Quote from: Omega;867874Co-op Board game from Plaid Hat. Survivours in a snow shrouded town dealing with not only some sort of zombie problem outside. But internal strife from within as well. Hidden agendas and possible power plays.

So yeah, Peyton Place with zombies.

QuoteAnd you can exile Felicia Day and one of the game designers to the cold harsh wilderness.

Well, that bit certainly appeals... that woman's schtick annoys me.

Quote from: Simlasa;867961So yeah, Peyton Place with zombies.

I'd play it.

jg

Heres something from marketing research on my own way back and it still applies today.

One thing that the art can be a factor for though is in how much incentive you feel for buying any supplements or other product from the publisher. Or more aptly. How the composition of art and content inspire or dissuade you from buying more.

2e D&D and Gurps are the posterchilds for that. For some the art fit and for others it was a turn-off

Quote from: Omega;867853Palladium art period. Overall their art and composition has been great. They tend to have a semi-uniform look throughout a book and the art nearly allways IS what is being described and gets across at a glance what the thing is.

And the art isnt over-used. Though they do like their little retread fillers. But mostly just as section breaks so that is ok really.

I really appreciated the art in their weapon & armor books, but have you seen the art in The Palladium RPG core book? I almost always got physically nauseous after looking at it. I don't just mean ideas, but just the way the faces and bodies were drawn somehow had a weird automatic effect on me.

Quote from: kosmos1214;867837...
please correct me if im wrong but isnt that top picture from shadow run ?
...

Yes, it is from Shadowrun. It's just an example of a visual style that I find very off-putting. I also can't stand Shadowrun, so maybe it's appropriate. But if the content were appropriate for a game I like, but that style were used in a game book I liked, I'd really dislike it and consider putting a sticker over the picture to avoid being annoyed by it when using the book.

Quote from: Skarg;868284I really appreciated the art in their weapon & armor books, but have you seen the art in The Palladium RPG core book? I almost always got physically nauseous after looking at it. I don't just mean ideas, but just the way the faces and bodies were drawn somehow had a weird automatic effect on me.

The 1st edtion of Palladium RPG art features a lot of Kevin Siembieda's pieces and it is not good to look at !

When Kevin Long joined, the art becomes better. The first edtion of Rifts has nice pieces.

A good move for Kevin was to hire Vince Martin (you see his art in Nightbane, Phase World and Japan) and Randall K Post.

Newton Ewell has done coll things on Atlantis, Mechanoids and Macross 2.

Quote from: Skarg;868284I really appreciated the art in their weapon & armor books, but have you seen the art in The Palladium RPG core book? I almost always got physically nauseous after looking at it. I don't just mean ideas, but just the way the faces and bodies were drawn somehow had a weird automatic effect on me.

That's why 2nd edition is the one to go. Fabulous artistry by Martin McKenna throughout the book.
Kevin's really got an eye for good illustration, you gotta give the guy credit.

Another vote for the "no art" is better than "bad art." And although it's very subjective, I've got my standards. If the art annoys me, then it better be a "must have" product in almost all other respects.

It's almost like interviewing someone for a job. If the art bugs me, then it sends a message to me that the product is probably going to be shoddy, sloppy or inappropriate in other ways (even if it's not always true.)  

"Outstanding art" or even "pretty good art" can definitely take me over the fence on what would otherwise be a marginal purchase.

Ah, yeah I'm pretty sure I had the awful art edition of Palladium RPG. There was also some good art in it (the maps and coin illustrations were nice, and it had things like magic symbology and various magic variations, but I think all that lured me to look at the other pictures... ;-)

Good vs bad art is partly subjective but there is also such a thing as technical skill or lack of it.  Some art is just amateurish and bad.  The anatomy is bad.  The perspective is off.  The line work is sloppy and/or lazy.  The piece looks unfinished.  If I did the art for your game it wouldn't be subjectively bad.  It would just be plain old bad.

Quote from: yosemitemike;868492Good vs bad art is partly subjective but there is also such a thing as technical skill or lack of it.  Some art is just amateurish and bad.  The anatomy is bad.  The perspective is off.  The line work is sloppy and/or lazy.  The piece looks unfinished.  If I did the art for your game it wouldn't be subjectively bad.  It would just be plain old bad.

This was my point about the art in the BECMI Cyclopedia. The art is really good and the artist showd a wide variety of favial and ethnic styles without being PC. And the amount of detailing on pieces is amazing. But his one failing is perspective and limb angles. Several of his pieces lack perspecta and a few have limbs at slightly off kilters. Seen far worse and its minour compared to other game art fails.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;868402That's why 2nd edition is the one to go. Fabulous artistry by Martin McKenna throughout the book.
Kevin's really got an eye for good illustration, you gotta give the guy credit.

Ok, so here's the real question: I think we all mostly agree that 2e Palladium has way better art than 1e Palladium.
But almost everyone believes that 1e Palladium is a much better SYSTEM than 2e Palladium (which ended up integrating the game to the more standard Palladium system found in Robotech, RIFTS, TMNT, etc).

So, which is more important? Would y'all rather have a better system with worse art? Or a less-good system with better art?

Quote from: RPGPundit;868977So, which is more important? Would y'all rather have a better system with worse art? Or a less-good system with better art?

Well, the fact that I bought Arrows of Indra kinda answers that...
(joking! I acually like the art in AoI)
System trumps art every time... but you have to read the book to get at the system and, sometimes, the art (GURPS, Larry Elmore, Poser) can drain my enthusiasm for that vital first step.

Quote from: RPGPundit;868977Ok, so here's the real question: I think we all mostly agree that 2e Palladium has way better art than 1e Palladium.
But almost everyone believes that 1e Palladium is a much better SYSTEM than 2e Palladium (which ended up integrating the game to the more standard Palladium system found in Robotech, RIFTS, TMNT, etc).

So, which is more important? Would y'all rather have a better system with worse art? Or a less-good system with better art?

As a highly visual person, I prefer good art, it sells a book better to me rather than no art or bad art.

(And for the record, I preferred Palladium 1e for both the art and the system.  It even had details on the various currencies and magical symbols!)

Considering all the systems I ended up buying (often used) through impulse, I guess I have to conclude my answer is an unexpected one: the art. I thought I'd be all high minded and say the system matters more. But over the years my shopping doesn't reflect that, and it would be dishonest of me to preach otherwise.

If there's a choice and I really had to put the effort into comparison shopping I guess I could say system. But I definitely am a setting person as I have plenty of systems. And when it comes to more casual purchases, art, funky tables, discrete bolt-on widgets, and awesome hooks sells me more than some grand display of cohesive (a.k.a. "elegant") mechanics.

I guess it has something to do with me being in a personal gaming period beyond where I was actively shopping for "The One System to Bind Them All." After a scattershot survey of systems, and a fruitless quest for "The One System," I got old and grumpy and just returned to what I liked, warts and all. And after that general system survey phase I'm just not on the market desperately seeking "The One" anymore.

I guess systems are disposable to me nowadays, like an afterthought. Never thought it'd get to that, but there it is. A new bucket of rules equations (and paradigms; never forget the new flavor of the year paradigms) is about as welcome as reading some table's 200+ page addendum of houserules. I could bother relearning how to build and operate a new car, or I could get on with the business of driving for fun.