I and many tried to show you reasons to like it, so for you better enjoy it or see any good side of it. But you didn't accepted any argument, not even that the graphics are still in work (you just want something else and thats it). If you give your thoughts in a forum, especially being contraditory over something and calling the attention over you, should be because you need opinions or you want to change their mind (they will not change the graphics totaly at this point, even you know that), and not just to express yourself deliberately.

I can understand frustration but you didnt acted very well this time. Just to don't let yourself believe you are a victim, if you look my post and what I quoted from you, you cleary started to mock the game, exacly like you said some did in other foruns.

Yet you called other people immature. I think it's even ok to just express youself, just don't mock a game in its forum when people are mostly positive about it, it's disrespectful and you might receive the same (I'm not making this up, any good forum that have dedicated users is like that. Yet everyone respected you here has far has I can see). To try to ridicule something is not constructive criticism.

Ah, what did Terry Pratchett say again about people who use multiple exclamation marks...

I am being oppressed by being called out on my stupidity, somebody please help me.




The reality is, you've pulled out this number out of thin air. Counting responses on forums is not a valid method of making a poll...




Says the guy who started the discussion by saying the art is childish....


Anyway, don't start a discussion in an angry and flippant way and expect people to be nice and respectful to you. As the saying goes, the tone makes the music and your style was quite dissonant.

You basically said that people (and the ones that created the art) can't be taken serious and that you yourself are the arbiter of what can be seen as serious. So don't expect niceties coming your way.

Your argument boiled down is just that you think the art direction is childish and you don't want to play something you see as childish. Do you really expect a serious answer to such a complain, besides that either the art direction isn't childish or that even if it would be, it wouldn't matter?

Just a small post for those that bulked and argued against my reference to a cartoony style, even the artists admit this is what they are trying to achieve.

No one argued that it doesn't look cartoony (or if they did they need glasses, badly). What I and others have argued is that it doesn't look cute. Cartoony ≠ cute by definition. Landisaurus gave a good example on page 2 of this thread - a cartoon image of a cartoon girl holding a cartoon axe, in a blood-strewn room filled with other cartoon characters hacked into cartoon pieces. I personally found it really disturbing and regret I even clicked on the link. My point (or his point, really) is that 'cartoony' and 'cute' are different words because they describe different things (although they can coincide).

When I think of "cartoon" I think of a simplified or exaggerated visual interpretation of an imagined or real scene. When I think of "cute" I picture fuzzy bunnies, my dog and most babies. Notice how none of those are cartoons nor cartoony. When I look at the screenshots of the game so far, I don't see anything cute about anything. It looks simple, and flat. No real exaggeration, though, which is what I think usually makes cartoons look cute. And I think the reason why things look flat is because SD hasn't implemented shadows or finished the lighting effects, yet. And have you looked at this screenshot? I dare you to say that it looks cute.

 

And compare the pink trees to a real tree : http://www.eg.bucknell.edu/~hyde/dan/Fall2001/Maple-Tree-Campus.JPG

Looking at the shape of the trees in the screenshots, they are probably maple trees, which can be of that color. (Actually, the tree in my link is even pinker than the trees in the screenshots.)

The only think I could label as "cute" in the current screenshots is the city, but I get the feeling that it is only because the graphics are not finalized are that details are missing.

 

Though I could be wrong, I got the impression that Luckmann was saying it doesn't look "cute and cartoony" (False and True = False  ) - not that it doesn't look "cute" and also not "cartoony". What he really meant, who knows. 

Compare the pink trees with this image of Candy floss.

I've already conceded that the pink trees look out of place. I still don't think they look cute (if there were a whole forest of them, then it probably would). I think the pink trees would actually look pretty good if they added in some other shades between green and pink, making them stand out less and look more like they belong. The result would be an autumn forest, not a forest of cutesy trees (if trees in autumn look cute to you then we are at an impasse).

I think the most telling thing, though, is that your argument is reduced to calling a scarce shade of some deciduous trees cute in an alpha screenshot with most-likely preliminary textures and confirmed unfinished lighting. 

I can't speak for others but I don't take your criticism personally. I may have been harsher than I normally am, but I can't help it... It seriously saddens (although I guess it doesn't really surprise me) that some people think that just because something doesn't try to look like real life, it's childish and cute... 

Have you ever heard of "naive painting"? It's a style of painting characterized by its simplicity. Some of the most famous painters in history were naive painters (ala Henri Rousseau). Simplicity can be beautiful in its own right. Have we really gotten to the point where the masses can't appreciate that? It seems to me that if a game were made in the style of Rousseau, that I would think it's beautiful and attractive, and you would think it's cute and childish, not fit for a serious wargamer .

Enough to annouce I was a 'fake' Spartan when I clearly never proclaimed to be anything other than myself and my opinion. Why attempt to discredit me with the term fake?

Sadly I have to concede and agree... though Rousseau work IS beautiful and attractive, I wouldn't think it suitable for a wargame, sorry.

