“Less but more detailed” art, or “more but shittier” art? (both 2d and 3d)

[cutepen]

When browsing reddit I’m sometimes just in awe of how amazingly detailed some of the hentai stuff is, like crazy insane detail … but then I see all these other creative things, or even comics/games that are extremely crude with sketchy linework and sometimes even no shading, and I enjoy those too.

Question is, what is actually preferred? As an aspiring artist (both 2d and 3d) and gamedev I’m struggling to find the right balance between how much time to spend on each picture vs on how many I should make.

In 2D I see some people make amazingly detailed paintings that took them 4+ hours, while others do sketches not much more detailed than a 1 minute gesture drawing.

Similarly in 3D there seems to be quite the difference between how much care went into setting up a specific shot, where some games just go all out, while others have dicks clipping through skin, cum that looks like plastic, but they might have it all animated and have hundreds/thousands of shots instead.

Which do you prefer?

 

[Deleted member 229118]

I personal prefer quality over quantity.

Its easy to see a woman get pounded.
I seen that so many times its boring.

What i want is to see the tears in her eyes.
The body betraying her as she enjoy's getting rapped.
The fear, the betrayel the breaking of the mind.

Simply put.
Quality gets me off more then random woman 73314879 enjoying a pounding.

 

[cutepen]

I personal prefer quality over quantity.

Its easy to see a woman get pounded.
I seen that so many times its boring.

What i want is to see the tears in her eyes.
The body betraying her as she enjoy's getting rapped.
The fear, the betrayel the breaking of the mind.

Simply put.
Quality gets me off more then random woman 73314879 enjoying a pounding.

Sorry if I'm going too in depth, but just to clarify that we mean the same thing (and for other posters), I was more thinking about the "rendering detail", rather than it not being a random asset flip.

For example, this is something I would consider "low detail" but still somewhat expressive



and this being somewhere in the middle


and the last one being "very detailed"

 

[j4yj4m]

To me it's the compromise that matters. The art should be good enough to be attractive, but it's clear that you can't invest hours/days into every asset if you actually want to create a whole game.

Then again, if I had to choose I'd take quality over quantity, simply because I usually won't even play games where the art just doesn't appeal to me.

 

[woody554]

I feel like this is one of those issues where people don't know what they want. there's a huge number of people who count the renders in an update and then decide whether update was good or not. but mostly those big numbers come from pointless (for the story) renders and trivial interpolation frames from bad animations.

but if we take even a cursory look at great comics, it's quickly apparent that the few RIGHT panes are far more important thant a great number of them. both for the story AND the quality. 40 pages of druuna is hands down better than we'll ever see here. our problem is never too few renders but bad and wrong renders. that's what we should be focusing on. telling the story by visuals instead of painfully overexplaing.

it's curious how we understand in writing that drivel is never a good thing, but for visual storytelling we often fail at the same. we should aim for less renders instead of more. make them count.

 

[Deleted member 229118]

Futa is not my thing but they all look nice.
Still i take the Elf over the others.
One because its a god damm elf.
And Two of the details.
What said j4y4m is right.
Quality is not economical.

 

[cutepen]

To me it's the compromise that matters. The art should be good enough to be attractive, but it's clear that you can't invest hours/days into every asset if you actually want to create a whole game.

Would you say the first one falls under the "good enough to be attractive"?

but mostly those big numbers come from pointless (for the story) renders and trivial interpolation frames from bad animations.

...our problem is never too few renders but bad and wrong renders. that's what we should be focusing on. telling the story by visuals instead of painfully overexplaing.

I've noticed myself being repeatedly disappointed in a few games where I wanted to try it because "lots of content" only to realize that "oh, it's just loads of the same crap over and over again", hmmmmm, fair point

Some VNs seem to do this thing where a character does something like walk down a hallway and they show 3-4 renders of them walking from various angles, or every conversation shows each character from a different angle as they speak. I generally tend to skip those for anyone but the characters I'm really into, but maybe they do it because people actually these extra render

 

[j4yj4m]

Would you say the first one falls under the "good enough to be attractive"?

