I first started doing some basic futuristic graphics for my game, an online top-down shooter, and people thought it looked ok. But I thought the graphics were too unoriginal, ideas just stolen from whatever scifi and real machinery is out there. Now I'm planning on taking another approach with some sort of surrealism; You know, stones with holes in them, gigantic metal feet coming from ground, weird eggs lying on ground. Yet I'll try to make it coherent, not just a mismatch of surrealism cliches (I am not yet sure how that will work out). Random pictures. Now before I even start with the effort, I want to hear your opinion: Do you think an average gamer would appreciate this kind of theme? I admit that my description was vague, but let your imagination run wild. I don't want/need any praise from them with this approach, they seemed already to be satisfied with the theme I had. I only want to do this because I like the idea (it is a hobby project after all), and I'm only concerned of whether surrealism would lose a game's audience. You may wonder, why I'm not asking those who have played it already. But trust me, it wouldn't be worth it. I'm just bored with the visuals games these days provide. Fantasy games trying to look like LOTR, scifi games trying to look like Star Wars and reality games trying to look like real life. There isn't too much effort put forward in creating a game universum that looks unique in some way. I've seen this done in some flash games and other small games though (e.g. many puzzle games). The Myst games also had their unique touch, IIRC, but the gameplay was repulsive for me.. So you can talk about some general ideas you have about surrealism and unique artwork, and how they would work out as game imaginary. This also heavily affects the design possibilities of a game, so I wasn't sure whether to post this on visual side or design. Don't limit this discussion to my question, whatever that was. [Edited by - civguy on December 9, 2004 2:01:46 PM]

Me: yes. Average gamers: no. Witness the popularity of CounterStrike and various other games strictly on the basis that they have realistic-looking weaponry. Gamers are a dull, dull lot.

edit: except in Japan. Japanese gamers have a very, very high tolerance for wierdness.

I'd better double-check that unicode support then :p

Ah, I just remembered one successful game with surrealistic ideas and visuals: MDK! Screenshots and more shots.

I think the concept is pretty interesting.

However, if you think MDK was a good example of surrealism, then I doubt your game would come out that great. MDK had some pretty weird shit in it for sure, but it wasnt surrealistic. Bent lightposts are not surrealism.

If youre going to base the entire art scheme on surrealism, you should do a LOT of reasearch on the movement. Study dali's work. Dig up interviews or things he's written explaining the elements in his art.. Try to find the deeper meaning of the whole style. Otherwise, its going to be just as boring. It'll feel fake.

Also, I dont know how well a futuristic high-tech type game (Im picturing Starcraft Terrans on your description) would be with this art style.

I dont know. Just do alot of research and understanding of the style before you jump in and fuck it all up.

Or, just try some acid. two tabs. Drink orange juice. You'll get a pretty good idea of surrealism.

Quote:

Original post by Garmichael Try to find the deeper meaning of the whole style. Otherwise, its going to be just as boring. It'll feel fake.

Like MDK? I doubt most people will be able to tell the difference.

Quote:

I dont know. Just do alot of research and understanding of the style before you jump in and fuck it all up.

Yeah, I know I'm a complete newbie when it comes to surrealism, and you have a point. But after doing some research (before starting this topic, mind you), it's clear to me that a surrealist painting isn't usually just a mixture of "features" or "ideas", but they convey a bigger meaning and the "weird" looking stuff is built around to support it. At least that's the feeling I'm getting out of them. However a game is not a painting, and being a plotless online action game it really doesn't have a message. So is there really a right way to use surrealism in such a scenario?

Quote:

Quote: Try to find the deeper meaning of the whole style. Otherwise, its going to be just as boring. It'll feel fake. I doubt most people will be able to tell the difference.

most people wont conciously (except the few intelligent ones), but if you can grab a users subconsiousness, and make them want to play the game over and over, then your away.

Quote:

So is there really a right way to use surrealism in such a scenario?

not in my opinion there isnt. So if your going to use it, try to get into a university library or something, because they have tonnes of books on this stuff.

Quote:

Original post by Anonymous Poster Simply put you seem to be confusing abstract art with surrealism.

I would like to hear your definition for both, which lead you to this conclusion. Because just doing a search for abstract art and surrealism shows that abstract art is wholly different from what I visualized. They just seem to be shapes and splatters to an uneducated mind like mine, barring a few exceptions ;) (yah I know you hate generalizations)

Quote:

(personally I think most shooters dont even resemble star wars at all)

I didn't really mean the LOTR & Star Wars comparison to be taken so strictly. I just meant the games mimic the popular ways of doing things, and when you start playing that brand new scifi game you get the feeling you've seen it before many times.

