[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The Artists thing
Ok, let's see if I can bore you some more with my ramblings:
Since game designers need a lot of imagination, and the ability to
envision levels (strategy etc.) it might be a good idea to look at
people who write books and people that enjoy role-playing (especially
Dungeon Masters). The chance that someone is able to come up with a new
game concept is pretty low, but someone that is used to setting up game
situations for others (Dungeon Masters) or create situations in books
(writers) may be very capable of creating a good setting for a game
(other than solitaire and tetris that is;). Perhaps having a look at the
role playing newsgroups might prove fruitful.
Since draw artists usually have a pretty good idea of the type of game
(levels) they'd like to be drawing for, it may help to let them come up
with the initial idea, and then work it through with them. Either that
or take a basic game concept, and let them in on the brain-storming. The
best way to attract draw artists for your game is of course to have
finished at least one successful game though. :)
Draw artists have the same problem musicians do: they can't really use
someone else's drawings, and don't like it when people take their work
without giving them at least credit for it (but preferably something
greener;). Since drawings are also not easily reusable (I saw some
programmers commenting on how little they could use from the things that
are available), a failed project is usually lost time for draw artists.
Hence they prefer a less open setting where they know the game will be
finished around this and this date rather than 'we'll see if it ever
gets finished'. Since the Open Source community often don't use
deadlines, these projects are less interesting to draw artists.
Music artists are very similar to draw artists, but have the added cost
of often expensive equipment. A little bit of money for their efforts is
therefore highly appreciated. I admit that the idea of Open Source is
very good, but it's usually more associated with OS'es and applications
rather than games.
Since games that are to be sold often have a higher chance of being
finished, and actually helping them to pay for their expensive hobby
(sheet music for instance is quite expensive), and artists being scarce,
it is easy to see which projects attract the artists.
Somebody said that people often remember the programmers, but not the
artists. That depends on who you talk to. The programmers will usually
remember the programmers, but if the music is good, the musicians will
remember the musicians. Chris Huelzbeck (dunno if this is the correct
spelling) who created the music for Turrican for instance is very well
known in the musicians gaming groups.
Another thought: A draw artist (and a very good one I might add) I spoke
to recently told me: 'I can easily get programmers to program the game I
want to design, so why would I wish to be limited by some programmer's
idea?' Basically it comes down to this: with programmers being highly
available, getting programmers to implement a good game design with good
graphics/sound is easy.
Perhaps in order to get artists to join the team, the idea of Open
Source should be used for implementation ideas and game engines, and
have the end-game still be sold. It will increase the chances of a game
being finished, and it will help artists (especially musicians) to pay
for better equipment to improve their future work. Don't forget: a
programmer can often program himself a better development system, but a
musician can't program himself a better synthesizer...
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com