I recently posted the exact same post somewhere else, but I am trying to make an improtant point that all should know.
Code isn't the only ingrident to a successful game you now. There are 2 ingridents along with Love and Care that go into a successful game they are 'Graphics' 'Code' those are the most important. Now don't get me wrong Code is an exceptionally improtant part to the progress of a good game, but also to succeed in the gaming business you must also have the Graphic element in your game. In my personal opinion Graphics as a whole takes far more skill that Programming because along with skill you need an Imagination which in the world that we live in, is in short supply. Now next time you go critizing someone for not Programming the game, perhaps you should find out what they are doing, it might even be Graphics. Also please don't go posting things like True Ownder = Programmer, because it isn't true. A game is made out of many people and they are not all just Programmers, there are Hosts, Testers, People who create Ideas and many other positions, and ingridents than are included to make an all out good game. I hope people look back to this post and realise the respect Graphics Artists and many other people should be deserving and not Programmers, but they are important, because without them the Graphics would be useless, but without the Graphics the Code would be useless.
ID:277171
 Oct 15 2006, 11:48 am
|
|
No. Grahpics can be two pixels, a black and a white one, for all I care. Programming is extremely important. It is definitely more important than graphics. What the point of having pretty graphics if you have no code, huh? Programming is just behind gameplay when it comes to making a game, and graphics, undoubtedly, fall in third.
| |
I agree, Love is the most important ingredient in a game! Everyone else in this thread is wrong, pretty much.
| |
Sid Meier doesn't do programming code or graphics, but all of his games are prefixed with "Sid Meier's".
Why? Because he is the designer, and that is the most important aspect of computer game development. True gamers couldn't care less about graphics or code -- they care about playability and a good game environment. If the game is fun, they will play it. Fun comes from design. Everyone's definition of fun varies, too, which is why you have some people playing copies of Halo and some people calling it the worst game ever made. | |
Jtgibson wrote:
Why? Because he is the designer, and that is the most important aspect of computer game development. Some of the more recent "Sid Meier's" games aren't even designed by him. Alpha Centauri, for example (okay, not all that recent), was mostly done by Brian Reynolds. | |
Jon88 wrote:
Jtgibson wrote: Well, in Alpha Centauri's case, it was just Civilization with a facelift and dynamically-created units. Most of the other "Sid Meier's" titles are revisions of his old designs as well. | |
Stephen-San wrote:
There are 2 ingridents along with Love and Care Hahaha. Also, ingredient that go into a successful game they are 'Graphics' 'Code' those are the most important. What you just said: Code isn't the only ingredient that goes in to a successful game - there are also code and graphics. In my personal opinion Graphics as a whole takes far more skill that Programming One may say that being artistic is a talent, while you're not born able to program. True Ownder (sic) = Programmer On BYOND, that's pretty much true. Hosts, Testers, People who create Ideas There are not members of a core development team (the exception being concept designers, but the tone of your post implies outside players). and many other positions, and ingridents than are included to make an all out good game. I hope people look back to this post and realise the respect Graphics Artists and many other people should be deserving and not Programmers, but they are important, because without them the Graphics would be useless, What? but without the Graphics the Code would be useless. Text based games. Also, please don't do this bold crap. It looks really dumb. | |
Block of incoherent text crits you for 1500 dmg.
You die. Anyways, graphics aren't as important as you seem to think it is. Art is more or less a talent that you are born with (although some do learn it after repeated use). Programming on the other hand is something that can come from years of hard work and studying... To say that graphics are the only thing that takes imagination is a load of bull. Especially considering in any professional environment, the creative designers will tell you what to make. The artists make all the "creative" adjustments and the graphics designers simply take the concept art and model it. If you are going to argue the case that you are talking about byond then you need to realize that the programmers are almost always the lead of the team and normally know what the game should be like. Every little snippet of programming code has personalization and creativity within itself. To say that programming takes no imagination is just dumb. | |
It's actually everything put together. The game play is the most important, you can have good coding, good icons, but you have to make it click.
| |
Spire8989 wrote:
Block of incoherent text crits you for 1500 dmg. I wouldn't play a game which used "crit" as a verb. ;-) Anyways, graphics aren't as important as you seem to think it is. Art is more or less a talent that you are born with (although some do learn it after repeated use). Programming on the other hand is something that can come from years of hard work and studying... MUDs are still played to this very day, and they completely lack graphics at all, which reinforces your argument even more. If you are going to argue the case that you are talking about byond then you need to realize that the programmers are almost always the lead of the team and normally know what the game should be like. Every little snippet of programming code has personalization and creativity within itself. To say that programming takes no imagination is just dumb. Here, however, I digress a bit. It depends on the role of the programmer. In BYOND, most of the people who are programmers are also the developers, so they tend to have the most opinions and effect on the "direction" of the game. In the computer games industry as a whole, however, programmers definitely do not run the show. Programming in the industry is a scientific, labour-intensive job where you are given tasks to complete and deadlines within which to complete them in. If a programmer tries to inject creativity into his source code in any form other than optimisation or code improvement, he is usually fired. =) | |
Haha... Pretty intersting reading all of this.
