That was kind of my own point. What I took away from the post was that "graphics matter because it shows effort put in to communicate the game to the player". Admittedly, the post itself does wibble wobble back and forth between both ideals and I get why. It's a notion I tend to agree with, for why graphics both are and are not important. It's just my experience in playing games that tells me even if you have HD, high fidelity, beautiful artwork, well put together worlds, highly stylized content, gorgeous graphics and effects... it doesn't really make your game any GOOD. Pretty, maybe, but not good. I care more about how a person uses what they've got. That was kind of my point about the aesthetics. If you use what you have well, you don't typically need "high end graphics" or even "completely original content". Please keep in mind, I'm talking strictly about the RTP in this particular instance as well as the people using these particular programs. Graphics should be used to tell your story effectively. The best graphics you can manage are the way to go, the best possible ways of using them are the way to go. If you can afford better ones, you go that way.
I guess my point on the subject in its entirety is just summed up like this: "Obtain and use the graphics that best fit the theme, mood, and storyline of your game. However, if you cannot obtain them for whatever reason, see what you can do with what you have."
Well, to me, the way your post sounded was like that. Sorry I took away the wrong thing from it. Judging by your reply, I completely missed the entirety of your point. I'm sorry for that. And... I'll have to agree with your new post. 'Cause that's how I feel on the subject.
If you find the term "elitist" offensive, then I'm sorry. It wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed towards the people who think you MUST have fantastic looking graphics as well as those who say you DO NOT need to have good graphics at all. I call such people "elitist" because they think only their way is the way to do it, only their way is the best way, and they don't even realize that they're arguing about something that is a treadmill in the first place. Graphics and graphic standards are ever evolving, ever changing, and forever moving forward. That game you think looks fantastic right now will look like crap in 20 years compared to what you can play on your Holodeck. It's a silly argument in my opinion and only the elitist people in the industry would make it, one way or the other. In all honesty, the only real subjects I ever throw out "elitist" as a word is the silly graphics stuff or the "console wars" type debates and other such nonsense.
As for "aesthetic"... I'm trying to use it IN PLACE of graphics. Not because it's exclusionary in any way, but because I think it's more important and more indicative of the actual problem with the "you need moar grafix!" argument. You do need graphics of some sort, text, ASCII, 8 bit, 16 bit, matte paintings, whatever. But, what you have, has to fit the aesthetic and quality of your game. It's really weird to have these beautiful overworld maps... and then really poorly drawn monsters that just don't fit the art style at all. With that in mind, pretty much all the RTP stuff goes together and fits together. It has "bumps" in places where it could be fixed, but as a whole, it works together. My point is that we should move beyond "quality of graphics" or "having original graphics" and move more towards "you need graphics that fit your aesthetic". That's all I was trying to say. But, I do have to make a single point. If you have a game that uses all this medieval stuff, but you've got some modern storyline... Maybe it's the storyline that doesn't fit the aesthetic and not the RTP? It's kind of a two or three way street on such a subject. If all you have to work with (and all you can work with) is the RTP, then you should probably be tailoring your story to the aesthetic of the RTP and what is inside of it, instead of trying to make what's in there fit your idea for a story.
@Topic At Large
Okay, I think I've dragged this thing far enough off topic. Sorry about that. If any of you would like to continue the discussion, perhaps we could take it to PM instead? Again, sorry about the interruption, I didn't mean to turn it into a debate or hurt anyone's feelings.
If anyone tells you that part of your game needs work, a mechanic in your game is wrong, or a character is enough of a Mary Sue to make the litmus test burst into flames, THEY ARE JUST STUPID HATERS WHO WOULDN'T KNOW A GOOD GAME IF IT SMACKED THEM IN THE FACE AND CALLED THEM "HONEY SHIRLEY WAFFLETON" IN FACT THEY R SOO JEALOUS OF U THATS THE OLY RAISIN THEY R TALKING SMACK ABOUT YOUR GAME!
...Also never spell check. It's totes boring and you're always right on the first go-around with text.
One uncomfortable truth that has withstood the test of time, is how most people will stand by while they see a crime happening, unless it's illegal to stand by. We probably wouldn't have stories about "special heroes" or games about heroes if the "everyday common folk" were largely capable of being heroes. Heroes face dangers that most people are not willing to.
I'm having toooo much fun designing the new MP (Mental Psyche) system. I've only worked it out for enemies so far, but it's fun to stun them, then go after their MP and delete them instead to farm for better item drops.