That's of course very, very subjective. I personally don't like the sketchy linework and white skin that much.

 

[cutepen]

It's a tough balance indeed. Even in 3d there seems to be such a huge difference, even between renderers.

This is probably the highest detail I could imagine realistically being pulled off, the first render being a higher quality renderer (cycles in blender) and the second animation with a realtime renderer (eevee in blender).

I guess the downside of doing these is that it's WAY less forgiving than just doing sketchy linework, where one can both be expressive and "make more interesting things", while going for this style I could make the facial animation very convincing with more effort, but then any change is a big commitment and less variety as a result.


View attachment 0000-0020-out.mp4

 

[Ambir]

Sorry if I'm going too in depth, but just to clarify that we mean the same thing (and for other posters), I was more thinking about the "rendering detail", rather than it not being a random asset flip.

For example, this is something I would consider "low detail" but still somewhat expressive

View attachment 1734938

and this being somewhere in the middle
View attachment 1734944

and the last one being "very detailed"

View attachment 1734953

All three can be good depending on context. Although I am partial to middle one simply because that's hot.

 

[toolkitxx]

A few artistic strikes often do more than the detailed stuff. Brain fires up the less details there are and the better the experience usually. Your first example is a good example of just that. It isnt too detailed to let your brain fill in the gaps which in turn makes the experience a very personal one for each viewer. The more detailed things become the less individual the experience. It becomes more sensory work for the brain and less of a personal experience.

 

[Crimson Delight Games]

40 pages of druuna is hands down better than we'll ever see here.

You sir are a man of culture! Druuna is a goddess.

As an aspiring artist (both 2d and 3d) and gamedev I’m struggling to find the right balance between how much time to spend on each picture vs on how many I should make.

Go for speed and output at the beginning... you can worry about quality later on, once you've built up your player base.

The market has conditioned people to expect lighting-fast updates, especially in 3D games. Players want episodic content, and they don't have a lot of patience for protracted development - they'd rather choose faster turnaround with lower quality, than vice-versa. We opted for for the latter when designing our game (high-quality art but slower output), and it's definitely brought its own challenges. Even a 'simple' pic like

You must be registered to see the links

takes multiple hours to go from sketch to finished painting. You'll struggle if you choose to go down that path. Like I mentioned in your previous thread, my team holds steady 9-5 jobs so we can afford to do things our way, but if you're on a strict timetable to make it, then you're better off focusing on speed, and hitting at least 1 update per month (ideally 2).

This is easier said than done; you're competing with entire teams who churn out hundreds of renders per month. Not a problem if you're doing things as a hobby, but you've mentioned quitting your job to pursue adult gamedev, so you're definitely in this to make money... Your average player has no idea how much work goes into game development, nor do they care - they just see the final output, and judge it mostly on how frequently it's delivered. They won't care that you're a solo dev who can't deliver like someone who's been doing this for years and has a loyal fanbase and outsources half their development to contractors in order to keep up the release pace. They see their favorite dev delivering 2 updates per month, and they'll get pissed that other games they like can't match that (and god help you if you go more than 3 months between updates! ).

So... my advice would be to focus on getting a bunch of content out there ASAP. I'm not telling you to produce crap, but definitely prioritize speed over quality until you've gotten a solid footing and have an income that you're satisfied with.

 

[Meaning Less]

Really depends on the game imo. I've played better pixel art games than highly detailed but short and meaningless games.

There is always a balance and compromise to be made depending on the kind of game you are going for.
In games that have more customizations and plenty of gameplay mechanics you expect less angles already and they still work pretty well even with less attention to character detail.
On the other hand, if your game has zero customization or gameplay, then you better have a great story and/or art to make up for it.

 

[justpassingbyreally]

A sketch is fine too if it can ride on your writing or gameplay (or you pick a neglected niche fetish).

(sketch = a Dragon's reQuest; niche fetish = Teraurge)

 

[cutepen]

Go for speed and output at the beginning... you can worry about quality later on, once you've built up your player base.

