So...what about the art?
John Hartwell
Okay, here's a question for all you GURPS players...
I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
I'm curious because obviously, I'm one of the ones illustrating these
books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
Thanks!!
Robert Rodger
Only once did the art have anything to do with a GURPS purchase for me,
and then was IOU with Phil Foglio's art (I've long since been a fan. I
even foud a copy of Buck Godot once!)
Other than that, it's strictly a matter of will I use the information and
therefore get my $20 worth. But also, once I have it, the art if usefull
for getting ideas and making the text easier to read (except perhaps in
GURPS: Mage and a few others where the art hindered it.)
Rob
MA Lloyd
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) writes:
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
I don't think I have ever bought a game because of the art, but I have
put back material from publishers I wasn't familiar with because of it;
either because it gave the impression of low production values or because
it was so offensive I doubted the taste of the publishers. I usually notice
something about the art. A lot of it in SJG products is clearly space filler
clip art that could be omitted, but there are usually some pieces that make a
positive contribution in every book. There are also usually a few that I
notice because they have problems - typically those reactions are someone
should tell Dan Smith that not all light sources are point sources in hard
vacuum, someone should tell Dan Smith his signature should not be the most
obvious thing in the frame, or this might be an OK drawing if it weren't
reduced to the size of a postage stamp. I would prefer a smaller number of
larger pieces with more careful selection for relevance to the text.
I am particularly turned off by the section title bands as art, behind the
text grayscales, or the lack of clear separation of the text from the art
seen in some products, its bad enough in web pages.
--
-- MA Lloyd (mall...@io.com)
Benson Fong
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) writes:
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another?
Um...pretty much not at all. The vast majority of my gaming money
goes to cosmetically lackluster SJG books rather than lushly
produced T$R artificial processed RPG product. Except for the
covers and the entire content of GURPS Goblins, art in SJG books
seems kinda tacked on. There's too much generic clip-art and
rarely enough coordination between illustrations and text. While
I'll buy GURPS books no matter what kind of art show up in them,
Goblins is an argument in favor of giving the artists a little
more room to maneuver.
>Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
Every now and again, I'll pick up something and flip through it
because of the snappy cover, but I invariably put it back down
again. I will occasionally make exceptions for necessarily art-
heavy projects like atlases.
L. Drew Davis
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) wrote:
>how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another?
Not at all, I'm afraid to say. A little bit of art livens up the book and
certainly makes it more attractive. But I'm not very keen on the recent
trend among RPG publishers to crank out books that are all appearance,
with glossy, full-color art (and a 50% higher price) at the expense of
content.
I suppose White Wolf started the trend. They've been very sucessful
at selling background and atmosphere in place of anything else. But my
reaction to all their stuff is usually, "hey, that sounds like it would have
been a really neat campaign. Too bad I missed it, and now it's just
this mass-produced unoriginal copy of itself." (These days, there's
an additional component of "What? they've changed the names
and jargon and are selling the same thing again?") This sort of
book lends itself very poorly to any other use, though. And GURPS
is supposed to be "Generic Universal", after all. I've already
got bookshelves full of inspirational material, most of which I
liked just fine without any art at all.
When I flip through GURPS books, the art only rarely
catches my eye. The presence or absence of rules or
systems that seem like they might be useful -- and
generically useful, that is, adaptable -- or of compact
information from the gaming point of view, are the things
that make me take a book out of the store, or just put
it back on the shelf.
Concentrate on the cover art, though. It won't sell
me the book, but it will be visible as the book spends
most of its time face-up on a gaming table.
--
L. Drew Davis dr...@mindspring.com
You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.