Quote:

Ship design is very important. You have to decide if you want to stay pure futruristic, and how far futuristic. Get some inspiration from mother nature if need be. Try taking different instect/bird shapes and sleeking them out to look like ships. Look at prototype car designs perhaps if you want a more sometime near future. Perhaps go retro with what designs were used in early sci fi flicks from the 40s, 50s, and 60s. Dont like retro? Maybe go massive with mech liek designs or take a cue from cowboy bepop and add a bit of pirate flair with boat designs (ie some yachts can look quite awsome as space ships with some imagination).

These are good ideas. I know this is going back to a more traditional approach, but I wouldn't mind that if I got the ideas of how to make it stand out.

Quote:

This there should be some cimilarity based on the time period and history of what things look like. Stone walls, castles, knights, etc. You cant expect ppl to stray to far from the fantasy setting and what it is to be in a fantasy if they want to make a game in a fanatsy setting.

I think fantasy theme bends a lot though. Maybe you need to have some magic and some knights and a human race living somewhere, but everything beyond that can be different. Terrain shape, buildings, plants, animals and so on. It needn't look like earth.

Quote:

Heck look at the complaints about windwaker for gamecube. People despised the fresh cartoony look for hyrule.

Actually, I didn't like that either. The graphics looked too much meant for kiddies. I did like the art in Viewtiful Joe though, and it was quite unique when it comes to games. And I got the impression that VJ's visuals were well accepted in general, so a fresh new look isn't doomed to failure.. (all based on screenshots, I don't own a Gamecube)

Quote:

If you are maiking a futuristic shooter there are some rules that need to be followed. you can bend a few, maybe even break a few, however you cant ignore them all.

I agree.

Quote:

The problem is that people have certain expectations based on the story for the game. If you are making a shooter with no story, you can do what you want with the graphics and most ppl wont care (nor will they care about your game).

That is simply untrue. Most popular online shooters are storyless, e.g. Quake 3, Unreal Tournament and Counterstrike.

Quote:

The graphics should reflect something about the world, and there should be a reason for doing it besides the dull "i want to be different".

I try to introduce some gameplay elements as well that go in conjunction with the visuals. This may sound like the wrong way around, but the end result will be similar and it works for me. But perhaps the "problem" here is that this game is a shooter game which essentially has no required theme: The player units could be tanks, wizards, troopers, mechas or hovercrafts and the gameplay mechanics would be essentially the same. That's why I'm open to *all* ideas. I don't see what is wrong with the viewpoint of "I want to be different". I see being different as something that has potential to not bore me nor the audience.

Quote:

Futuristic designs will look similar to something, and even your surrealistic game has probably been done many times over before.

If you break out of the traditional boundaries of looking natural or functional, the possibilities are endless.

Quote:

Using stones with holes in it, giant metal feet, or other wierd items dont make a game original. Afterall aint that stone coming form nature, and the feet, and the eggs? Think about that.

I don't know what you're trying to say with this. That the shapes should be weirder to make the game original? Well, I wouldn't think you were saying that, but that's what makes your statement confusing.

Quote:

style is the word of the day

This seems to be the main point though. And I agree that there has to be some kind of theme or central idea behind how I'm going to create the visuals, so the game won't end up being a "mismatch of surrealism cliches".

[Edited by - civguy on December 10, 2004 11:12:40 AM]

A little off topic, but.. Am I the only one that gets annoyed when people chop up replies into pieces of 1 or 2 sentences, take them out of context, then respond to them with 1 or 2 sentences that dont really say anything? It sort of feels like they arent trying to understand your overall point, and are really just trying to defend themselves without having to do a whole lot independant thinking or research.

Quote:

Original post by Garmichael A little off topic, but.. Am I the only one that gets annoyed when people chop up replies into pieces of 1 or 2 sentences, take them out of context, then respond to them with 1 or 2 sentences that dont really say anything? It sort of feels like they arent trying to understand your overall point, and are really just trying to defend themselves without having to do a whole lot independant thinking or research.

Hmm. I find it ironic that your overall point was "Do a lot of research so you won't fuck it up by not having a deeper meaning in it", only said with 20 sentences most of which didn't really add anything.

On the other hand, if you're annoyed just by my reply to the anonymous poster, please be more specific in what I misunderstood. Your complaint isn't helpful for me as it is. His reply was long so I wouldn't be surprised if I didn't get the overall point.