next »

[Torchkas]

Man, why is GDC so expensive?
It costs more than 500 bucks to do pretty much anything GDC-related.

[gimymblert]

https://twitter.com/alexjc/status/569791061620592640

HolY shit skyet is almost here

this is ai that look at image and translate it in plain language

[gimymblert]

game kickstarter status watcher

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1lFW2sjShHriYRsyuVZx4Se8Qxjw38VJk4g-7cls8cpg/edit#gid=0

[Boreal]

Man, why is GDC so expensive?
It costs more than 500 bucks to do pretty much anything GDC-related.

Yeah, here's hoping this will go in the vault.  I'm sure it will since it's such an important milestone.

[TheLastBanana]

did it steal characters from real old cartoons or do they all just look 90 % like those characters

i feel like ive seen every face in here before

i guess its the faces they stole and the bodies they kinda modified???

That's just kind of how faces were drawn in a lot of 30s cartoons.


Disney, Warner, Fleischer, the list goes on... It was pretty common to have huge eyes with little Pacman-shaped pupils.

[Mittens]

Man, why is GDC so expensive?
It costs more than 500 bucks to do pretty much anything GDC-related.

Try living in Australia, then you can add about another US$3000 onto that

[~Tidal]

did it steal characters from real old cartoons or do they all just look 90 % like those characters

i feel like ive seen every face in here before

i guess its the faces they stole and the bodies they kinda modified???

That's just kind of how faces were drawn in a lot of 30s cartoons.


Disney, Warner, Fleischer, the list goes on... It was pretty common to have huge eyes with little Pacman-shaped pupils.

no why are you proving her wrong when all the games she doesn't like are unoriginal and meaningless

[Torchkas]

It's almost impossible to not be a remix of something else these days.

[gimymblert]

yes it's possible, chance you won't be maintream any time soon until a successful artist rip you big time and introduce you to maintream and then people like this rthen realize it's from underground momevent, and those "not try hard" follower will end up saying everything is a remix, because they never dared to be TOO weird.

[JWK5]

Placing value in novelty over integrity always results in something that fails to stand the test of time.

[Torchkas]

I said almost impossible though.
But yes, like JWK5 said, you're usually much better off just perfecting an already existing formula or combining ones if you want to be succesful.
I'm not saying there can't be original ideas in something that's a remix either, just that creating something entirely original is next to impossible.

[JWK5]

It's not the newness or uniqueness that is the problem, you need that to move forward, it is the lack of a strong foundation to support it that is usually the problem.

A lot of games try to do something new without really trying all that hard to do something actually good, as in the game itself fails to engage for long. It's like buying a product that advertises "Awesome new features!" and then it falls apart after a week. It is every bit (if not more) important that you create something that is built with integrity, not just built for novelty.

[s0]

but is it really not good or do you just dislike it because it falls outside of an expected pattern? i think thats gimmy's point. if you look at the history of art, even the modernist avantgarde which was all about newness had a pattern as to what sort of art was considered to be "cutting edge" and praiseworthy. "original" shit that is too far outside of the norm to fit some sort of evolution/revolution narrative (relative to the established canon) is usually disliked or ignored. when it does receive praise later on (b/c the norm has changed in its favor) we call it "ahead of its time".

however, there IS a difference between breaking rules for the hell of it and breaking rules because youre trying to do something that an existing paradigm just doesnt cover (thats jwk's point kinda).

ok this is going to be my only post about this.

[gimymblert]

Breaking the rules is always good, it might stand the test of overall mainstream time but it will pave the way for those standing on the shoulder of giants, nobody care about teh giant that support them except for the insider. Who remember norman mac laren but students in animation, who care about kandisky but art historian? There legacy mightv seems force to teh public audience but those who stand on them honored them. Night driver might not be considered good, but hey that's where pole osition picked up, who remember the cover base shooting of kill switch but hey gears of war remember, only hispter get tower of druga but zelda was born as nothing but an homage. Pay attention to your elder, novelty for the sake of it is creating tools for the arogant artist who want nothing but eternal fame. It's the circle of art. TRY HARD and TRY RADER.

