Purple Parlay — Graphic Design

8 Comments

1. Gerald on 12.03.2010 at 18:18

   I like a good theme for my games these days, and I prefer that the components and art work (cards, board, whatever) are consistent with the theme and of high quality. That said, I do recall some interesting games from Cheapass Games that were simply printed black on white thin cardboard or heavy paper. So, looks can be important to me, but a good game can overcome its appearance. One thing, though — I probably won’t shell out much money for an ugly game, no matter how good I hear it plays!

2. ekted on 12.03.2010 at 20:38

   You have to separate graphics from art, physical components, layout, etc. A game can have superb art and terrible graphics. Each individual component could be great on its own, but the whole can be ruined by inconsistency or a complete failure of a property I call “at a glance”. Any one aspect can ruin an otherwise playable game, but most common is for the publisher to simply miss the mark by just a little in everything. You can’t point to any one thing as “the straw”, but the game as a whole is a disappointment.

   As extreme examples, FFG’s recent Chaos in the Old World and Middle Earth Quest failed in every possible physical design aspect (graphics, components, layout) except art. This would have definitely ruined the game for me if the mechanics hadn’t already done so.

3. Larry on 12.03.2010 at 21:11

   A great game transcends artwork, graphics, and components. For example, the 3M bookshelf version of Acquire is my favorite game, and I would play it anytime.

   I am also a sucker for games with great components, graphics, and artwork, even if the game isn’t a ‘great’ game. MagBlast 3rd ed. is a good example of great graphics that keep me interested, as are many of the ‘standard’ gateway games, Chateau Roquefort, Niagara, Zooloretto, etc…

4. ekted on 13.03.2010 at 17:41

   A good example of a potentially good game that I will not touch because of its graphics is Small World. I don’t see how a reasonable graphic designer could come up with that visual vomit and be happy with it.

5. James on 13.03.2010 at 18:59

   I own two game stores in the Milwaukee area and I can sure atest to the fact that an ugly cover will keep people from buying a good game. I can’t sell Alhumbra or Tai Mahal to anyone not already seeking it for example. Yet pretty games (that I know are not that good) still sell all the time.

   That’s the general public for you – who ever said a cover doesn’t sell the book? Or was that don’t by a book by it’s cover… whatever.

   James
   MinionGames.com

6. JMcL63 on 16.03.2010 at 05:01

   Pandemic is an example of the best graphic design I’ve seen in a while; and there’s some good stuff out there these days. ;)

7. David McCord on 16.03.2010 at 07:49

   As a Creative Director, game designer, and gamer, I see it this way: Depends on if you’re an artist, gamer, or “target consumer.”
   1. From the artist/creative aspect, the game is a canvas which embodies the theme and engages the gamer in it, planting a sense of involvement and a visual foundation for the game experience. In the best case, the gamer is immersed in the theme, drawn in (no pun intended) by the world expressed through the artwork. The artwork is often better than the game.
   2. If you’re a gamer, the above is true IF the feeling invoked by the artwork holds true when the game is played – if it’s well integrated, and remains so through start to finish, play after play. If the game play is outstanding, but the artwork is poor, or mismatched to the theme or pace of the game, or the theme is a pasted-on “wrapper”, the synergy between game play and artwork is lost. “This looks so cool. How come I don’t like it?”
   3. If you’re a game company, catering to a demographic target audience, it’s a completely different set of rules. How well does the box art COMPETE with the box on the shelf next to it for the consumer’s attention? How well do we trigger the consumer’s impulse to buy, to get involved? The criteria for “Good Graphic Design” is quite different in this case.
   All that said, it’s wonderful when all three can be fulfilled at the same time.
   Oh, and then there’s the licensing factor. Does Hanna Montana’s image still sell games? Or Harry Potter? Or LOTR?

8. JMcL63 on 16.03.2010 at 09:02

   Informative post there David. I have to say I think that Pandemic hits all the targets you outline. I had a few words to say on the subject about the subject on my blog earlier in the year, after I’d played the game for the first time. :)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.