That wasn't direct to you, that was a universal jk (even I was in it, since if I told that, I obsviusly had to take notice of it first). English is not my first language, I didn't meant you (directing to you), but instead you (everyone/anyone) reading that, exacly because the comment I did could sound very happy (meant gay almost has I mean happy). I didn't quoted you or mentioned anyone's nick. I was generally speaking regarding the going on discussion that the game is/isn't cute. And that is so true, that there isn't any other comment in the entire post that could sound offensive or be mistaken like it.

 

Let me quote TC, has you trolled the main discussion a lot. This is not a topic to ask about changing the art style or the graphics, it is regarding the zoom level and level of detail up close:

----------------------------

But since you lured it. I can asure you, many people do enjoy a colorful style (I like the ones that uses it and the ones that don't, things just need to be well made) finding it cute in their opinions or not. Imagine has someone like excessive cutish stuff, and go troll in L4D foruns, to complain about it when they already choosed a style? It is not and NEVER will be 50% disagreeing the graphics of this game is not good but actually bad. Also mostly of the few that aren't very happy with it, are fine to wait it get finished.

I said later about explicit cute, or cutish material:

Left bunny is cutish stilized, it forces to be cute (it is ridiculous in my personal opinion). The right one, follow much better and closer the reality, the bunny's anatomy and expression and do not try to exaggerate it or provoke the viewer regarding that; it have a unique style based on what is real. It is sigtly cute imo, any picture of a bunny (even a real one) can feel cute for almost everybody. Any small looking castle, can also feel cute, especially if there is any bright color in it.

This is not even that right bunny case. You sound like you don't undestand anything  of art style at all. The windows of the castle arent exaggerated and it isn't fat. The estructure of it seems to follow real escale, even the population if looking close, are very tiny in comparisson. Aside from the windows colors (that are very tiny), there are only TWO vivid colors in the city: Dark Red and Orange for the roofs; everything else is grayish or brown. And I absolutely like the roofs, and the style in general. The city is cute and very nice, just isn't ridicously cute or provocative, how you want to make it look like. There is even missing what would be a pontential thing to make it cutier: the flags on top of it. Where are they? An artist that intend to provoke cute feelings, would never forget it. That castle is only beatiful and because of it, it  can possibly appears to be cute, just like someone could say of a girl.

You Anomander, are just acting radical over it, to make your personal whishes prevail or stand up, that is to have all realistic modeled and colored thigs like many games have. But many people do like sighly cute or beautifuly stylized art especially for a board game.

Age of Wonders graphics are cute imo (not exaggeratedly so), they are great. Worms Armaggedon have VERY cute graphics (provoking/intended), much more than here, with funny cute voices, and is in my opinion and of many, one of the best and most addictive strategy games ever made that captived even (or especially) adult audiences. The cute aspect made it even more fun to play. But it was good simply because the artists were good, and that was great to pass the feeling they wanted for their game.

Now look the Bestiary:

Colorful and yet serious (realistic) in the expressions and anatomy, It is a good mixture. I think the animals here are very fun to look at. If I want to see a real crocodile I can have a real photograph of it or go play Metal Gear Solid (if thats it).

But even tough I personaly like the art already, a lot since there was a long time since I lastly found a board game with colorful designs, I'm not saying its the best thing they could ever possible do with it (tough I am not a designer and capable to do better or have an idea of what could be. I just like it and know I will enjoy the way it is going till now). You don't even know how to tell what is better apart from criticise what is already there.

A way to tell it would be like: "I wish the game could have more darker colors, less bright, more use of shade, or I wish it could have a totaly different art style and designs because I do not sympatize with the current one. I wish castles would be made of a bigger design and not be pictured like it is in the Civilization games. I do not like the 2d feel" ect. Then would see other people reactions and what they think about this since this game is not being made for you. You ridicule it just to try to provoke feelings and confusion so that what you personally want (or need) stand up, which shows you are just a selfish person. Not to mention, with a bad restricted taste.

I enjoy the art of this game and I'm not a fanboy, my account is registered for a long time on Stardock, and yet this is the first forum I went into. Do this especially if you are going to contradict many people, and explain reasonably what you think that could be better instead of trying to ridicule or say how bad it is what its there. You trowed into disorder what the topic was about, which was the zooming capabilities and the level of detail from it, not to put into judgement the colorful art design choice.

 

"Will we next create false gods to rule over us? How proud we have become, and how blind."
-- Sister Miriam Godwinson, "We Must Dissent"

 

 

I was just making a reference to Nights Edge's comment that "Dissent is good". Miriam is far from my favourite quotable in SMAC/X.

I feel an urge to make another quote, but I think that'd derail the thread completely.

Agreed! The whole concept and feel of SMAC was perfect!

To dissent is good, but even to dissent, like with everything else, you must be reasonable. If you choose to dissent about something related to a community, take the community in mind and how that is better for most, don't put personal whishes above it.

In some cases, it is also important to show consideration to the other side and not anule it or show disrespect for it.

Instead of proposing a graphical revamp, why not propose a middle term that probably most can be fine with? That would sound cooler. After the shading is in place, that might even happen already.

Think about it: If the likes are 50/50 (which is totaly not true at all) what happens if you completly change over for the other side? (...)

Its just not a reasonable proposition to make.