I am loving this analyzing. The way you grab my post by the scruff and kick the stuffing out of it. Hmm, there are 2 sides. I am apart of both. The Programmers and the Graphics Artists. Most likely in these situations, the people seem to join the side they are either capable or some or crazy funky arse idea. I personally think Graphics Artists can make some beautiful work, but at the same time Programmers can make beautiful work... If you find numbers and letters attractive, which personally I do. I now you can make successful text base games and I used to play one here on BYOND, but unfortunatly it was killed of along with most text games. As you may see through a historyof text based games, this is an recurring stage of events that happens in the sad life of a text based game, being treated with no respect, it disgusts me >_<. Along with the text based game the life of a game with graphics included is sometime short lived, so really you can argue from both sides. The core of a game is really the programming, and I must admit it is incredibly important, because without it where would the game get to, but the game wouldn't travel very far without the assistants of Graphics.... Ahh this argument could go on for centuries to come "Haha" but in my opinion they are both as equal as each other. Thanks for reading. | |
The reason I program and stick to only turfs is my lack of imagination. When it comes to icons I also think mathimatically. In essence, most people presume that the owner should be a programmer, and I can see why. Generally, a programmer would most likely have the most power, and would have more knowledge over hub entries exc. Though that doesn't rule out the humble iconer.
In theory, it's not position that states your rank. It's your skills in leadership. If you can organise a game and keep your team happy, then you can easily claim the rank of owner no matter what you excel at. Also, the art of iconing and the skill of programming are like English and Maths. Some people are good at one thing and some people are good at another. When you said that imaginative people is something this world lacks, in theory, the same applies to programmers. We lack good programmers. The only reason you presume we lack good iconers is because when you play a game, you never actually see the code do you? You only feel it's flexibility when you play it. You may notice bugs or flaws but it doesn't stand out as much as a bad icon. If you stick a icon with inverse colours everyone will notice. The key to programming is structure and neatness. Fully commented code is good code. Messy code is bad code. If you just chuck together some code and post it some people may see it as a good game, though in theory it isn't. Basically, I went a bit off topic, though my point is that anyone can lead the project, and that programmers and iconers are equal in their own respects, no skill is harder than another. To create a good icon it may take a lot of time and work, and this is exactly the same with code. So next time you think of biasing iconing, think again. ADT_CLONE | |
To sum up... pretty much everything;
You can have an awesome game with little (or any) graphics at all (eg: TSIF (wonder if thats still around...)). You cant have a game without code, otherwise its just... a picture. Code ftw. | |
Look how Grand Theft Auto did on the past and present, it was 2D and blocky for crying out loud, then 3D and not very good looking.My point is...
Game Developers > Programmers > Artists Tested, Proven and Still Evolving. | |
Game Developers > Programmers > Artiststrewwwwww dat! although i dont really get the GTA reference... all the GTA games that ive played that came out before SA were crap | |
Than you were doing something wrong. There hasn't been a single GTA game that was not fun nor good for its time. Granted GTA 1, 2, and London were not the prettiest of all games of their time, they did a great job of making due with the power of the PS1. GTA3 and GTAVC were lacking some details in the models, but their gameplay was solid and the graphics worked overall. GTA 3 was every bit as good as VC. SA really didn't add anything special. Sure, it had a bigger map and a few new cars, but not much at all was added into the game. And the voice acting for SA was down right HORRIBLE.
Point is, the GTA games were not crap, even if you didn't like them. Back to the topic: The GTA games, although not graphically stunning, where actually a good example of graphics making a large part of the game. Think about the cars. There where a lot of cars in all the GTA games, and they all looked good. Sure the human models didn't look great, and the engine didn't do the best job at rendering, but they did work. I would blame the graphics being bad more on programming than the art team. I think art is a very important part in a game. Most people downplay it, but it really is right up there with graphics. Man games rely heavily on cut scenes to make the game playable, and some of those are among the best games of all times. Using Nintendo as an example for the whole "Graphics aren't important" thing is also wrong(Not saying you are, but some have). Nintendo is a great example of how basic but well thought out graphic can make a game. I would say that making good graphics with less power is what Nintendo where it is today. | |
I disagree. The most important aspect to any large project is its initial design. Without a concept and goal, there is nothing to build to.
Granted, the code is what makes the game into an actual game; there have been many successful games with cruddy graphics. Also, that doesn't account for text-based games, which of course are entirely based on the design, and possibly any programming behind it.
I won't disagree here; this is one fact which prevents me from being an artist.
Most of the time that I have seen such criticism on BYOND, it has been to the person that says "i need coders artists turfs maps designers everything we're going to make this the best game ever." I haven't really ever seen anyone get criticized for making it apparent that they would handle the graphics department.
Games don't have to convey through some nice graphical interface. Sure, it's nice, but the code can still be useful without needing high quality graphics.
Hiead