GRAPHICS

[sailorseal]

Why do people focus so much on graphics? I really am asking. I do not see why maps with great game play but okay graphics never seem to move...

[the.killing.44]

Because maps need graphics to advance. Eye sores are almost just as unplayable as a map formatted like:
._.
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Graphics are the map.

.44

[sailorseal]

Because maps need graphics to advance. Eye sores are almost just as unplayable as a map formatted like:
._.
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Graphics are the map.

.44

I am not talking about terrible graphics just not wonderful graphics but thanks for answering...

[samuelc812]

A lot of people will play a map because of the way it looks, regardless of gameplay. If you drew in Paint, 24 Army Circles and called it a map, and quenched it next to nobody would play it, trust me

Over the years this site has set the standard for high quality maps, and i don't think anyone wants that to stop, hence why each and every map goes through a long foundry process If you have good lookin maps you are more likely to get more customer's. People are not paying premium for the production of maps that are done in paint or have mediocre graphics. They want quality and that's what they are given.

[sailorseal]

Thanks for answering...

a mod can lock this thread now my question was answered, unless someone wants to turn it into a graphics discussion...

[The Neon Peon]

Why do people focus so much on graphics? I really am asking. I do not see why maps with great game play but okay graphics never seem to move...

Why would there be complaints about classic being changed?

Graphics are one of the most important parts of the map... as for "great gameplay"... there is absolutely no way to tell what the strategy will be like and how good the gameplay will be until the map gets quenched. Look as Das Schlob for example...

[oaktown]

there are many websites at which you can play a similar game to this... what sets CC apart is that the maps here don't look like mud.

[samuelc812]

http://www.strategygamenetwork.com/

Take that site for example ^^

It lets anyone create a map whether in paint or not. They have many crappy maps but it's what they wish to do, so that's their business. If you really want a map published and for people to play on it as fast as you can. That would be the site to publish on, of course they will never have the quality that CC has and their premium is through the roof And they don't even care about even gameplay

[AndyDufresne]

Everyone can comment on graphics, so most everyone does. Fewer people can, or want maybe is a better word, to take time looking to game play---it's a simple fact of the Foundry ever since it first started.


--Andy

[Kotaro]

A lot of people will play a map because of the way it looks, regardless of gameplay. If you drew in Paint, 24 Army Circles and called it a map, and quenched it next to nobody would play it, trust me

I'd play!

[wcaclimbing]

Why do people focus so much on graphics? I really am asking. I do not see why maps with great game play but okay graphics never seem to move...

I think it is because most of the foundry regulars really like the graphics side of things.
DiM is the only person I can think of that specifically developed unique gameplay maps.

Maybe it is also because graphics are, in a sense, easier than gameplay. Gameplay takes quite a while to fully analyze a map and work out how to make the map have interesting gameplay. Graphics, on the other hand, takes about 10 seconds of looking at an image to find something that needs improving.

Aside from that, having good graphics brings more visitors to your thread. Which most likely brings more suggestions and more support, speeding up the mapmaking process.

[gimil]

I actually think that feedback has become more balanced that it used to be. I remeber a time when it was next to impossible to get feedback on the gameplay or a map. Now a days there are more people around who take the time to fully analyis maps gameplay.

[blakebowling]

I actually think that feedback has become more balanced that it used to be. I remeber a time when it was next to impossible to get feedback on the gameplay or a map. Now a days there are more people around who take the time to fully analyis maps gameplay.

If only those people would've read the Das Schloss thread

[sailorseal]

Everyone can comment on graphics, so most everyone does. Fewer people can, or want maybe is a better word, to take time looking to game play---it's a simple fact of the Foundry ever since it first started.


--Andy

Exactly what I was thinking when I posed this question...

I guess Andy is not just talking bananas!

[oaktown]

Everyone can comment on graphics, so most everyone does. Fewer people can, or want maybe is a better word, to take time looking to game play---it's a simple fact of the Foundry ever since it first started.

There are certainly more folks around who are willing to give feedback about gameplay, as the longer we do this the more folks feel comfortable doing so. But breaking down the gameplay of a map - especially a tricky map like Das Schlos - takes a long time. I can look at a map and decide in 10 seconds if I like the color or not, but it requires a long sitting to decide if I like the gameplay or not.

I passed off the gameplay stamp because I lost the will to look at each and every map for an extended period of time.

Anyway, I think the original question has been answered... was there a point to this thread?