Could you picture CARDS without any ART???

Wed, 09/07/2022 - 05:02

#1

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

A little picture

Cards without art...
Not sure...
Maybe if it contains a rule changer or something.

But if it represents an object. A picture to picture would be better tbh.

That said. I personally searched for something that would represent even a game rule changer.

Wed, 09/07/2022 - 09:18

#2

let-off studios

Offline

Joined: 02/07/2011

Thumbs Down

I don't recommend it.

This looks like a reference card for a tabletop RPG or something of that nature, not a card game. I think a lack of artwork - beyond that icon you have in the lower-right corner - would work against your game.

From a mechanics standpoint: distinctive artwork and iconography helps players quickly identify and differentiate between all the cards in their hand, in their tableau, as well as that of their opponents. I think that some form of artwork, specifically in a competitive game, is required.

Wed, 09/07/2022 - 17:09

#3

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Hmm... I'm surprised TBH...

I thought that most people would agree that Game Aesthetics take a back seat to Game Function. TBH I'm surprised. Like I said, Pokemon TCG has cards you can barely READ what it says and the icons are so small you hardly known which ones they are. So Form & Function take precedence over Art & Aesthetics IN MY BOOK.

And WHY is this the LEAST bit important???

Well without paying the HIGH COST of "Art/Illustrations", I can "produce" more cards within the realm of the game. IDK maybe something like 300+ cards NO ART.

This would of course force you to rely on TWO (2) Things: The SIDE ("White Wizard" or "Red Dragon") the icon that was mentioned and the NAME of the CARD (which is "Coal Miner Orc").

The game is a modern-day take on the old Video Game "Archon: Black & White". Instead this game is named "Archon: Circlet of the Heavens" and it is meant to bring back the "classic" dual with a list of NEW protagonists and antagonists.

I'm still moving forwards with this design. IMHO I feel like the GAME is not necessarily ART but instead RULES. As such, I feel like defining all kinds of cool and NEAT abilities that mesh well with the Characters (good and bad) are of much more value to the average gamer ... Than say halving a card in HALF just to put a "pretty picture".

That's not to say that ART & Illustrations are not important.

I'm just thinking for THIS "design", I'd rather have clearer actions and rules that govern an exciting method of play which is better that squinting to know if the Weakness is Red or Orange... Meh!

Note #1: Also there are FOUR (4) OTHER Colors of cards. Yeah they are the same like Magic (Red, Green, Blue, White and Black). I designed this game waaayy BEFORE I even knew what Magic was. It (the game) uses a RPS-5 which is one of the PRIMARY mechanics in the game. Pokemon SAYS it uses an RPS also ... But not in the traditional sense. You don't have to worry about which Suit beats which other Suit... It's just some have some weaknesses and others have a resistance factor.

In ARCH you actually need to factor in RPS-5 rules. What I mean is the BATTLE "mechanic" is based on the TRADITIONAL RPS-5. Meaning Red beats Green and White. So if your opponent played a White card and you played a Red one, your Suit would beat the opponent allowing you to inflict some type of Damage or Consequence...

So it's not an IMAGINARY RPS... It's a REAL ONE.

In the NEW Version, you DRAW 6 cards to start and choose ANY ONE of those six to be the Boss of that duel. The Boss is HP x 2. Again SIMPLE rules and you have control (to a certain extent) over who is the Boss and the Pit Units.

You play 3 rounds with the SAME Boss or until one of the Bosses is defeated.

Note #2: The game has some unique timing mechanics and has a LIGHT/MOON tracker... I still need to figure out if I KEEP this element or NOT. It's cool (as a concept) but I need to see HOW it will work and so forth.

Wed, 09/07/2022 - 18:14

#4

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

A picture is a 1000 words

Players will see the picture. And know the effects it has by playing the game and reading. Eventually, the players see the pictures and know by memory which effect the card will have.

If you have only text. They need to read every card carefully before they know what they are dealing with. This is a lot of down time.

