Every time I begin to make a game I end up stopping and deleting everything I’ve made. I used to think it was because I was bored ,but today I realized I was deleting it because I did not like the visual quality I was getting at. Help me! Is there some secret or tips for good quality in the graphics area? I can’t seem to find any textures that I need and I’m certainly not artistic enough to paint my own textures. I have reached a major brick wall when it comes to game dev. I dont know what too do…:sad:
Go try the CryEngine SDK, do a level… If it looks excellent than your on a winner, you may just have to do a lot of tweaking when back in Unity. If your level in CryEngine looks bad, then it is without a shadow of a doubt your artwork sucks and you need to focus in that direction…
Well personally I think prototypes should have bad art. If after 2 hours you expect it to have a finished look you are unrealistic. You can tell if a game is fun if it works with squares/cubes etc.
Worry about art when you have mechanics which are worth investing time on art.
Do you have screenshots of your game?
Indeed, in many situations it is better to have have bad (or at least very clearly not final) art. It is an old standard that goes way back (advertising, marketing, graphic design, etc.). If you are showing your prototype to other people, for example, for a pitch or even just to get feedback on your game, the worse looking your prototype is, the better (more useful) feedback you will usually get on actual game play. Visuals get a more immediate and emotional response than game play or mechanics. Grey boxes work great.
Again, very true. If the game isn’t fun, art can’t fix it. One of our designers paper prototypes his mechanics. Literally cuts out little pieces of paper and works stuff out on a big table. It’s funny to watch, but it works for him.
Realistically, you only have two options. Option 1, you can get serious about art, and really take the time and effort to build a level of competency at at. It will take time, and unlike coding/programming, it is more about practicing than absorbing information, just different approaches to skill building. If that isn’t the route you want to go, then Option 2 is to just embrace it and focus on the other parts that are more interesting for you. Worrying and getting frustrated about what you can’t (or may not want to) do is wasting time you could spend elsewhere. Work on your game, and either don’t worry about the look, or just straight up copy something else as placeholder. Then build relationships with artists who may not have the other skills or aren’t interested in learning them. It’s pretty common to see even the most successful indie games are often centered around an artist and programmer. Find a partner, it does work.
Beyond that, if you get frustrated with a project, just try to set it aside and work on something else. Often taking a break from something frustrating allows you to come back to with some clarity.
Good luck.
Yeah some of the screenshots might help us to guide you.
Also try to make somethign small and then gradually scale it up.
http://www.arcanasandsofdestiny.com
http://www.invokegames.com/
I still think even if you are the artist don’t start putting good art on until you know it will fit the mechanics. I have pretty much never had a final product look even close to the prototype in layout and requirements.
On a side note - I assume you are part of the company who made Tiny Death Star - it is really addictive but the game has a game ending fault in that I can’t make the 11th service level 
This is the very reason I decided to make some tutorials on the whole pipeline of game dev. Your problem and also threads like ‘why do all Unity games look the same?’. If you’re a solo developer then I think you should make at least some attempt to work up basic skills in each part of the pipeline. You don’t need to be great at everything. I’m a lousy artist too, but I’ve worked at it and at least my characters (and other assets) are my own and not just assets that everyone else is using from the asset store or elsewhere. Frankly I get as much fun out of putting my own characters out there, even if the concept and gameplay is very simple, than having good looking library stuff that fails to interest me.
As you specifically mentioned textures, perhaps I should add that textures are mostly created from photographs. I did a workshop on texture painting with Leigh van der Byl whose most recent gig was painting textures for the movie Gravity. We were texturing buildings but it’s mostly layering photos of buildings with photos of cracks, photos of dirt and grime, photos of chipped off mortar, etc. There’s not a lot of hand painting involved, even when the product looks nothing like any actual building.
I know it’s anathema to the artist’s ideals at times, but the truth about games is they’re more than artwork - they’re also a software package. They are engineering along with art.
The engineering part implies something artists don’t like to hear - there comes a point where you have to settle for ‘good enough’, and provide margin for error or taste.
With games you’ve got two real roads that I see - you can strive for perfection at all times, which will lead to a lot of deletions and stress. Or you can create a project with a clear ‘good enough’ point, then evaluate it based on the feedback of your fans (they are the people we do this for, not ourselves so much.) If they like it? Then attack your nitpick points with your next project.
The idea I think you’re correctly latching on to is that you’re needing to continuously improve, but you’re going about it the wrong way to actually produce something; strive to improve one release at a time, instead of one asset at a time, and you will have much more to show of your efforts.
Perfection is something people spend a lifetime seeking; it’s something we do a bit each day, every day. Don’t try to conquer perfection in a single day, or you’ll just foster new imperfections.
@Asvarduil
So true and a great read.
@ Nutella
As I suggested, try CE… You’ve nothing to loose and it can expand horizons and gives new perspective. As Asvar said, it’s a constant working process of texturing, items, artwork, effect’s that add up to a complete picture. Something a lot of people seem to look past is Scale, go outside see how big a tree is, see how large a house is in comparison to something. Depth perception can add much in a 3D world. One question, are you using free or pro?
Also you never mentioned if you’re making a 2D or 3D game, so I could be rambling on about something completely different :).
Indeed. Mechanics should drive a game.
Essentially, but basically as I understand, it was NimbleBits game based on their Tiny Tower with our team doing art/story/direction. The game was built on the other side of our building, so I know very little about the details. I don’t have quite that many service levels yet. 
Very true. A great game can do well with mediocre or even poor art. A crap game can’t be made awesome by artwork alone. Art supports the game, not so much the other way around. Of course ideally, great art+great game.
You expect too much from your game within a very limited timeframe.
Try to set up yourself small, chewable goals, such as:
Day 1:
Create walking algorithm.
Day 2:
Start working on NPC.
Day 3:
Finish basic NPC behaviour
Day 4:
Add collectables
And so on.
Going that way you always will be rewarded with something new in your project. Don’t expect it to be outstanding after a couple of days of development, it’s just silly.
Juice it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fy0aCDmgnxg
Game graphics are foremost about commucation and feedback. Just focus on making everything feel responsive and super explicit and exaggerate everything a little. No need for silly stuff like textures. You should be able to get away with just good choices of colors.
I love words of wisdom like that, that tend to put things in perspective for me. Great advice.
Often, I think of graphics as trying to look awesome/realistic/whatever, instead of asking…what are they presenting to the player?
Absolutely. Your graphics are a part of your interface and should be treated as such.
Also, to be honest, I quite like the look of grey-box levels. Maybe it’s because I’m not a good enough environmental artist to make things look good, but I often prefer the look of my prototype levels before I lay props and details down to afterwards. Interface wise they’re very clear and unambiguous, and you don’t have to put additional layers of information in there (scuff marks to show where you can run/jump/drag things, painting grazable ledges, stuff like that) to tell people things because they know just by looking at what’s there in its most basic form. In terms of an interface, that’s achieved all of the function-oriented goals already.
For most games, though, you’ll need to go further because people will want you to kick certain aesthetic goals, as well.
Are you deleting just the art? Or are you deleting the entire game and mechanics as well?