Sonic X-treme update

[na_th_an]

Pete, I think we have a language problem let me explain some points:

What pisses me off is how self-righteous all the people are who make games with original graphics, original music, original characters, an original story, etc. They think that anyone who doesn't do the same has thereby made a game of lesser value.

That's only 'cause drawing the GFX, composing and making the Music and the SFX take way more time than actually coding it. As a game program, I couldn't care less if artwork is original, 'cause what matters is that the game is funny and well coded .But as a whole, as a product, I tend to give more value to original (yea, i.e. new ) artwork 'cause, while it can be (it will be) amateur and with less quality, the game creator has spent a good amount of time on designing it. There's much more effort put on the product. Imagine you have two equally killer engines, one with the Zelda tileset and another one with original (i.e. new) graphics. Which one is better, more valuable to you? That was my point: Ripped artwork don't make a game worse; original artwork make a game more valuable - as in the developer has worked harder on it. That doesn't mean that a game which has a killer engine and ripped graphics has to be worse that a game which an unplayable engine but with original graphics.

Besides, ripped graphics, characters, music, etc. are almost always superior to the work done by amateurs. Sonic the Hedgehog's graphics are far better than just about anything I've seen done by a QB programmer. So is the music.

Yeah, but those graphics and music were designed for another (commercial, copyrighted) game. Your above statement could be considered like some kind of "you won't ever surpass the quality of profesional pixel artists, so steal their sprites instead of creating yours". Of course your sprites will be worse, but they are YOURS, created by you to fit your game. You spent hours on them. That's what I call "valuable". As I wrote above, it's the difference between spending 1 month coding and 3 designing graphics and spending 1 month coding and 1 day ripping graphics.

Imagine that, at school, you have to write an essay about physics. Instead of writing it yourself, you take an article by Albert Einstein and give it to your teacher. Shouldn't he complain? After all, Einstein's articles are much better that what you could have probably written. Well, this is the same case but with game graphics, sounds and music.

So Na_th_an, when you say:

I myself have been coding a sequel to a famous Spanish 80s game called Phantomas. It is a sequel, meaning it uses the character and game style, but not a single tile or sprite (and there are around 2000+ of them), not a single background image, sound or tune have been ripped. Does that mean that the game would have sucked if it had ripped artwork? No, but I think that everyone will agree that it is better and more valuable the way it is.

I don't agree that just because you have done "original" (ie: new) artwork for your sequel, that it's instantly "better and more valuable". In my opinion, your artwork IS more valuable if it truly is BETTER than the original game's artwork...but ONLY if it actually is better. If it's a pathetic imitation of the real thing, as are most graphics done by fans, then you can't say that your work is more valuable. What would you rather see -- pathetic fan art or the superior source material that inspired it?

That's the prob: "valuable". I didn't mean "valuable" in an absolute sense, i.e. $20 is more valuable than $5, but in a... uh... figurative sense? My English fails here. It's in the fashion of a mother who likes his son's drawings rather than a Michaelangelo. That's what I meat with "valuable". I finished the engine for "Phantomas" in two days. If I had ripped the GFX and the level data the game would have been finished in 1 week. But I spent almost two years drawing tiles and sprites. That's what I call valuable.

(and, by the way, I think my GFX are better, considering that the original game was for the Sinclair ZX Spectrum computer :lol

I ENJOY ORIGINAL ARTWORK AND STORYLINE, and, IMHO, ORIGINAL ARTWORK AND STORYLINE INCREASES A GAME'S QUALITY.

I agree with you -- but only if the original artwork and storyline are GOOD. Having original graphics and storyline is a plus if they are of high quality -- but they do not automatically make a game superior.

Yeah, you are right here. I worded it wrong, explained above

Just look at how many original QB games have an entirely original tilset that absolutely sucks. SonicX is superior in every aspect -- graphics, sound, gameplay and fun factor -- to those games.

Agreed 100%. My point was that JB is only in charge of the two last aspects: gameplay and fun factor.

You can't say its graphics are worse...because they're not. They were designed by very talented professional artists who did a fantastic job. And you also can't say that this game is less fun to play...because that would be a lie. SonicX is a hell of a lot more fun than most QB platformers. I'd rather play a good clone than a bad original game any day.

And I also told that before, that the engine is superb, that it rocks, that it could be a QB milestone... 'cause that's the truth and that's what I think.

All this began I dunno way, 'cause my original claim was somewhat innocent:

"It rocks but I'd rather have original artwork".

Which is just a comment about my personal preferences.