Shin Chyang Yu
Well, just my personal opinion. I don't think the interior art is
that important. The cover art is important to grab the attention
of buyers, but generally I would rather they put up more detail
rules, examples, etc, instead of taking the room up with some
seemly random piece of art work. The exception to that is if the
art is actually important in helping conveying something in the
book, for example, what an alien looks like, what a piece of
equipment looks like, maps, etc. I don't think GURPS supplement
requires much art work to sell them, as people who buys them are
probably already established GURPS player. For example, in GURPS
Magic Item, I like the main art at the begining of each chapter
because they are nice to look at, and without any artwork, a book
might be a bit boring. But the small arts that appears about once
on each pages seems unnecessary, because the book never mention
which art goes with which item, and some arts are different from the
text description. Also, for something simple as sword, unless there
are something special to it, I don't really need to see the art
of a generic sword when that space could be used for more interesting
stuffs. However, the main
GURPS rule book might get some boost in sale if it goes to a
more art work oriented lay out like Castle Falkenstein, Fong
Sui, etc, as a someone undecided which system to get into
might pick one over the other because one looks better, so
it might seems like he is getting a bit more for his money.
Once again, that is just my opinion.
In article <olympus-1409...@dialup-01-081.austin.io.com>,
John Hartwell <oly...@io.com> wrote:
>Okay, here's a question for all you GURPS players...
>
>
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>
William Twentyman
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) writes:
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
To be honest, artwork isn't a factor when I buy an rpg book. I admit
that I appreciate good art, but it's usually not that important. The
only exception is when the artwork is used to supplement a description,
such as in a bestiary or racial supplement. Other than that, about all
the artwork does is help set the mood of a book. Kind of off the wall
in _Goblins_, dark in _Blood Types_, etc. Unless the artwork is
relevent to the text in some way, it tends to be filtered out. I will
say that I prefer less color art and a cheaper book. In my oppinion,
what makes the biggest difference in what I buy is the text on the back
of the book, and whether I'm even interested. If I'm interested in the
idea, I start browsing the text, not the pictures.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Will Twentyman
twen...@math.uiuc.edu http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~twentyma/
What are you reading this for?? The good stuff's up there!
Fhaolan
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) wrote:
>Okay, here's a question for all you GURPS players...
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>I'm curious because obviously, I'm one of the ones illustrating these
>books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
>Thanks!!
Well, this one is a bit difficult as it deals with game and rules
suppliments. If I decide I need the.....oh heck....Celtic Myth
worldbook because I'm going to be running a campaign with a heavy
Celtic flavour, I'll buy it. (Which I did. :) However, if the
suppliment costs $20, and it looks cheap and shoddy (Poor art, bad
binding, looks like it was photocopied instead of printed, etc.) I
won't bother. In the stores I go to, all the books are bagged so I
can't inspect the actual contents. I *have* to go by what it looks
like. When TSR started to print their Ravenloft and Al-Quadim
suppliments, they stood out from the normal AD&D suppliments because
of their visual and content quality. Same with the White Wolf
Vampire/Werewolf/whatever publications. They *looked* good, so they
sold well. Then again, there is some stuff out there that is well
packaged, but is absolute junk.
All in all, I will buy a suppliment when I feed the quality is equal
to or better than it's price. If I'm paying $20+ for something, I
expect a certain level of quality. If I start to notice poor art, poor
editing, poor printing, or simply poor content in a supplement, it
will lower the chance of me buying another book from that publisher.
If a company can't be bothered to pay for quality in it's product, I
can't be bothered to pay them for that product.
For a specific example. I wanted RPG books on Celts, and was somewhat
disappointed by the AD&D Celtic Campaign book as it wasn't as
extensive as I had hoped for the price. Then I notice the GURPS:
Celtic Myth book. It was bagged, so I couldn't see inside. The cover
art showed that the artists knew Celtic culture by how the warriors on
the front were dressed and the decorative lettering and zoomorphs. So,
I bought it assuming that if the cover art was accurate to my
perception of that culture it was a good chance the content of the
book was as well. And the quality of the cover art and binding
indicated to me that the contents might have a similar quality as
well. I decided it was worth the $20.95+tax Canadian. Once I was able
to look inside, I was impressed by the interior art and layout. The
content was good, relevant, and extensive. There were only two editing
errors I noticed and one omission due to space considerations that
were all covered by the errata available on the SJG web pages. (This
is another bonus for GURPS in my mind. Free errata.)
Hope this helps
-
Allan Kemp
ark...@golden.net
Dianna and Jason Lescalleet
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) wrote:
>Okay, here's a question for all you GURPS players...