If they see that their opponent has 6 different pictures. And they are familiar with these pictures. The game will flow much faster.

No down time by reading.
No down time by systematically look at every card.
No down time by watching their own hand.

Wed, 09/07/2022 - 18:48

#5

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I see your point too...

But the Deck is only 16 cards. And if you have a pool of 300+ cards ... That a LOT of "Down-time" but more like OFF-LINE time (outside of play) to figure out what cards you want as part of your Deck (16 cards).

However I understand. There is the opposite situation in Pokemon: you can have MULTIPLE cards called "Pikachu" and you've got to figure out which 4 (max of one Pokemon) you want in a Deck. Same goes with Supporter cards (you only get a max of 4 of each one of them too... the same one).

So if Pokemon can confuse us with all the SAME Card Titles... I feel like UNIQUE Card Titles should be in the opposite direction and offer more CLARITY.

For example there are five (5) Classes of Orcs (one of each color)! See that is another COOL difference. Normally these duel games focus on types per Color or Faction. Orcs are Red and Fairies are Blue.

But not in ARCH! You can have a "Nautilus Orc" which is a BLUE Orc! Or the sample shows you a "Coal Miner Orc" which is a BLACK Orc. And you can MIX & MATCH as you like. You can have a monochrome Deck (All RED for example) or you can have the SAME "Basic" Unit (like an Orc) in several Colors/Versions.

Pikachu is Yellow and Electric and stays that way for ALL the "Pikachu" cards.

But an Orc in ARCH can come in five (5) Flavors!

That combined with the cool abilities allows you to BUILD a Deck and test it out to see how EFFECTIVE it is. PLUS this is geared towards PLAYERS (with no art... I don't see why anyone not playing would want to collect the cards TBH) and puts less emphasis on "card value".

However I see that art is like 1000 words. I just think that in my case, there is not much room for the abilities to be written down (for what I plan to design anyhow...)

Cheers!

Thu, 09/08/2022 - 09:20

#6

let-off studios

Offline

Joined: 02/07/2011

Larger Form Factor

questccg wrote:

However I see that art is like 1000 words. I just think that in my case, there is not much room for the abilities to be written down (for what I plan to design anyhow...)

Have you considered larger cards? Perhaps Tarot-sized? If there are only 16 cards per player per game, there might be room for the ability explanations as well as even the smallest distinctive piece of artwork to help differentiate one Orc (for example) from another, along with adequate table space.

Thu, 09/08/2022 - 15:16

#7

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I understood...

It's just that with Tarot-sized cards, all this adds is about 1.25 inches above the standard Poker card. Not much room for additional art anyways. I understood everyone "concerns" ... I'm just surprised that nobody is in the camp of "Function over Aesthetics"! I personally feel like the LAYOUT is NOVEL. The Gameplay is NOVEL (which I have not fully explained here as the way the game plays doesn't impact this discussion). And generally there is some different IDEAS (like the "5" Orcs) which makes the game VERY different than MOST Duel-type games.

And I know you guys are all adults but I wonder if kids would NOT be interested in a game such as ARCH "because there is NO Art"! I'm not saying Teens or Adults because those groups generally see past those elements and can judge a game based on "the game itself" not ART.

In any event... You are all entitled to your opinion and what you have expressed is TRUE. I can't argue with any of the reasoning other than to say that MY "Function" for this game takes priority over ART. And like I said earlier it will allow me to FOCUS on "CARDS" not "ART".

Making games is a costly venture. Anything that can CUT DOWN on the expenses is IMHO a "blessing". Now I'm not suggesting that everyone do this... But in the case of this design and what I want to achieve with it... Why not?!

Again I value your comments and input... However for this particular design, I must "disagree" that ART would be required. I think more like CARD VARIETY should be the focus... Something that I have FAILED to do in Crystal Heroes (CH) due to the HIGH COST of making original ART for that game. I honestly don't want to "cheapen" a design because I don't have the monies to pay for card art.

