I noticed that the community's got a pretty damn harsh attitude on graphics ripping. Even when someone rips graphics he made from another game.
And I've also noticed it strange how the world's got the opposite attitude towards ripping graphics (AKA actors) from movies. Not only are actors liked when they're re-used, they're practically worshipped. Actors get loads of money and fame, and even more so the more times they're re-used.
So, why's there such a big difference here? Why can't we just consider ripped graphics the same as actors? I mean, half of the time graphics are ripped, they're with permission (and even blessings) from the author. Why can't we just treat them both the same way... with either showers of praise for a re-used digital actor, or showers of 'lololol' and 'noob' taunts at seasoned actors?
BTW, anyone got a sprite library they'd like to share?
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
I agree Muz. Burn the re-used actors, they are far too old!
Seriously though, without ripped graphics I'd have...no graphics...which is why my games have no graphics. About the only things I can draw are geometric shapes. Aren't I talented?
The difference is, the actor isn't using the same costume or makeup every time, and actor is like the character or whatever in a game, you might have a company mascot named mathias that is featured in all of your games, but the games are different genres and mathias is dressed, acts and blah's different in every different game.
Thats the difference, ripping sucks, even for fangames, example: sonic time attack rawks.
"Everytime you use Kazaa, a metallica band member dies a little."
Quote Jonathon Smeby.
Im one of those that thinks ripped graphics are fine.
they may reek of unoriginality but the point of fangames are to recreate the game that the maker is a fan of, so they help dont they?
I am in the process of of making a dizzy fangame and im using ripped graphics albiet slightly edited.
now all comments so far have been positive, they say they "love the nes style graphics" (even when it is based on the Amstrad cpc version)
so i think that people associate ripped graphics with poor quality since so many fangames are beyond the maker abilities.
Well, I didn't really mean "ripped" as in well... ripped, I meant more like re-used from another game, even when the author fully allows it or even draws it himself. Strange how the community just bash such people.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
The difference is, actors are people working, while ripped graphics indicate someone doing no work. Minor things like explosions are alright, but it ruins the feel of a game when you realise it's the same badly-drawn sphere character in a new and crappier adventure.
Well, the ripper did work to do the ripping, or otherwise finding, of the ripped graphics and put them into motion in their game. Even more so if they edit the color.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
