Most Open-Source Game Artwork Is Awful

[Azpegath]

Games are like 90% art, 10% game designing (which is also art).
Programmers don't create games, they create game engines.
Then there's a 0.0001% of glue code & game logic that even a monkey could do, which isn't even considered part of the formula.

If you want to be part of a game you better hang around Blender.org, deviant-art, newgrounds, etc. or whatever community that brings together more artists.
Be aware that a good game takes years of hard work, and it's doomed without a clear vision.
The classical community-driven development approach of "everybody working on whatever feels like and every feature gets accepted" doesn't work here.

It's quite clear that you've never worked at a game company, or have any insight into how they work.

[alpha_one_x86]

It's why is named "pixel art", the pixel using can be have their good effect (I think about pokemon, mario, ...)

Use gimp in professional world is not possible, all is into .psd, and gimp 2.6 (I don't know about 2.8), not read/write it out of the box.
That's more hobbyist only for art work...

For 2D game: I have not found 2D engine adapted to my use (tiled is the more need, but have some missing features: multiple map across into a view, door support, QML for animation, 2D effect, ...), exactly same for the 2D map editor. More missing musique/art free for commercial usage (yes, the most people wish try life of their game)...

[GreatEmerald]

I think Minecraft has proven that people generally will forgive sub-par art if the gameplay makes up for it. FPS games are abundant and there are ones with good graphics, so they don't have that luxury.

Well, for some the art direction of Minecraft even adds to the charm. It feels very similar to Doom and other games of that era.

[SpaceMonkey]

What about 0 A.D.?

[DanL]

I think Minecraft has proven that people generally will forgive sub-par art if the gameplay makes up for it. FPS games are abundant and there are ones with good graphics, so they don't have that luxury.

[Irritant]

The problem isn't so much that the FOSS community is made up of coders - it's that it's made up of hobbyists. Generally you just are not going to get the quality of artwork from hobbyists that you will from professionals. The facts are, if an artist is good enough to make money off of his work, he's probably going to do so.

That's not to say that there aren't talented artists in the FOSS scene, and it's not to say that many professionals do not enjoy working on non-profit work in the spare time. This can, and does occur, and the projects that have these people involved benefit and show the results.

Community driven artwork is another issue. Most projects that have community driven, open art development lack consistent graphical style and quality. Projects that have one or two, dedicated, talented artists are going to have more cohesiveness and quality balance across the board. Another issue is that many projects have to lower the acceptance standards because otherwise they'd never get released due to a lack of art. The best thing for these projects is to always look to update and upgrade their art as they go along. Eventually, after some time and polish, they'll at least have something that has good quality, even if it lacks the cohesiveness.

[DeiF]

0ad is a great game with great art, and it's SourceForge's project of the Month.
The interview is very interesting and it agrees with my previous post:

Unlike other Open Source projects, we actually have an idea of a completed game. And we have an idea of when we?re done. We do want to reach this state of completion and reach some closure, and not just keep this project developing endlessly. And we hope to reach that state in late 2013.

[energyman]

wesnoth has some very fine artwork

vegastrike

both beautiful

[DeiF]

Games are like 90% art, 10% game designing (which is also art).
Programmers don't create games, they create game engines.
Then there's a 0.0001% of glue code & game logic that even a monkey could do, which isn't even considered part of the formula.

If you want to be part of a game you better hang around Blender.org, deviant-art, newgrounds, etc. or whatever community that brings together more artists.
Be aware that a good game takes years of hard work, and it's doomed without a clear vision.
The classical community-driven development approach of "everybody working on whatever feels like and every feature gets accepted" doesn't work here.

[Azpegath]

There should be a Open Source / Creative Commons Art Dev community that aims at giving recognition to the artists and such by means easily visible credits etc etc. You could encourage 3D and texture graphic design students to take part in supporting the community and give them a HIG to stick to. They should supply the resources used if the resources are licensed accordingly. Example if they used Blender then supply the .blend not just the 3ds or collada versions etc etc. I'm aware that there are similar ideas floating around but there is no emphasis on credit and a standard, so people tend to design resources that can't be used in the same game.

I think this is a great idea, it would be awesome to get more artists (in training) into the FOSS world. It would be a great experience for them as well, experiencing the feeling of a great community. But one issue I see immediately is that professional artists in training don't use either Blender or GIMP. It's Maya/3DS, Photoshop and other professional texturing software (can't seem to remember the name of it right now) all the way for them.

None the less, it's still a good idea, creating a coherent community which would be the apparent starting point for any artist wanting to get into the community.