Know what I mean??? We'll see what happens to CH as the design is done just missing the real cards and rulebook editing (due to a number of changes because of playtesting). In any event... I still have time for that design.

Cheers!

Note #1: And FOR ONCE, I was able to put the RPS-5 Rules at the TOP of the card (and not in some cryptic way either!) The are CLEAR:

1. Sword = Win the duel, subsequently you Attack.
2. Skull = Lose the duel, you are Attacked.
3. Shield = Tie in the duel, you Defend and no Damage is taken.

Right now... I am trying to STICK to the RPS-5 Rules. But who knows as some of the crazy designers (like in Magic: the Gathering), break those RPS-5 Rules and see what happens... (LOL)

Thanks for all your input. It is appreciated even if I don't concur/agree.

Thu, 09/08/2022 - 15:57

#8

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

USC

I make use of Unit Statistics Cards.
They are twice the size of a normal play card.
And I got all information AND a picture on them if needed.

While I do not do the following, it might be neat for you.
2 normal cards would fit perfectly on the big one.

Thu, 09/08/2022 - 18:28

#9

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Here's another ORC to get a better feel for the aesthetics...

Here's another SAMPLE Orc card (in the Green suit):

Anyways I get from the template ... That it is sufficiently detailed enough to have NO ART (other than some icons).

I feel the "Presentation Layer" (UIX) is sufficient for its Function. Yes I know it's NOT the most ATTRACTIVE card template out there. But it works for me. It is different from the Black Suit in that this card can directly deal "1 melee DMG" to the opposing Boss. But as a Boss ... It deals "3 range DMG" if attacked (provided the player has sufficient Fusion points).

Note #1: I've done enough with this design for the time being. I will "shelve" starting next week. But I will finalize the template over the next three (3) days (Friday to Sunday). I have no idea what are my plans for the weekend... But for sure, I've got some things to do tomorrow.

Anyways I've read all the comments and most of you say "ART is preferred". And I get that... Maybe someone who BUYS the design will figure out a way to include art... TBD.

Note #2: I should also explain that there are TWO (2) Equal and opposite sides: the White Wizard and the Red Dragon. Orcs fight for the Red Dragon side (the baddies) and you CANNOT include them with cards or units from the other side of the game.

So when you play, there is some gentlemen's rules like the winner of the Coin Toss gets to either choose to go First or to Choose his side... And then the game begins.

Thu, 09/08/2022 - 21:23

#10

Stormyknight1976

Offline

Joined: 04/08/2012

Hey Kris

I think it's a fine idea on what your going for.

I rather save money for product, art covers, booklets, postage etc.

There are quite a few games with out art and sold millions and less than. Here are a few.

Monopoly cards
Cards Against Humanity cards
Kingdom Death : Mountain action cards

For my game Dymino Monsters there will be some art. Character ranking/level up cards, Troop/faction cards maybe. Now that I think of it and for a few months this year and even your post, I've decided not to have art work for all of the faction cards.

There will be art for my box covers, transportation, booklets, maps, Constellations, and for the monster encyclopedia with stars.

Why, well again it saves me money but I want my players to imagine what the monsters, creatures, weapons, armor etc.

Nothing wrong with art, but you as the designer spend upward to $150 to $500 on all the Art and you turn around and sell the game for $30 , $40 , $60 ?

Art helps the imagery of the game or story telling. The Oo's, ah's, the wow factor.

Nothing wrong with that.

Design the game on what you can financially handle.

I would love to have art for all of my 9,864 cards for Dymino Monsters, but to me, a lot of the art is not needed.

You card templates get the point across.

We already know what an orc looks like, well some do and some don't.

I do like your templates.

In my game, there are no icons to remember. It wasn't needed from the very beginning (2004).

Pokemon has way to many and I get as the game industry terms it paralysis analysis.

I don't know what to do or choose from. Though I never had any one teach me the game, but the creature cards are cool but it's also the point system.