The market has conditioned people to expect lighting-fast updates, especially in 3D games. Players want episodic content, and they don't have a lot of patience for protracted development - they'd rather choose faster turnaround with lower quality, than vice-versa. We opted for for the latter when designing our game (high-quality art but slower output), and it's definitely brought its own challenges. Even a 'simple' pic like

You must be registered to see the links

takes multiple hours to go from sketch to finished painting. You'll struggle if you choose to go down that path. Like I mentioned in your previous thread, my team holds steady 9-5 jobs so we can afford to do things our way, but if you're on a strict timetable to make it, then you're better off focusing on speed, and hitting at least 1 update per month (ideally 2).

Thanks for the good tips! Considering you've gone for paintings as opposed to renders, which route would you recommend? I definitely have and intend on exploring both a bit to learn more, but it's always good to hear a perspective of someone who's already put a crapton of hours into their process.

I'm really torn between the two since I really enjoy the expressivity of just drawing what I want and directly translate my thoughts into the art ... but then there's the other perspective of just "we want a ton of content" and my thoughts immediately jump to "this would be so much easier if I had a perfect model rigged and could just pose it and do a few renders". I guess both can be efficient when mastered, but it seems so difficult to strike the right balance there since the possibilities are so different, between some people doing quick renders with a default Daz models, while others spend a day making a single painting.

This is easier said than done; you're competing with entire teams who churn out hundreds of renders per month. Not a problem if you're doing things as a hobby, but you've mentioned quitting your job to pursue adult gamedev, so you're definitely in this to make money... Your average player has no idea how much work goes into game development, nor do they care - they just see the final output, and judge it mostly on how frequently it's delivered. They won't care that you're a solo dev who can't deliver like someone who's been doing this for years and has a loyal fanbase and outsources half their development to contractors in order to keep up the release pace. They see their favorite dev delivering 2 updates per month, and they'll get pissed that other games they like can't match that (and god help you if you go more than 3 months between updates! ).

So... my advice would be to focus on getting a bunch of content out there ASAP. I'm not telling you to produce crap, but definitely prioritize speed over quality until you've gotten a solid footing and have an income that you're satisfied with.

I've never actually considered this part, mostly because I've been focusing on Steam until now hmm. I can totally see how building up something too big and complex to keep updating would be problematic in case of episodic releases.

 

[Crimson Delight Games]

Considering you've gone for paintings as opposed to renders, which route would you recommend?

It all depends on your priorities...

If your 2D sucks, and you want/need to make money, then 3D is the obvious choice. It'll let you produce playable content that won't make the eyes bleed, and do it relatively quickly (depending on how complex you make the scenes, and how powerful your rendering hardware is). And it's very noob-friendly. Don't get me wrong, 3D can be an art form, and there's beautiful games and renders out there that'll make your jaw drop in awe... but unlike 2D paintings, the gap from atrocious to playable is a lot smaller for renderings, especially if you're using premade assets and models (which like 99% of developers do - almost no one sculpts their own stuff, as it's mostly bought from asset stores or pirated from sites like F95).

Now if you don't care about money (which, again, you probably do since you quit your job), and you want to develop your artistic skills, then 2D is the way to go... But it takes a looooong time to go from noob, to proficient, to moderately skilled. Even bad 2D is difficult to produce, and good 2D is a world of pain if you're looking to make something people can get aroused to. I myself am not an artist, but I know a bunch of them IRL, and I see how much time they sink into working and practicing... It's a daily grind, and it never ends. I don't want to discourage you from trying your hand at 2D and developing your skills, but again, it all comes down to one simple question: can you afford to take enough time to get good enough?

If you're independently wealthy or don't need the income, then yeah, do art for art's sake!

 

[RossoX]

I agree with the general sentiment of "quality over quantity", but then you have something like summertime saga with simplistic and cartoony art (even suffering from same-face syndrome) but it is still immensely popular.

The thread question is somewhat loaded; obviously most people will instinctively say that they prefer the HD art, but the truth is that the context in which the art finds itself can alter people's perception of it.

