color, but use the other three for the green grass and stuff.
Huh, never realized there were so many colors in the spectrum.
Okay that makes sense now.
Honestly, I'm not even sure how trackers are related in the first place.
And no, what I meant was the tracker would export the song as a series of hardware commands to be read by a custom music engine. Kind of like MIDI, except without any sampled instruments whatsoever - it simply sends the pitch, volume, and maybe wave pattern to the sound chip, which automatically takes care of the rest.
Black outlines definitely count as a color. >>250277173 doesn't represent "true" 8-bit graphics, it's a PC game.
As for backgrounds, all you need to know is they work exactly the same as sprites: 3 colors plus transparency. The only difference is that they're stuck to a grid.
My point was that game maker was a lot like tracker in the sense that it didn't hinder or kill off the real deal and it didn't make people lazy. I don't want to repeat myself so yea that was real confusing. Although I believe the same applies with the introduction of sampled instruments, devs don't try to find a way to cut corners like sleazy engineers and we can't really blame some tool for that. They all have their own ladders to climb.
you have 8 palettes of 3 colours apiece (4, technically, but one in each palette is transparent)
This is where the term palette swapping comes from, because it's trivial to take one object and point it at a different palette, resulting in a recolored sprite.
Unlike modern retro games which often laboriously recolor each individual object.
>As for backgrounds, all you need to know is they work exactly the same as sprites: 3 colors plus transparency
But then how does the Mario example work?
There's the Blue for the sky and cloud hilight, White Clouds, Light Green Bushes, Lime Green Bush Highlights, Dark Green Hills and Black Outline.
>That's not 8 bit at all.
actually there are many 8-bit games which would employ a similar palette.
Well shit. It suddenly makes sense why some games used black backgrounds on occasion. They could do stuff like this without wasting a color on outlines.
Yeah, I'm not entirely sure why he thinks Game Maker is bad, either. I mean, what's the alternative, raw assembly? (I've tried this - I don't reccommend using it if you don't have to.)
Well, time to ask an Debugging emulator for it.
The four upper rows of colors are the four colors you can use on the background.
And the four below are the sprite colors.
to be fair, the PC engine video hardware is really pretty fucking good. Bright, vibrant colours, very few shortcuts giving it a very extensive palette.
The video hardware WAS on par with the 16bit systems that would come later, especially when coupled with a bit more RAM of the arcade cards.
Using Little Samson as an example again can anyone explain the castle walls for me?
The mountain/forest stuff is clearly the background layer. So how does the castle interior work? Is it a separate background layer? Is that even possible on an NES?
In the Mario example, blue is the background color. If you eliminate blue, you'll notice each 16*16 tile has only 3 other colors.
I think the palettes are organized like this (not necessarily in this order):
-white/brown/black, for bricks and floor
-gold/brown/black, for ? blocks
-light green/dark green/black, for bushes, pipes, and hills
-white/blue/black, for clouds (and water, not in that scene)
If this is the case, you can actually change the entire stage to nighttime (i.e. world 3) by simply setting the background color to black.
In all honesty what kind of game would an indie dev make in 6 weeks time? Let's say he has enough budget he needed
There were some 1 week game contest and those games were serviceable at best
nothing to do with age, anon.
The thing you need to realise about 8-bit games is, that the good ones are very cleverly optimised for screen readability. Which is to say, you can look at the screen and immediately understand what every object is and where you can stand and what needs to be avoided, etc.
This is, in truth, what people are often trying to capture by creating retro styled games, even if they don't understand it.
Pretty cool article from the Shovel Knight devs talking about what went into making it look like an NES game and which rules they decided to follow and which they abandoned for the good of the game.
Pretty much this, although there are a handful of developers who use "retro" aka pixel graphics and put effort into it.
The background color is obviously black, as there's black on the whole scene.
All the grey parts use the same three colors besides black.
All the brown part use the same three colors.
And the sky and grass are the last two color banks with its own 3 colors each.
The whole rest is sprite.
If you look carefully, you can actually see the seams. That big shell in the upper left corner causes the background around it to be brown instead of yellow-green due to the palette limit.
Smart graphic artists were able to disguise these kinds of errors by using colors with similar brightness values, so they aren't glaringly obvious unless you look up close. Yet another art lost with time.
What about it? The background is on one layer.
You ever notice how in the NES sometimes almost the whole screen will go black for a boss? That's because they've decided to let the boss use BG layer, so there's no sprite flicker (usually because the boss is too damn huge)
Here are what the palletes correspond to.
Top Left: Pipes, bushes and hills. Sometimes trees.
Top Middle Left: Ground and bricks.
Top Middle Right: Clouds and text.
Top Right: An alternative coin pallete, I think.
