I do not want to derail the Reventure thread but to briefly clarify, it was apparently already rejected by GOGwhile in early access. Currently, it is available DRM-free direct download from the dev's own site, for an additional cost.

For anyone who bought/has played Reventure, how are the RPG elements? I get it's not a classic RPG like I eat up, but see some Zelda references, etc.

If there has been a synonymum for a cheap pixel art, this is it.
Doesn´t have to be bad, but looks bad.

Just curious: not in 320x200, correct? It's hard to tell from the trailer.

Proof that one can overdo retro-graphics. I like retro graphics if they are functional. In this case they detract from the game because it is difficult to recognize anything. And the feature list reads as if they just took everything anyone liked and threw it all together. Unfortunately they also threw features in that are turn-offs. So, no thanks.

I don't want to lie: I kinda like the premise of the game. And the humour.
But - that player sprite is literally 6x5 pixels...I played games on 8-bit computers, that showed more details...

And yet...I kinda like the premise. And the humour.
Well, I still got a week to make a decision... ;)

I'm so jaded on the whole pixel art thing. Nowadays, while looking at those games, I only see the developer screaming: "I am a coder, not an artist. And I have no money to hire someone who is good at 2D sprites. Oh woe is me."
And this has nothing to do with retro art. The peak 16 bit pixel art from the mid 90s is seemingly unreachable high for modern indie game devs.

This particular game is unattractive to me, and I'm not a huge fan of modern pixel graphics in general, but it is simply wrong to say that all modern pixel graphics games use programmer graphics.

Many of them use professional artists who are skillful at that limited medium, regardless of whether you and I *like* it.

If you imitate lesser art, you will never achieve true greatness. Doesn't matter if the real artist is otherwise talented or not.

Ha ha, well that's true, but that's a different question than simply working in a restrictive medium.

I used to create 4 color tiny icons imitating images (when that was all the Amiga supported for icons), and it's *quite* hard to make anything workable/recognizable at all with such restrictions. Programmers with no art experience will fail badly at such an exercise compared with actual artists.

I agree with you that there appear to be a lot of games with programmer graphics, I'm just saying that that's not universally the case, as game credits for artists show on some of the better ones.

Here's a picture.

Even considering the limitations, I've seen better art produced in much smaller screens. Take the entire Game Boy library, for instance. If you are going to limit yourself graphically, my suggestion is to go Full Monty and use equally limited tools. If Mark Ferrari and countless others could create wonderscapes with 255 colors, what's stopping today's artists from replicating these when they've got literally billions of colors?


(That was a rhetorical question, of course it's possible.

Nice trailer though.

It strikes me more as yet another case of a dev jumping on the "retro" bandwagon, without any real understanding of those classic 8 & 16 Bit aesthetics. Even if you can look past the low resolution and minimalistic style, the modern filters ( blur, glow etc. ) just make it look downright fugly and inconsistent.

( The forced humor, and mention of pop culture references as a "feature" don't exactly help, either. )

You're trolling, right? lol But 100% good reviews! lol

Some people think a urinal is "art". lol

Well...

Ending #30 probably should have said "GOG" instead of "Steam"...