For instance if you're just making a low effort image and placing it on a image host, sure most people won't bat an eye and will move on. But if that same image is in a game with good story or fun gameplay then suddenly the art is elevated by the whole and can carry itself in that context.

Ultimately there is no simple answer and you as the artist will have to ponder on all of the variables such as time/effort to create each piece, your motivation and what purpose the art will serve etc in order to find a good balance.

 

[cutepen]

I agree with the general sentiment of "quality over quantity", but then you have something like summertime saga with simplistic and cartoony art (even suffering from same-face syndrome) but it is still immensely popular.

Maybe this actually brings the question, is Summertime Saga "good porn"? I really like the game, but I'm also pretty noob/unexplored/vanilla in a lot of regards.

The thread question is somewhat loaded; obviously most people will instinctively say that they prefer the HD art, but the truth is that the context in which the art finds itself can alter people's perception of it.

I think a part of the problem in asking this question is it could be both interpreted as "done quickly" and "done poorly". I also wouldn't choose a "bad quality game" over a "good game", but at the same time I'm not sure if choosing between say "an expert comic strip with 10 panels" vs "one super detailed painting with every tear carefully painted" is such an easy distinction.

but unlike 2D paintings, the gap from atrocious to playable is a lot smaller for renderings, especially if you're using premade assets and models (which like 99% of developers do - almost no one sculpts their own stuff, as it's mostly bought from asset stores or pirated from sites like F95)

This is probably a big takeaway for me, even if I was considering 2D in the long run it probably makes sense to at least do something in 3D since like you say, "renders are harder to fuck up". I'm still not sure about the "uniqueness" vs "daz assets lololol" ... my intuition keeps telling me that sculpting a few stylized (non-anime) characters could go a long way in terms of uniqueness (since everyone is either doing Daz or HS/KK it seems), but that brings the question of "if it's such a good idea, why aren't people doing it?"

can you afford to take enough time to get good enough?

I guess my overall problem with deciding this is how good enough is good enough. I know that again that's probably hard to answer, but to be specific, I think this is kinda illustrative of my current level in 2d (something like 20 minutes on this, didn't time it tho).

Part of the reason I even asked this question is that at least to me 2D makes more sense if it's sketchy/fast/expressive, while 3D makes more sense if it's detailed ... at least for a game. I can't imagine myself spending 4 hours on a single painting for a VN where people just hold CTRL to skip through the whole thing, but I could imagine doing a bunch of smaller ones to express the story. On the other hand, if I know ahead of time that I need to have things detailed, I could put all that effort into sculpting the perfect character, and just re-use it in many renders ... but then of course losing a lot in expressivity/variety.

Feels to me that's probably the hardest thing about making these decisions, I don't really mind learning, and I don't mind doing 3D while I learn 2D on the side or vice versa. The thing that is a barrier for me though is not having a workflow that makes sense in the long run.

 

[Carrera]

I like what fits the game. Some stuff fits the type of game it's in, like, lemme think of a good example.

Drawing a blank here lol.

There's one where the entire game is in black and white and it fits the feel of the game quite well IMHO. I don't think having colorized pictures, or especially real porn would fit the game at all, even if I had never played it previously.

Some games benefit from a simpler kind of art just because of how they're designed.

 

[cutepen]

I like what fits the game. Some stuff fits the type of game it's in, like, lemme think of a good example.

Drawing a blank here lol.

There's one where the entire game is in black and white and it fits the feel of the game quite well IMHO. I don't think having colorized pictures, or especially real porn would fit the game at all, even if I had never played it previously.

Some games benefit from a simpler kind of art just because of how they're designed.

I really like how that sounds, if you remember please let me know hehe. One thing that isn't exactly porn but comes to mind that is quite simple and stylized is

You must be registered to see the links

. The art in it is so sketchy and crude I could imagine someone just drawing all of it in a single pass hehe. Or maybe I'm just too big of a noob to see the brilliance of it. I definitely did enjoy the game a lot tho.