When playing MTG players look at the rules, how the cards affect another card. Every year, there is a banned list of over powered cards that don't fit the current card decks. So, players are not playing against artwork against artwork it's the point system and the new game rules.

But the art work does sell these games but after while, it's everything else that the player is worried about on strategy and tactics during game play.

Everyone has an opinion. You can't please everyone and that is okay to.

Let's talk about graphics. Super smooth, high definition 4k 60 fps video games.

To my, it's all right. It is cool, but to me a good storyline and choices make the game not the graphics. Oh sure it helps the mechanics flow through game play. Even the developers have a hard time with glitches after the game is sold.

To me, it's the little details that developers add to the game world. I don't act like,'Whoa check out those graphics".

Okay sort of contradictory, I do or had collected MTG cards years ago due to the art alone but never played. Then I moved onto something else. And I've played 2 hours of MTG and my nephew through out a card on to the table and I couldn't do anything. It was like, I'm bored, you lost, you can't or even understand this game kinda mentality" and so, I don't play that game. Not really interested in the tap system either. But that's another long winded story I won't get into.

So for can I picture a card game with NO ART? WHY yes, yes I can. I'm a very imaginative creative person. It's the little details that super excited me either it be in a board , card , novel or video game.

That is what I'm working on, the little details.

Creator of Dymino Monsters
Bows respectfully
Jesse

Fri, 09/09/2022 - 13:43

#11

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Thanks for your input!

Yeah... I mean different strokes for different "designs"! (LOL)

Thanks for sharing your opinion @Stormyknight1976... I agree with you.

A NEW concept that came to mind last night was "Victory Points" vs. "Boss Knock-out".

How does that work/what does that mean???

Well I haven't shared any "3" Ability Cards... But essentially some will be "Attack the opposing UNIT" and others will be "Attack the opposing BOSS". And some cards will have BOTH of these.

Why is this IMPORTANT seems to not really matter.

The reason this is SO IMPORTANT is IF your STRATEGY is to attack the BOSS such that after 3 Rounds you defeat him is GREAT. But what happens if you FAIL??? This is where "Victory Points" come into play and 1 VP = 1 DMG. So for every Damage Point (DMG) you deal to opposing UNITS you gain 1 Victory Point.

And what happens is if neither player manages to knock-out a BOSS, the winner is determined by the number of "VPs" (or whomever dealt the most Damage)!

So you've got to figure out which strategy is best for you... And play according to the method which is more likely to help you WIN the duel/match.

Fri, 09/09/2022 - 15:04

#12

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

I almost wanted to ask the

I almost wanted to ask the same question. The card looks good. But effectively no art.

I think the main problem is the memorization of cards. In Magic the gathering, sometimes just looking at the picture you remember the stats, you don`t have to remember it. I think that is one of the good advantage of art from a game play point of view.

So the questions would be, how to make it easily identifiable without artwork?

Solution A: Use a unique icon, like unit emblem or tiny icon art. That could work, but if there is a lot of icons, it could be hard to make them unique. I think dragon dice had a similar concept.

Solution B: A combination of stats could identify a unit. In Duel Masters the video game, the low resolution could not afford artwork so you could only see cost, strength and ability icon. Most of the time, it was enough to identify which card it was. The drawback is that 2 units could have exactly the same combination of stats confusing both cards.

Do you have any other ideas?

Fri, 09/09/2022 - 15:11

#13

X3M

Offline

Joined: 10/28/2013

larienna wrote:I think the

larienna wrote:

I think the main problem is the memorization of cards. In Magic the gathering, sometimes just looking at the picture you remember the stats, you don`t have to remember it. I think that is one of the good advantage of art from a game play point of view.

Exactly this.

larienna wrote:

So the questions would be, how to make it easily identifiable without artwork?

Ok, that is a good question. I didn't think of this yet. A card without art, but a thing to recognise it fast...

larienna wrote:

Solution A: Use a unique icon, like unit emblem or tiny icon art. That could work, but if there is a lot of icons, it could be hard to make them unique. I think dragon dice had a similar concept.

