5 ms·

Maybe he's saying that adding good art won't make his games sell better. In that case it would just be cost without gain.

chii 7y ago
That's probably true. Good art style/aesthetics is a foot in the door for a lot of gamers, unfortunately. A game needs to stand on a foundation of good game mechanics (and possibly good writing), but the mainstream players' choice to try your game is gated by the production value and direction/style of the art.
effarig 7y ago
I personally have not bought Vogel's games based solely on their amateur visual appearance, and given the fact that he's never put out a "good-looking" game, how does he even know how it would affect sales?
- sangnoir 7y ago
  > how does he even know how it would affect sales? He doesn't know - but he feels he does not need to take the risk to find out because the stakes are too high for him (since he'll need to borrow from a bank or his retirement savings). I'm sure those who feel strongly about the potential on HN, reddit and elsewhere could band together and crowdfund/formally pitch Jeff on an investment in an artist for a subsequent game and capture the upside while shouldering the risk - he probably would be happy to take the money; he's not ready to put up his.
  - zapzupnz 7y ago
    > He doesn't know - but he feels he does not need to take the risk to find out because the stakes are too high for him (since he'll need to borrow from a bank or his retirement savings). Then that should have been the main crux of his argument, without the need to start making up questionable numbers and making comparisons with other titles; particularly when it's an open letter on a subject nobody really seemed to care about prior to the previous article. It seems his audience, his customerbase, is so extraordinarily specific that the letter would really have been better addressed to his fans and nobody else; instead, the two posts come off as unsolicited whining which I believe is what is rubbing people the wrong way.
    - sgift 7y ago
      > instead, the two posts come off as unsolicited whining which I believe is what is rubbing people the wrong way. They are sound business advice from someone who knows what he talks about (because he has had a successful business for a long time). Far better than the usual "hey, I'm a unicorn startup and obviously I will change the world" which will then implode a few weeks or month later, when their "revolutionary" idea and/or business opportunity turns out to be useless.
      - zapzupnz 7y ago
        He's had a small successful business for a long time, though, with an extremely limited audience and no intent to widen it with a view to potentially much better profits. I'm not sure I'd call it "sound business advice" unless one's business intent is to barely float above water.
        CathedralBorrow 7y ago
        You speak as if you know his business a lot better than a couple of blog posts can convey. What's the basis for your business advice?
        zapzupnz 7y ago
        I'm not claiming to provide business advice. The source of my understanding of the articles, and the business described therein, is the same as the basis for absolutely anybody else's extrapolation, both in his defence and against: the articles themselves. It seems to me that if, in 25 years, this guy is quibbling over whether he has the money or not to improve the look of his assets, something repeatedly said not to necessarily have any cost at all, whilst other small indie development teams (even those with only one or two people) manage to make breakthrough hits that reach as wide as possible an audience and look good, sometimes on multiple platforms including console, there's plenty to say that perhaps any business advice one could extrapolate is not the gold standard that his defenders are holding it up to be.
        7y ago
- vidarh 7y ago
  He doesn't know, but he's tried and spent money on trying to lift the quality in the past and failed. Someone else might make it work better. If he'd be able to afford spending even more, it might work better. But he's made it clear he's not willing to take the economic risk inherent in that, and that's a valid choice.
crooked-v 7y ago
Vogel is conflating 'good art' and 'good aesthetics', though. Many games 'look good' with 'bad' art because they spend the effort to cultivate a certain aesthetic.

chii 7y ago

That's probably true. Good art style/aesthetics is a foot in the door for a lot of gamers, unfortunately. A game needs to stand on a foundation of good game mechanics (and possibly good writing), but the mainstream players' choice to try your game is gated by the production value and direction/style of the art.

effarig 7y ago

I personally have not bought Vogel's games based solely on their amateur visual appearance, and given the fact that he's never put out a "good-looking" game, how does he even know how it would affect sales?

sangnoir 7y ago
> how does he even know how it would affect sales? He doesn't know - but he feels he does not need to take the risk to find out because the stakes are too high for him (since he'll need to borrow from a bank or his retirement savings). I'm sure those who feel strongly about the potential on HN, reddit and elsewhere could band together and crowdfund/formally pitch Jeff on an investment in an artist for a subsequent game and capture the upside while shouldering the risk - he probably would be happy to take the money; he's not ready to put up his.
- zapzupnz 7y ago
  > He doesn't know - but he feels he does not need to take the risk to find out because the stakes are too high for him (since he'll need to borrow from a bank or his retirement savings). Then that should have been the main crux of his argument, without the need to start making up questionable numbers and making comparisons with other titles; particularly when it's an open letter on a subject nobody really seemed to care about prior to the previous article. It seems his audience, his customerbase, is so extraordinarily specific that the letter would really have been better addressed to his fans and nobody else; instead, the two posts come off as unsolicited whining which I believe is what is rubbing people the wrong way.
  - sgift 7y ago
    > instead, the two posts come off as unsolicited whining which I believe is what is rubbing people the wrong way. They are sound business advice from someone who knows what he talks about (because he has had a successful business for a long time). Far better than the usual "hey, I'm a unicorn startup and obviously I will change the world" which will then implode a few weeks or month later, when their "revolutionary" idea and/or business opportunity turns out to be useless.
    - zapzupnz 7y ago
      He's had a small successful business for a long time, though, with an extremely limited audience and no intent to widen it with a view to potentially much better profits. I'm not sure I'd call it "sound business advice" unless one's business intent is to barely float above water.
      - CathedralBorrow 7y ago
        You speak as if you know his business a lot better than a couple of blog posts can convey. What's the basis for your business advice?
        zapzupnz 7y ago
        I'm not claiming to provide business advice. The source of my understanding of the articles, and the business described therein, is the same as the basis for absolutely anybody else's extrapolation, both in his defence and against: the articles themselves. It seems to me that if, in 25 years, this guy is quibbling over whether he has the money or not to improve the look of his assets, something repeatedly said not to necessarily have any cost at all, whilst other small indie development teams (even those with only one or two people) manage to make breakthrough hits that reach as wide as possible an audience and look good, sometimes on multiple platforms including console, there's plenty to say that perhaps any business advice one could extrapolate is not the gold standard that his defenders are holding it up to be.
      - 7y ago
vidarh 7y ago
He doesn't know, but he's tried and spent money on trying to lift the quality in the past and failed. Someone else might make it work better. If he'd be able to afford spending even more, it might work better. But he's made it clear he's not willing to take the economic risk inherent in that, and that's a valid choice.

crooked-v 7y ago

Vogel is conflating 'good art' and 'good aesthetics', though. Many games 'look good' with 'bad' art because they spend the effort to cultivate a certain aesthetic.