Bottom Left: Mario. If you're Luigi, then this pallete changes to Luigi's colors.
Bottom Middle Left: Green Koopa. Also used for Hammer Bros.
Bottom Middle Right: Red Koopa. Also used for moving platforms, Cheep Cheeps, and the mushroom powerup.
Bottom Right: Goomba. Also used for Buzzy Beetles.
My first system was an odyssey and it was brand new when I got it...
This sort've shit does not appeal to me at all. I LIKED IT when graphics got better. SO did everybody else, that's why it happened.
I can deal with it in some games if it's a complex roguelike for instance, but otherwise, that shit annoys me.
>/v/'s complains about retro graphics
>Indie game makers start making "hand-painted" graphics
What will /v/ think of them?
How does the Mega Man sprite work again?
Bottom is black, light blue, blue and transparency so that works.
But the head layer is tan, blue, light blue, black and white...how does that work.
They're alright when they don't look like a flash animation. Rasterized vector style animation works well in, for example, Skullgirls.
Addendum: The artstyle of SG is absolute shit, but the animation technique is spot-on for what smooth vectors are capable of. Don't confuse the two.
Because most of them are just trying to capture the general aesthetic rather than sticking rigidly to the original technical specifications, I don't see why that's so hard to understand.
as explained, sometimes "improvements" are nothing of the sort.
Developers are drawn to retro-styled graphics not only out of "laziness", but because they offer a simple clarity that is often lost.
Here, for example, is Oscar on the Amiga 1200, a 256 color game. You will note that it is significantly less "readable" than the Batman screenshot. Good luck figuring out what you can, and cannot, stand on.
He actually made his own NES dev kit back when RCR was still just a GTA NES homebrew.
Wonder if anything like that exists. It would be a nice learning experience for indie devs to have to working with an NES dev kit and learn and understand the basics first.
God, you're all so fucking dumb. Firstly, artists alone have to learn how to code, because if they don't, they can't make a game.
Programmers alone have to learn how to draw, because if they don't they can't make a PRETTY game.
See what I'm getting at? But the process of making a game isn't just art and programming. There's also design. All people can design even without learning it. The design may be shit, or it may be the best ever. You can learn how to design, but in the end, there will always be someone who has a better feel for design even when they haven't studied at all.
So that's the main point. If both parties could do both things - program and draw, it would all come down to design. Games' programming is not rocket science, it's pretty simple. Pixel art and 3d art is also more simple than 2d art or large pixel art.
But are programmers more needed and better at making games? No. It doesn't matter if the game is made by an artist or a programmer, it all comes down to design. Gameplay can overshine all the shitty art or minor bugs.
Design is not law. If the utterly failure of Ion Storm should have taught us anything, it's that.
No single aspect of game development is truly more important than another.
Its just the face that is a separate sprite, not the whole head.
Check out all those neat empty helmets.
it's not hard. It's basically 6502 assembler and home-built dev-tools.
To be honest, they might as well start with the C64 or Apple 2. Closely related in terms in hardware, but they're a lot easier to get your code into.
I can't fucking stand Iji's palette though. Everything comes in ugly neon colors.
I'd much rather have something downplayed like Another World, since that's what it seems to be aping anyway.
Anachronix was in development for 7 years.
Daikatana was in development for a long time and was hyped up to no end.
Bad management did much more harm to Ion Storm than anything else really.
forgot mah image
There are so many tools nowadays for making games, programming can be learned easily. You don't have to program everything from scratch in C++. Also, programming is pretty fucking easy. All you need to have is logical thinking. It's all there's to it.
Also, programming is very overrated nowadays, I wonder how people can't see it. Programmers are needed everywhere because of the new age. Yes, programmers are being payed more. But it won't be so in few years, I give it 7-10 years. Haven't you seen how schools attract programmers? There are a lot of internet schools, hell, there's even a school that says "Programming can be sexy" and you're awarded with hot girls when you solve a problem. In my country every year there's 250 budget places (as opposed to 15-20 in anywhere else) for programmers (budget means it's all free), and that's only in one university. They're taking a shotgun approach to make massive amounts of not so great programmers, just so they can choose and make the prices for them go down a ton. The salaries are really overblown for programmers, it's not like it would be SO hard to learn programming.
>no games with proper HD pixel art sprites
Because artfags are whiny bitches and programmers can't be bothered to fuck with them.
source: I'm a fucking gamedev making a 3d game
We basically have to beg the fuckers to get shit done while the programmers ARE getting shit done.
I mean, I hate that retro shit too, especially when it's a fucking platformer with no new experimental gameplay features, but shit, I hate artfags.
