I used to try to get away with using them when I was making games that just me and my friends played. It was a quick way to get results, and even then it took longer than it probably should have because I'm a stickler for quality and few of the library graphics matched, so I found myself struggling to get a game that seemed to all around match.
In the end though, I honestly do not believe that any of the library graphics, especially enough of them in a particular style, are anywhere near good enough to accomplish anything in any serious game. Their only striving hope is the explosions, because you can do quite a bit with them to distract from the fact that they're libs, but even then... making your own in the long run will significantly improve both your skill and end quality (eventually).
If you want my personal opinion, I hate library graphics. I know I used to use them, but I hate them. I will never use them again, and I feel like the chances of me downloading a game are cut at least 50%, the instant I see a library graphic in the screenshot. Call me prejudice (usage?), but at least you can't call me dishonest.
You can make a great game with library graphcs. Perhaps unlikely, but still very much possible.
If you submit and promote your game widely on the web, to gamers and not to other developers (like mainly is the case e.g. here), no one cares whether you have drawn the gfx yourself or not. The only thing that matters to the average player is how the graphics look and how the game plays and feels. That's it. The whole concept of "library graphics" exists only inside the Click community, which is like a grain of sand in the Sahara if you think of getting actual players for your game.
That said, of course it's recommended to use custom graphics. You will almost certainly end up with better results - at least in the long run - when you select that route instead of the easy one. But I just wanted to highlight that it's not such a sin or a critical mistake what the developer community think it is. Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience. Game developers, even though being also gamers themselves, view games differently than the average player.
I haven't used library graphics since I was making games for kicks alone in TGF. Haven't even seen what graphics, sounds or music come with MMF1.5 or 2.
Originally Posted by MJK Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience.
They're almost always your target audience in the klik world.
Sure, if players that aren't developers haven't seen the graphics before, it's ok to use them. But with library graphics, they may have been seen in other projects. And quite frankly, if you use library graphics, your coding probably won't match up with the quality of the graphics yet, so they'll notice shiny graphics and sloppy coding, and deduce that it's not a very good game.
Bottom line is, if it's obvious they're ripped, you look like a noob. If it complements the game well, and it doesn't drive your OCD insane, and it's hard for people to tell that you used library graphics, then it's up to you. It's always up to you. But as you progress you'll probably realize how much you can dislike them. It's something you'll probably want to move away from of your own accord, if you continue to make games.
Originally Posted by MJK Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience.
They're almost always your target audience in the klik world.
That's for damn sure, and that means that if your Graphics aren't 100% perfect, no one will take your game seriously and you're game will be labled as boring. But if they are perfect, there's no way your game can be boring, even if it's boring!
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
Originally Posted by MJK Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience.
They're almost always your target audience in the klik world.
That's for damn sure, and that means that if your Graphics aren't 100% perfect, no one will take your game seriously and you're game will be labled as boring. But if they are perfect, there's no way your game can be boring, even if it's boring!
Most people will rate a game more on how it plays than how it looks (and reviews will influence their decision on whether or not to download in the first place).
It's not so much the actual quality of the graphics, as it is what they tell you about the designer.
The thing is, you see a game with library graphics and you think "this person hasn't put any effort into the graphics, so he/she probably didn't put much effort into the programming (ie. gameplay) either, so it will probably suck".
Even if your sprites look like crap, people are more likely to think "this person obviously has no artistic talent, but at least he/she is the kind of person who really makes an effort, so maybe the gameplay will be better".
Originally Posted by MJK Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience.
They're almost always your target audience in the klik world.
That's for damn sure, and that means that if your Graphics aren't 100% perfect, no one will take your game seriously and you're game will be labled as boring. But if they are perfect, there's no way your game can be boring, even if it's boring!
i really suggest you look around more before you make such blatently non factual remarks. most developers that pull off amazing graphics are usually doing this proffessinally and the gameplay is usually on par with the graphics. that said, there are TOMES upon TOMES of great games that have less than satisfactory graphics.