>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>I'm curious because obviously, I'm one of the ones illustrating these
>books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
The only reason I buy GURPS books is because I think I might make use
of the rules within. Art is not that important, but its good that
it's there.
GURPS art is improving. The Compendium art (the most recent
book I have) is pretty good, and generally relevant to at least one of
the things being discussed on the page. Robots also had fairly good
art, although I liked the cartoon-like (or more likely anime-like) art
more than the Dan Smith art.
Vehicles, on the other hand (1st edition, at least), had awful art.
Well, the art itself wasn't bad, for the most part, it was just in the
wrong places. There seldom seemed any connection between what
was in the text and what was in the art. The example that comes to
mind is the locomotive on the HT and body cost/weight page. Not only
were trains not mentioned on that page, they weren't even mentioned
in the whole book!
As for the (in)famous Dan Smith art, I'm beginning to like it more
than I used to. Or maybe the quality is improving. Compendium
looks much better than Magic did. I still get annoyed by the big,
blocky "Smif" signatures on every picture. One thing's for sure,
though, after seeing his art (and others) in pyramid, I have to admit
that it looks _much_ better in color.
Oh, and by the way, I loved the Bruno cartoon in Compendium. And
it was actually relevant (Hard To Kill).
Jason (the Tarkuss in his other life)
>Thanks!!
KyRaden
In article <51hjn7$7...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, twen...@symcom.math.uiuc.edu
(William Twentyman) writes:
>>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of
work
>>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers.
I've
>>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people
is
>>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one
book
>>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in
the
>>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if
all
>>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
I wouldn't buy a book on the weight of the art alone, but I also get very
disappointed when the art sucks. (The cover from the first SJG Magic
sourcebook is a prime example.) The art isn't the reason those books are
bought, but it does contribute to the overall aesthetic value. I notice
the art, and enjoy the better ones. Your work does not go unappreciated.
KyR...@aol.com
Portland, OR
B)
Remember:
That last night on the Titanic
there were people who skipped desert...
Peter Mikelsons
I have to confess that the bad art was one reason I gave up on GURPS a few
years ago. Seeing the same crummy drawing tacked on in an inappropriate place
in every book turns me off. Also, illustrations do alot to create the
atmosphere of a game world. In GURPS world books I felt the art was
inconsistant with itself and with the text, and I had a hard time creating a
satifying mental landscape of that world. In contrast, I would offer _Over the
Edge_. Reading that game book, I felt drawn in totally by the art/text
presentation, to the point where I had to start a campaign to draw others into
the world described.
GURPS stuff has gotten better lately, I guess, but I have lost my taste for
mechanics-heavy games.
Tom Grant
> Well, just my personal opinion. I don't think the interior art is
> that important.
I would have agreed before this weekend, except I looked at the Core Rules
CD-ROM for AD&D. All of the books were presented in both Windows help and
RTF format, in both cases without any art. I've played AD&D for a long
time, and I don't need the art to get me to buy the book. However, for
setting the mood of the game, giving me an idea of what things (monsters,
treasure, etc.) look like, and generally putting me into the right mindset
for the game, I'll take the books with the art over the CD without the art.
Fred Wagener
>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>I'm curious because obviously, I'm one of the ones illustrating these
>books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
As a GM, I want my $ to go towards maximizing useful information. I
haven't seen any of the books you've illustrated, but as a rule GURPS art
is fairly lame compared to White Wolf and their ilk. This has never
bothered me because in my head there is an equation "really good art =
really cheesy game system". In other words, if you have a good rules
system why waste money on really good artists? The exception to this is
diagrams or maps which convey information that can't be easily written out
as text. A good looking map is a joy forever. One of my complaints about
"Places of Mystery" was the thumbnail maps, but that book had so much data
in it I understand the necessity.
My players, OTH, really appreciate good art in the books. Sometimes it is
very helpful in generating character concepts or in allowing them to more
properly evoke the mood of the setting. The cover of GURPS:Vodoo and some
of the interior art (especially the In-Betweener peeling off his false
human skin) immediately conveyed the "feel" of that setting to my players.
