Most Open-Source Game Artwork Is Awful
Phoronix: Most Open-Source Game Artwork Is Awful
Earlier this month when talking about the Baseio game that's being worked on by the ioquake3 project, many Phoronix readers were quick to bring up in the forums that the artwork done by the free software community for these open-source games often aren't up to par...
Dude, the turtle game seemed like a game from N64!
What's the point ?
Most open-source game developers know how to code but not to draw ?
How come I am not surprised ?
The point is, we need to get more graphic ppl to get into contributing to FLOSS games, or at least maybe make a kickstarter or sth for certain projects in order to pay some graphical artists for high quality content.
This is also a larger issue, cause 99% of artists that I know genuinely believe in the old MAFIAA business models (as in sell their work as single products) and are in it exclusively for the money, not for the art.
My graphic worker try do a good graphics for my game, I try get good music, it's very important for the immersion. The gameplay is important too. I have try do that's into pokecraft, but all the dev part have facility (lib, engine, ...), all the arkwork no (no lot of gimp how-to, open source base music/graphic/tile, ...)
And so very dirty for most open source game.
For me, it's 50% important to dev, 50% to artwork. And I see lot of projet/noob, which start game, do the code (sometime from 0), and have very bad artwork.
The most good artwork it's proprietary game switched to open-source.
Last edited by alpha_one_x86; 06-13-2012 at 07:55 AM.
I think that Kickstarter could be a good place for getting money to pay more professional artists for releasing some artwork for specific title under CC. One example I've found once was Flare, where developer / artist asked for money to create some portraits for his game.
There's probably a big gap between the ability to write code and the creativity to design. I'm sure that any game studio has conceptual artists that probably don't know very much about building a game engine, but there are also brilliant engineers that can take that art and turn it into polys and pixels. Also, for profit blockbusters spend years in production, as a quality, bug free (relatively speaking) game environment takes lots of hours. Look at how long Valve, ID, and Unreal will go between engine updates, and people STILL bag on the flaws.
I used to build Quake 2 MP levels back in the day, but I had an architectural background and an interest in computers. Even then, when using the free level builders out there, it took a few years before I felt that I got comfortable/good with it.
Art dev Community
There should be a Open Source / Creative Commons Art Dev community that aims at giving recognition to the artists and such by means easily visible credits etc etc. You could encourage 3D and texture graphic design students to take part in supporting the community and give them a HIG to stick to. They should supply the resources used if the resources are licensed accordingly. Example if they used Blender then supply the .blend not just the 3ds or collada versions etc etc. I'm aware that there are similar ideas floating around but there is no emphasis on credit and a standard, so people tend to design resources that can't be used in the same game.
I think the approach in open source games needs to change to be more artists focused as they are the most rare resource.
From my own experience the problem with FOSS games is the art pipeline or actually the absence of one.
We've got enough 3d/game engines out there. What we need are robust and easy to use level/world editors supporting a standard set of file formats used/known by artists.
Lime engine is trying to solve that. Currently Im working to develop a set of tools including a mesh converter and an scene editor. If somebody wants to help, is welcome to join the team.
Originally Posted by log0