I thought the same. But does this not fall in the same category as "art"? Or at least a picture...?

larienna wrote:

Solution B: A combination of stats could identify a unit. In Duel Masters the video game, the low resolution could not afford artwork so you could only see cost, strength and ability icon. Most of the time, it was enough to identify which card it was. The drawback is that 2 units could have exactly the same combination of stats confusing both cards.

Hey! This is a good idea.
I have something similar in my game.
If the armor is high, the players know it is a tank.
If the damage is high, the players know it is an anti tank.
Long range is often a support.
Fast movement is often a hit and run on a base.
Long range and fast movement is often a hit and run anywhere.

My players recognise this by watching the stats, not the pictures of said units.
I only realized this now!
Cheers!

Fri, 09/09/2022 - 18:35

#14

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Yes I DO!

larienna wrote:

... Do you have any other ideas?

My method to design ARCH cards is to DEFINE a "Monster/Unit": eg. ORC. Now for each of the FIVE (5) Colors (in the Color Pie), define a UNIQUE ORC for each one of them. Therefore there are FIVE (5) ORCS and your deck can have at most four (4) of them. So you can have any combination of ORCS given that you can ONLY have FOUR (4) of the EXACT SAME ORC. That means with the ORCS-only you can have "20" Cards... The Deck is only "16" Cards... So if you WANT you can make the DECK of ONLY ORCS (4 x 4 = 16).

So the NAME of the card "ORCS" identifies that the UNIT is an ORC. And the COLOR of the card defines WHICH of the ORCS it is (1 out of 5 colors).

And therefore it is a little EASIER to think of of Skills/Abilities that MATCH both the COLOR and the UNIT (Orcs in the present case).

This is a little bit like Pokemon: you can have mulitple Pikachus. But different in that Orcs come in FIVE (5) Colors. Whereas in MOST Duels the Colors are distinct Factions. Meaning Pikachu is Electric (Yellow). In ARCH, the Orcs come in five (5) "version" or one for each COLOR. So you can have "4" Black Orcs, Red Orcs, Green Orcs, Blue Orcs and White Orcs.

So this is DIFFERENT than MOST "Duels" and the "MO" is a bit different. Since ARCH is based on "Archon: Black & White", the FORMATIONS of Cards may require certain RULES. That of course is YET to be DEFINED!

I'm still working on the MECHANICS and HOW simple I want the game to be. I need more thought... Keep you all posted on what I decide and what comes to mind. Sincerely.

Mon, 09/12/2022 - 09:03

#15

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

An icon is generally less

An icon is generally less elaborate than artwork. Most of the time, only a silhouette will do. In the picture example in this thread, the dragon icon besides the unit name could be the type of icon I am thinking about.

Being more limited, it's hard to make them unique. If the difference is not big enough people could confuse them. So maybe they would be more suitable for an entire group of units. In the example from the OP, there could be an ORC icon which is used on all the 4-5 orc cards. So there would be an icon per category rather per card.

I guess then combinations of color, numbers, icons or other stats would kick in to make the identification unique. Ability text cannot be used to make a card easy to identify.

Another idea, card codes. If big enough, could make it easy to identify. That card 2A5 means the Lava Orc. There would need to be a better way to disguise this code in the theme.

Mon, 09/12/2022 - 21:21

#16

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

For the White Wizard's side ...

I also have pre-set types of units. So for example the "Knight"... He comes in FIVE (5) Flavors but in the set only three (3) of two (2) "Knights":

1> 3x Red Knight = "Firebrand Knight"

2> 3x Black Knight = "Dark of Knight"

So you KNOW that anything that is a "Knight" belongs to the "White Wizard's" side of the game ... There could be the option for "Corrupted Knight" which could break this rule... But that is NOT for now.

As of TODAY, that's how you can tell is a card is a "Knight" (they have "Knight" in the name). And could potentially come in FIVE (5) Flavors/Colors/Classes.