Originally Posted by MJK Opinions of other developers are obviously very valuable, but they rarely are your game's target audience.
They're almost always your target audience in the klik world.
That's for damn sure, and that means that if your Graphics aren't 100% perfect, no one will take your game seriously and you're game will be labled as boring. But if they are perfect, there's no way your game can be boring, even if it's boring!
i really suggest you look around more before you make such blatently non factual remarks. most developers that pull off amazing graphics are usually doing this proffessinally and the gameplay is usually on par with the graphics. that said, there are TOMES upon TOMES of great games that have less than satisfactory graphics.
Okay, show me something that has top of the line gameplay, got tons of popularity but uses library GFX. Or something that someone has described as having "horrible" GFX. After all it doesn't matter, right?
While he's doing that, everyone else can show me a list of games that have very impressive GFX, and we'll compare and contrast.
Edited by HorrendousGames
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
Originally Posted by OMGGames
Okay, show me something that has top of the line gameplay, got tons of popularity but uses library GFX.
The fact that you don't see these, doesn't mean that one couldn't create something very popular and successful with library graphics. It basically just means that you can create something even more popular with custom graphics and this is obviously (and fortunately) the path that most clickers and game designers take. But if you think of a hypothetical scenario where creation of custom graphics would be impossible (let's imagine there would be no image editors at all in the world we're living - only library gfx! ), I can tell you that we would see some pretty amazing stuff made out of the MMF2 library graphics...
i had this long ass reply for you with a bunch of links and some more of the usual. but you know what. this is the n'th time youve hijacked a thread by causing an argument. look for yourself if you want to know what the games are. back on topic please.
Originally Posted by OMGGames
Okay, show me something that has top of the line gameplay, got tons of popularity but uses library GFX.
The fact that you don't see these, doesn't mean that one couldn't create something very popular and successful with library graphics. It basically just means that you can create something even more popular with custom graphics and this is obviously (and fortunately) the path that most clickers and game designers take. But if you think of a hypothetical scenario where creation of custom graphics would be impossible (let's imagine there would be no image editors at all in the world we're living - only library gfx! ), I can tell you that we would see some pretty amazing stuff made out of the MMF2 library graphics...
Originally Posted by Mr.Sludgy i had this long ass reply for you with a bunch of links and some more of the usual. but you know what. this is the n'th time youve hijacked a thread by causing an argument. look for yourself if you want to know what the games are. back on topic please.
Yeah, I hijacked the thread. I have nothing more to say to you.
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
"Okay, show me something that has top of the line gameplay, got tons of popularity but uses library GFX. Or something that someone has described as having "horrible" GFX. After all it doesn't matter, right? "
Okay, show me something that has top of the line gameplay, got tons of popularity but uses library GFX. Or something that someone has described as having "horrible" GFX. After all it doesn't matter, right?
Knytt is popular and has no gameplay and very basic, Paint like graphics.
Cave Story limits its palette, jerky animations, basic effects etc and is also quite popular.
La Mulana looks terribly dated and is popular.
(I don't really play many indie games so my experience is limited mmkay )
Whilst these aren't horrible they're certainly not as pretty as what some people here can churn out. I think the reason why there isn't a good game with library graphics is because it's new people who use them, people who aren't going to know the ins and outs of making a good game. Could be a good idea for a comp though - make something decent with library graphics .
I only used library graphics once for my very first game. I personally have nothing against them: they are great for people who aren't very good spritists, or just want to test a gameplay concept or something, but I just really enjoy making my own graphics and effects (with the event Editor).
Awesomeness is Watermelon.
*／l、
ﾞ（ﾟ､ ｡ ７
l、ﾞ ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ
This is Koji. Copy and paste Koji to your sig so he can acheive world domination.
i suppose they're ok if you need graphics NOW but when it's later you should be looking into customs
you may be able to get away with using them if you use them well or edit the hell out of them, but if most people won't even touch your game the instant they see library graphics in your screenshots, well...
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by MJK
), I can tell you that we would see some pretty amazing stuff made out of the MMF2 library graphics... 