[JWK5]

That's the circle of consumerism, especially of industry, the circle of art is more like learn -> create -> share -> learn. Novelty might tread new ground but tradition lays down the road that lets others travel to new ground faster.

When I speak of integrity, I am speaking of the artist's relationship with the recipient of their work. Novelty is great for the artist when it comes to learning, but if presented poorly it won't necessarily do anything for the recipients. What good is a game with great new features or built around some exciting new concept if it plays like shit? Of course others will pillage the idea eventually, regardless of whether the artists give it up willingly or not, but it will have a much greater impact, both in learning and as a means of connection (through expression) if its novelty is backed up with integrity, i.e. with effort and cohesiveness.

You can look at virtually anything in the grand scheme of things and go "well at least it lead to all these great things" but that doesn't necessarily mean it was anything good at the time. We've had plenty of novel advances in weapon technology, it's debatable about who that's been good for. Sure, novelty will get you somewhere, but novelty backed with integrity will get you somewhere worthwhile.

The best artists are not the ones with notoriety, the best artists are the ones with integrity, regardless of whether they were innovators or traditionalists or anything in between. Art is a vehicle for expression, no matter how new the expression any expression backed with integrity makes for a much more meaningful connection between the one expressing and the one being expressed to.

Art is not about the artist, whether we are speaking the arrogant traditionalist or the thoughtless rule breaker, art is about the connection between the artist and those who experience it. The progression of art is the progression of indirect communication.

[gimymblert]

nothing to do with consumerism, and tradition had start as a novelty ...
but what would be the alternative never push the envelop because we fear to fail? we should have stay to oxo or tennis for two then, success is paved with failure, it doesn't matter if there is integrity or not, what matter is that the result is out there for people to assess. And shit is relatives, shit is good to plant seed that feeds you well! Good is overrated, it would not stand without the land that make it grow with shit, any laborer know this, whithout shit your land is sterile, it's only when shit is process by the underground worms and microbe it allow your good stuff to grow thick and numerous so you feed and appreciate. But hey nobody like peasant, only their production, even though that's what keeps you alive and happy! Do novelty if it's what you like, nobody care about your shit, fine as long as you do.

BTW the idea of good is fascist is taking too far, what someone like is the shit of another one, it's the circle of life. But their will always be "pioneer" that spread smallpox, burn village, and claim land of those who learn them to feed themselves and glorify themselves by trying to pass for the victim and write the other as savage so they can define what's good and what's bad in their own term. Making shit is almost more about integrity because it mean resisting to a norm that try to measure you into unfair metrics /dark unnecessary turn

[JWK5]

Before we get too far out in left field,

Integrity: (syn. unity, unification, coherence, cohesion, togetherness, solidarity)
An undivided or unbroken completeness or totality with nothing wanting
(hence its alternate meaning of moral soundness)

In other words, to back novelty with integrity means to not half-ass it, to do the work to the best of your ability and see it through as completely as you can. My initial point is that too many people think novelty alone equals "quality", which we tend to mean as inherent value, so they tend to focus on what is new in their work (the "originality") and wind up half-assing the rest seemingly under the assumption that the novelty makes up for it. This leads to a great idea with shitty execution (that no doubt someone else will inevitably pillage). It would be better for any artist (regardless of what chain of events happens beyond their work) to back up the novelty with integrity, i.e. push any new idea to the fullest rather than treat it as a cheap gimmick they can cash in on. It is not hard to see why that is, cheap novel gimmicks is one of the most complained about things in both art and gaming.

[Torchkas]

Jimbert I'd like for you to give examples of games that were so ahead of their time that they weren't critically acclaimed then, but that are now. I can't think of any example from the top of my head.
Novelty might be the most reputable thing to make as an artist, but it won't be something with redeeming quality if it lacks integrity. A completely 100% innovative idea is hard to make successful because it lacks any form of recognition, recognition is what gives something notoriety. Everything is based on something else.

[ProgramGamer]

Just a quick question:
How does the forum's level system work?

[s0]

1 level per 100 posts. max is 10.