Therefore it's not too complicated to understand what ARE the units to either side. @let-off studios mentioned that testing is a bit HARD. I'm going with the approach that it is RANDOM. So randomness will be my friend as I play trying to NOT remember each player's hand and Pit Units...

Fri, 09/16/2022 - 11:19

#17

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

You can make each category

You can make each category like Orc and Knight have their own icons.

If you share the flavor/color/classes accross the categories, you can also use icons for that.

Making each unit uniquely identifiable with only 2 icons.

Wed, 09/21/2022 - 13:29

#18

chriswhite

Offline

Joined: 07/10/2011

No

This could work in single-box boardgame, especially if there was art elsewhere. (One game published game that I've worked on had cards with no art, and that worked fine.)

However, for a collectible game, there's just no way... sorry.

That being said, it seems like there's tons of space being wasted here. Like, you have 4 different areas of border and margin between the side edges and the middle text. The area in the bottom seems unjudgeable without knowing the game, but strikes me as poorly used. And you have huge empty spaces in your text boxes. (If you have text abilities that regularly fill both those boxes, then I'd cautiously say that you are straining the limits of the amount of mechanical information a single standard card can be expected to reasonably impart.)

Here's an example of a card design that imparts information a bit more economically:

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/94/fc/94fc2a3f-a6...

I'd sooner make the cards larger — even with an unorthodox size/shape — than release them without art. After all, the more mechanics that there are (and it seems like there's a lot here) the more important it is that the theming serves those mechanics to the player in a comprehensible way.

Wed, 09/21/2022 - 22:10

#19

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

Hmm... A bit different than I thought

chriswhite wrote:

This could work in single-box boardgame, especially if there was art elsewhere. (One game published game that I've worked on had cards with no art, and that worked fine.)

Not really what I am AIMING for TBH.

chriswhite wrote:

However, for a collectible game, there's just no way... sorry.

Not saying it's going to be collected or collectible, what I am more leaning towards is "expandable". I've been Designing Games for about 12+ Years now and I haven't made a dime. I've lost a small nest-egg and blown the balance with things like TradeWorlds and Crystal Heroes (Art).

What I have learnt is that if you want to MAKE it in the Design business especially games, you need a FOUNDATION. Whatever it may be, design-wise, you need some kind of "game" that produces re-occurring revenue. I'm not saying that you will make millions of dollars but if you can NET in a Year $50,000 to $60,000 in profit that's something that is NOT to balk at.

That's why most of my games are "expandable". I'm hoping that one (1) Game "Franchise" sticks and earns me some monies so I can continue to design games.

For me it's NOT a "Hobby", I want it to be my Job/purpose. So an expandable game without ANY ART... Hmm... That's something that COULD "stick"! I used the term "collectible" because the terms are so "archaic" in the business... You've got CCGs and TCGs. Both got to do with collecting, one more focused on trading.

chriswhite wrote:

That being said, it seems like ...

I will re-work the design of the template. It's not 100% completed. There are some more design choices that can be improved upon too. Thanks for the sample but that is FFG... I'm a mediocre Graphic Designer trying to make an AMAZING template ... Hard. But I appreciate you sharing.

chriswhite wrote:

I'd sooner make the cards larger — even with an unorthodox size/shape — than release them without art. After all, the more mechanics that there are (and it seems like there's a lot here) the more important it is that the theming serves those mechanics to the player in a comprehensible way.

I don't want to stray from Poker-sized Cards... And I'm working on having "3" Abilities per card (as per my design): Grunt, Adept and Noble. ARCH is still in "design/conception". Thanks for sharing your thoughts and insights. I'm not finished with the template ... But DOUBT that there will be ROOM for a picture/illustration. In the end I design games for PLAYERS not "collectors".

Cheers!

Note #1: I thought TradeWorlds was going to be my FOUNDATION but we've lost all our Backer support and thousands of twitter followers, OLG is a shell with just Stan and myself (as a helper). Because we are so LATE on our commitments ... people are turned off and there will be little to any hope that TradeWorlds continues and more expansions can be made... It's too bad because I have at LEAST "3" Expansion concepts for TradeWorlds. All great but who is going to buy when we have "0" Backer support... Meh.