Case in point: the Feng Shui RPG. It was $30.00, and I only bought it
after numerous trustworthy sources assured me that it was a good system
(which it is), because even though I loved the ideas behind it I was
worried that too much of that $30 asking price was spent on the glossy
paper and flashy art.
Bottom line? If the rules are good, good art is an asset but not worth
more than an additional 10-15% on the asking price (to me). If the rules
are bad, no artist is good enough to save the product.
Fredrick
Robert Kelk
> for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
> who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
> read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
> everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
> or another? Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
> store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
> things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
> for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>
> I'm curious because obviously, I'm one of the ones illustrating these
> books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
>
I'm hard to please when it comes to artwork in RPG products. If there
isn't any or if it's badly drawn, then I end up with a poor reaction to
the book. (I think it's something along the lines of "this is going to
be as hard to read as first-edition AD&D, isn't it?") If there's too
much, or it's all glossy artwork with full-page pieces, then I end up
with a poor reaction to the book. (I _know_ where this reaction comes
from -- it's a gut reaction to the days when FASA stopped publishing
rulebooks and started printing picture books with few, poor and/or
unplayable rules instead.) The current level of artwork in GURPS books
is a happy medium, as far as I'm concerned.
I don't buy a gamebook just because a particular person did the artwork.
When I buy an RPG book, it's for the rules, not the pictures! (If I want
a book with Donna Barr's artwork in it, I'll look for a copy of "Stinz"
at the comic book store. If I want some of Kenichi Sonoda's artwork,
I'll buy the latest copy of "Gunsmith Cats". When I buy a GURPS
sourcebook (or a Mekton book, or any other RPG product), it's because I
want the text.) Good artwork in an RPG is a bonus for me, not a deciding
factor.
I guess I'm one of the people who usually doesn't even notice the art,
unless its obvious by its absence or overwhelming presence. Sorry I
couldn't be of more help.
--
Robert Kelk ke...@pwgsc.gc.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions in this posting do not necessarily reflect the official
position of the Government of Canada or its departments.
Neelakantan Krishnaswami
oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) wrote:
>how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>or another?
Good art, and more generally, good layout are very important to me.
If I am choosing between two books that I want, I will buy the
better looking one first. (This is why I picked up Feng Shui
before I bought GURPS Compendium, f'ex.)
Good layout and art make reading the book and tracking down
references a lot easier. Having a memorable drawing near a
frequently referred to rule makes finding it easier.
The art doesn't have to full color plates; it just has to be
effective and memorable. Black and white is fine as long as
it's good.
Neel
Steven Anderson
In a previous article, dr...@mindspring.com (L. Drew Davis) says:
>oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) wrote:
>
>>how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>>or another?
>
> Not at all, I'm afraid to say. A little bit of art livens up the book and
>certainly makes it more attractive. But I'm not very keen on the recent
>trend among RPG publishers to crank out books that are all appearance,
>with glossy, full-color art (and a 50% higher price) at the expense of
>content.
>
> I suppose White Wolf started the trend. They've been very sucessful
>at selling background and atmosphere in place of anything else. But my
>reaction to all their stuff is usually, "hey, that sounds like it would have
>been a really neat campaign.
Technically Shadowrun started the "Artwork & Attitude" phase of gaming
though you can actually blame TSR. In the early to mid 80s, TSR
assembled this *killer* art staff and raised the stakes. Case in point:
Modern Myth's licensed IST book was on a par with the stuff large RPG
companies put out a couple of years before.
But in those couple of years standards were raised, like it or not and
the book looks weak as a result.
Whether it should have to contend with a Torg or WoD book is a separate
issue. Fact is it had to.
--
`I already HAVE a dirty name for the Easter Rabbit!"
Bugs Bunny
jru...@ix.netcom.com
If I already have some expectation of the book's contents - I'm not
going to be influenced by the art - good or bad. Some of the games I
own have truly amatuer quality artwork - but the text is sound so I
don't mind a bit.