>m-muh art degree
well, the thing about "proper" pixel art sprites is that they don't look right.
Take, for example, Muramasa. A beautiful game to look at, but absolutely horrible to actually play. It's another game with poor readability because technology makes it too easy to throw hundred of thousands of colours at the screen.
Compare and contrast the visuals with a more technically restrained game, like Actraiser on the Super Nintendo. It undoubtedly looks better than the SNES game, but it fails the crucial playability test.
It's a remake, you don't even need to try!
For instance for guardian legend - it's simple as fuck to improve on current technological level.
I may or may not have been working on a "spiritual successor". The only issue is that I'm slav and can't use kickstarter.
Its a matter of contrast.
Using the same brightness level for everything is a painfully bad design.
I don't mind retro graphics, but what I hate is when retarded indie devs mistake "retro" for "shit". The original Mario games have bare-fucking-basic spritework but have a lot of charm and style. Whereas most "retro" games that come out use the retro tag as an excuse to put no effort whatsoever into visual representation.
only in your delusional brain
Yeah, I have a very distinct "taste" in games I enjoy like that, and Muramasa falls outside it, as do other beloved games like Gunstar Heroes.
It may not be a bad game, but I personally don't enjoy it.
I think a better example would be guilty gear.
>absolutely horrible to play
What? I can't remember a single instant where anything was hard to see or judge. The only shitty thing was that pressing attack shortly before an enemy attacks you automatically blocks, so you wind up guarding against auto-blade-breaking attacks and losing all your damn swords.
>"we can't make any better graphics so we'll use pseudo pixel shit, we're just programmers!"
>yet always have the money to hire a professional musician to do the soundtrack
Actually, it's the younger audience. The people who grew up on the NES want better graphics because all they had growing up was shitty 2d pixel games. Early teens hipsters who want to fit in and say "pshh, graphics dont matter" are the ones eating this shit up
I'll be honest here, I could not make a video game on my own. I would be able to program it all and put it together, sure, but what the fuck do I do for the sprites and backgrounds? Stick people with stick swords and stick clouds with stick rain?
Then again, I guess it could go both ways. I could learn to art well enough to make a game probably just as easily as someone could learn to program well enough to make a game.
To be fair, I don't think most of the people employed to do music for indie games are "professional" musicians. or at least, aren't any more professional than say, the average busker.
holy shit, this, i remember eagerly anticipating every new generation of consoles because of the amazing improvements in graphics, 8 bit sprite games really do get stale after so many years. i'm tired of these underage turdlings constantly screaming about how HURR GRAFICKS DONT MATTER. right, they arent the most important part of the game, but if you have the opportunity to make a game with better graphics then you fucking do, you don't choose to make a game with godawful early 90s graphics just because its "retro".
I prefer rotoscoped 3d
Yes. The pixel representation of the original artwork is not the artwork you originally created.
rotoscoping would be if this was converted into a 2d sprite
from the looks of this game i think they just use clever lighting techniques to make it seem like it's 2d in still shots, but it's still 3d
I'll take a pixel game with kickass atmospheric music over an artsy game with a shitty soundtrack any day.
Hotline Miami is the perfect example. Meh pixel art. Great gameplay. Great soundtrack. Great game.
Maybe this is the right place to ask.I remember seeing a certain indie game few months ago, but I can't recall the name.
Gameplay was obviously stolen from Binding of Isaac, while art style was stolen from Don't Starve. Anyone recalls something like that?
not even close to true.
There are many MANY utterly crap games on the platform. But there are a few shining gems which still hold up well even today, and would make fantastic indie games given a lick of paint.
A couple of years ago we got a stupid point, the point when the average joe confused indie with 8-bit, and when hipsters actually took over a genre
It IS a stupid point, like an independent musician made midi music or an independent movie maker made a film in 8-bit in his computer and eventually people thought indie was the equivalent of that.
It's particularly saddening for those people who actually put effort in their stuff and make sure their games look good.
it's more accurate to say that indie games started to center stage cause well, they were delivering types of games that simply weren't - and indeed, still aren't - being served by AAA publishers.
fortunately EA doesn't know HOW to make indie games. It is so hidebound it can only create things which fit into a very narrow spec.
Look at what they did to Plants Vs Zombies.
I just tried the Dustforce demo and holy shit it is mediocre
the controls are stiff as hell and it uses crappy indie tier sprites that animated nice but the animations didn't actually tell me anything (like if I'm about to fall down while climbing the ceiling for example)
I don't know how people can play indie shit if this is considered a good indie game
ugh, Ubisofts PR for CoL managed to turn me off a game I'd probably normally have been all over.
You don't need to sell me on how pretty the game looks Ubi. I don't need to to tell me about how artsy your game is.