Note #2: Take Justin Gary from Stone Blade Entertainment and his "Ascension" suite of games. $100 USD for one game box. That's how you do it! Have like an Anniversary Edition each Year, 6 Years going... With a loyal following interested in more of the same... That's a FOUNDATION.

Whatever it is you are designing... If you are serious, you might as well NOT waste time with PNPs or small games... Get to your REAL Games as quickly as possible. Why? Because the earlier you find something that "sticks" the better you will be. And this will allow you to design MORE.

Like I said, I'm not in it to make Millions of dollars... But to make a decent income, pay my bills, support the family and be able to afford sometimes nicer things... That to me sounds "REASONABLE"!

Note #3: That's not to say that there is NOT a market for SMALLER or lighter games. Kids games are very popular too... If you find a "niche" in that market ... By designing something that "sticks"... No reason why that cannot be a good FOUNDATION.

Gregg Jewell had his "Battle Pencils" concept which I'm sure could net a pretty penny and all it was was pencils (HB or 2H, etc.) with characters and stats to match so kids could battle! Plus you use the pencils to sharpen them for writing and you get it... Kids need to buy more pencils ... To continue playing and writing! Genius!!!

Wed, 09/21/2022 - 23:28

#20

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

I'm not 100% certain but...

questccg wrote:

And I'm working on having "3" Abilities per card (as per my design): Grunt, Adept and Noble.

Of those three (3) "categories", I LIKE "Grunt and Noble". The "Adept" category is still something that I am "working on". I need something like "Secondary" or "Intermediate" or "Advanced" or something like that...

Right now, "Adept" is the best name that I have.

If anyone has a better name for the middle category, feel free to share! I am still going to do some more digging and searching to see if I can find a BETTER term than "Adept".

Cheers all!

Wed, 09/21/2022 - 23:42

#21

questccg

Offline

Joined: 04/16/2011

And it's NOT that I don't LIKE "Art" ...

Here's a sample from "Crystal Heroes" (CH):

It's not like I am against it. I was just wondering if an "expandable" game could be viable without ART. There is more to be designed and thought about ATM.

I'm just saying that for ARCH, I would prefer choosing another "path"!

P.S.: That is two (2) illustrations from first version on the LEFT to the second version on the RIGHT. I love the art... But right now I just am floundering because I'm not sure what is the best avenue to follow!

Fri, 09/23/2022 - 10:05

#22

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

If you can afford it, yes go

If you can afford it, yes go ahead, use artwork.

If you cannot do it, you`ll have to find alternatives. Personally, I am looking more into making Pixel Art. Depending on the resolution, it could be done relatively easily once you know the concept of blocking, highlight and shading.

Convolution Matrix could help smooth the image afterwards with more colors than 3 variation per color.

It all depends on the resolution size. The more pixel, the more skills you need.

Sat, 09/24/2022 - 21:48

#23

larienna

Offline

Joined: 07/28/2008

I just stumbled on AI

I just stumbled on AI generated artwork, and generated the following picture from a website.

https://www.bgdf.com/image/ai-generated-artwork-pocket-watch

Tell me if you cannot view the picture.

It's unfortunate to say this, but if those algorithm are actually delivering correctly the merchandise, we do not need any artists anymore.

User login

Navigation

Jan 29 2025

Jan 27 2025

Jan 25 2025

Jan 23 2025

Jan 21 2025

Jan 14 2025

Jan 11 2025

Jan 8 2025

Jan 1 2025

Dec 29 2024

Dec 27 2024

Dec 26 2024

Dec 25 2024

Dec 24 2024

Dec 17 2024

Dec 16 2024

Dec 14 2024

Dec 13 2024

Dec 11 2024

	Madison Game Design Cabal (0) by The Game Crafter
	PoA — Major shift back closer to FCE (13) by questccg