The rules change when the product is unfamiliar to me. I look for
quality production values across the board - art included. However, I
am suspicious of products that have TOO much art and graphics. To me
that says, "We didn't have enough quality game info so let's put in
more art." I hold White Wolf and Games Workshop in particularly low
esteem on this score.
Ideally I want the art in the product to help me define the
atmosphere. I want pictures of things, people and creatures that are
informative and descriptive. I want the art to inform the text. If I
can't have that - I want the art to be as amusing as possible. The
original AD&D books (Players Handbook, DMG, and Monster Manual) did a
great job of meeting my needs with very simple graphics.
My thoughts.
Rusty
Steven Anderson
In a previous article, wom...@sirius.com (Benson Fong) says:
>oly...@io.com (John Hartwell) writes:
>
>>I'm John Hartwell, freelance cartoonist guy. I've done quite a bit of work
>>for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
>>who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
>>read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
>>everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
>>this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
>>or another?
>
>Um...pretty much not at all. The vast majority of my gaming money
>goes to cosmetically lackluster SJG books rather than lushly
>produced T$R artificial processed RPG product. Except for the
>covers and the entire content of GURPS Goblins, art in SJG books
>seems kinda tacked on. There's too much generic clip-art and
>rarely enough coordination between illustrations and text. While
>I'll buy GURPS books no matter what kind of art show up in them,
>Goblins is an argument in favor of giving the artists a little
>more room to maneuver.
>
>>Obviously, content is important, but if you're standing in the
>>store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
>>things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
>>for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>
>Every now and again, I'll pick up something and flip through it
>because of the snappy cover, but I invariably put it back down
>again. I will occasionally make exceptions for necessarily art-
>heavy projects like atlases.
>
Have to agree with this. There are places for good art, eye breaks
and the like, and a book utterly without art would be a poorer read.
But a LOT of stuff on the market is full of rather useless
eye candy (White Wolf's WOD games, Shadowrun & Feng Shui come to mind).
Beyond the cover, most art in a game supplement should be there to
support the written material, not compete with it. This isn't
to say I don't like it, occasionally there is some crude drawings that
probably should have been stopped long before the book saw print, but in
general the artwork is tolerable to good, and I run a character or 3
whose existence was due to a drawing in a book. But if I want art in
relatively "mass" quantities of high quality, I'll buy an art book or
graphic novel.
My stuff is nowhere near professional level though the characters I
draw do take a good deal of my time & effort. What you and the other
illustrators do is good, and important. It's just nowhere near as
important as the text, and it's pretty easy to overlook it as a result.
Sorry if we readers come across as rude or disinterested. Put out a book
without any artwork & hear us whine.
Patrick Daily
John Hartwell wrote:
>
> Okay, here's a question for all you GURPS players...
>
> for SJGames over the past few years (not as much as Dan Smith, but hey,
> who has?), including recently Vehicles, Alternate Earths, and Supers. I've
> read through these newsgroups for awhile, and everybody talks about
> everything in the books...except the art. So my question to you people is
> this: how important is the art to you in making a decision to buy one book
> store with your $20 in hand and trying to decide which book to buy, if all
> things were equal, do you go for the snappier looking book? Do you look
> for certain artists? Do you not even notice the art?
>
> books. So think of this as market research, and tell me what you think.
>
> Thanks!!
artwork ( good or bad ) can have a tremendous effect on sales of a
game. Take for example Warhammer FB/40K/WFRP/Necromunda etc. These
games, though extremely popular, would not sell nearly so well if not
for the complex background info that is supplemented and supported by
the high quality artwork in the books . I know they are hideously
over-priced but you can't beat them for what they are : miniatures
rules. When was the last time an RPG world ( besides AD&D or Tukemel )
had such lavish and detailed art and history that supported not
contradicted each other, as a lot of artwork does. In miniatures gaming
it is vital that high quality colour artwork is available to the player
. Unpainted miniatures are both an eye-sore and show a lack of
dedication to the game world. The games I've played that had two sides
square off across a detailed battlefield with banners waving and armour
gleaming etc. etc. (add your own adjectives here ) are always more
enjoyable both play-wise and visually. I know a little paint wont make
you roll better but it does help set the mood.
The art work in GURPS is good as far as most games go but is a
little too flat in most books. Some games benifit greatly from good art
work . CoC is a lot more fun to play if you know what a Shoggoth or a
Mi-go looks like. Two books of artwork were put out for this game long
ago and if you can find them they will add greatly to a Keepers store of
Mythos descriptions hence enhancing the game for all involved.
Another thing to remember is that we are visually focused
creatures, especially men, and the saying " You can't judge a book by
it's cover" , though true , does not apply when it comes to first
impressions . Most people when faced with two choices and no time to
gather data will usually go with the more profesional, ie. prettier,
looking product . A lot of gaming sales are impulse buys and the pretty
product gets the buck , good or not. always tell people to ask around in
newsgroups, school , gaming groups etc. if they are not sure. Remember
in the world of hard copy gaming there is no try before you buy.
Sometimes a really slick looking game comes along that makes you say
" this has got to be good , just look at the production values !" but
when you get it home and study the system you find out it's virtually
unplayable ( remember Immortal ?). When all is said and done good art
work does not a game make but as far as sales go it is a definite help.
In the end all gamers must remember that old axiom " ceavat emptor"
let the buyer beware.
Guod Skrap
Mr.Hartwell;
I for one feel that the art is invaluable to the books. I am
considering purchasing the newest edition of the GURPS basic set based on
the new art, for it gives a fresh feel to a book I've handled countless
times.
Art in RPG's is very important. It contributes more to the feel, to the
atmosphere than any other aspect of the game. When generating the mindset
for a particular campaign, one need but look at the illustrations to get
"in the mood." In a particularly generic system like GURPS, there should
be a variety of art in the basic book, followed by an associated style
designed for each world book. In much the way that TSR's Planescape and
Dark Sun settings have been enhanced by the style of DiTerlizzi and Brom,
GURPS Lensman was defined by Dan Smith. INWO also would be an entirely
different game without him. Where would Vampire be without Tim Bradstreet?
Would it have gone the way of Chill? Hard to say. . . .
I like Dan Smith's art, but it is a bit prevalent. The constant
computer enhancement and coloring also affects the way his images are
perceived. I would suggest limiting this to the settings based in the
future.
Art is something that many of my fellow gamers and I pay attention to,
myself in particular as I am a fledgeling artist. I have met Ruth Thompson
at GEN CON and recognized her by the art she had placed in front of her
booth.
As far as purchasing, "Don't judge a book by its cover," is hooey. My
friend explains it this way: "If they can afford good art for the cover,
chances are the products expected to sell. So it must be good." I don't
subscribe to this line of thinking, but it has its home.
Personally, art plays a large part in what I purchase. The new systems,
Dead Lands and Fading Suns are examples of how art can give a book a
certain feel and enhance the appeal of the product.
So, YES, Mr. Hartwell, art is infinitely important to Role-playing
games. More so than most people realize on a conscious level.
Sincerely,
Douglas Parks,
Guod Sk...@AOL.com
Fred Wagener
>I am
>considering purchasing the newest edition of the GURPS basic set based on
>the new art, for it gives a fresh feel to a book I've handled countless
>times.
The new art may be nifty, but the main selling point of the new Basic Set
is that the binding won't self destruct three weeks after you get the book
home...
Dianna and Jason Lescalleet
Just a question. What will the art be like in GURPS Mecha?
Will they go with Dan Smith again, or get someone to draw in an
Anime style. I hope the latter. I like Smith's artwork (although
it's best colored, as in Pyramid) but that book would look best with
a bunch of cool Japanese-style mecha pictures, and of course,
the big-eyed teenage girls who invariably pilot such machines.
Other cool things would be schematic-like drawings of individual
mecha (perhaps the sample ones) complete with closeups of heads,
controls, guns, and such, and maybe a few shots showing how the
pilot fits inside. I've seen such drawings on Anime web pages and in
books about Anime, and I think that they would really add to the Anime
feel of the book. (It would be going a bit far to label them in
Japanese, like the pictures I've seen, but a little Japanese writing
scattered here and there might also lend an Anime feel.)
No matter what, though, I'm going to buy this book!